Thread: Call On Jesus When Having A Nightmare

Originally Posted by Ne

That's what I've been trying to point out to you from the start Irman. The Trinity is accepted by Christendom beliefs not Christianity. Jesus Christ never gave any indication of a Trinity no where in the bible and people who believe in it are not following what Jesus Christ was preaching. I didn't denounce Christians I've denouced Christendom.

Now on to becondreamer.
He is a God but this is not the "Almighty God."
Now don't get me wrong Jesus Christ is definately an entity to be loved, cherished and given praises to, however Jesus has a position far higher than angels, imperfect men, or Satan. Since these are referred to as "gods," mighty ones, surely Jesus can be and is "a god." Because of his unique position in relation to Jehovah, Jesus is a "Mighty God."—John 1:1; Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 10:21 The reference of the name "Yahweh" is not speaking of Jesus Christ. That name belongs to the "Almighty God"

But does not "Mighty God" with its capital letters indicate that Jesus is in some way equal to The Almighty God? Not at all. Isaiah merely prophesied this to be one of four names that Jesus would be called, and in the English language such names are capitalized. Still, even though Jesus was called "Mighty," there can be only one who is "Almighty." To call Jehovah God "Almighty" would have little significance unless there existed others who were also called gods but who occupied a lesser or inferior position.


You missed a verse accompanying Matthew 28:18 what about the verse right after which states the following.

Matthew 28:19

"Go, therefore, make disciples of all nations; baptise them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

Do those verses say that God, Christ, and the holy spirit constitute a Trinitarian Godhead, that the three are equal in substance, power, and eternity? No, they do not, no more than listing three people, such as Tom, Dick, and Harry, means that they are three in one.

Matthew 28.18

I recall this verse but if All Power was given unto Jesus over the Heavens and the Earth who do you think has "given" this power unto Christ?

Believe me I do honor the Son as well as I honor the Father but I pay special attention to the Father because that's what Jesus wants me to do.

Now let me point this out to you because we also need to keep in mind that not even so much as one "proof text" says that God, Jesus, and the holy spirit are one in some mysterious Godhead. Not one scripture Anywhere in the Bible says that all three are the same in substance, power, and eternity. The Bible is consistent in revealing Almighty God, Jehovah, as alone Supreme, Jesus as his created Son, and the holy spirit as God's active force.

So, would you like to present some additional infromation that supports your Trinity belief? So that I can clear up some additional missunderstanding you may have.
[/b]

Thank you, I would like to present you with more info.

Jesus was with God in the very beginning of creation. In Genesis 1: 26 is says "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness...". Who do you think God was talking to? He was talking to Jesus.

And in John 14:7 Jesus says "If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

and in John 14:9 Jesus answered "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."

God has given full authority to his son Jesus to give life to the dead and to judge all. In John 5: 21 - For just as the Father gives life to those he raises from the dead, so the Son gives life to anyone he wants. In addition, the Father judges no one. Instead, he has given the Son absolute authority to judge, so that everyone will honor the Son, just as they honor the Father.

A simple way to explain the Trinity is to look at H2O. H2O can be in a liquid form, "water", it can be in a solid form, "ice", and it can be in another form "steam". But it is all still H2O.

yet the Bible still says that Jesus is somewhat lower then God on numeruas [bugger my spelling!] occasions

If Jesus is the Word of God, then it would explain why this is so.

God is the Head, and the One who makes the choice of what should happen

Jesus is the Word, or the Power that act out Gods Will.

Jesus shares Gods Power and Nature, but is Gods Son, and the means by wich all is Created, yet still a bit lower then God

One, I have read the new testament
and your culture/faith argument is awful, because my quote comes directly from something God said, therefore this to do with faith, not mere culture.
Answer my question with an answer not a question
or crawl into a dark corner
=D
Imran

Originally Posted by BillyBob_001

There is no Jesus, the effect that calling on this imaginary figure has on nightmares is totally placebo (which in dreams is all you need to make anything happen)

I think you should start viewing things in a more objective way.
[/b]

Amen to that!
You see what i did there?

Anyway hes completely right this is all its down to.

Imran_P

Originally Posted by imran_p

NE-YO, do you eat pork? (you shouldnt)
do you honour the Sabbath. (you should)[/b]

To answer your questions Imran No I do not eat Pork and as for the Sabbath. Sabbath observance was given only to Israel and ended with Mosaic Law. You know what? Better yet Take a look at these verses, would you care to explain to me what does the following verses mean?Deut. 5:15; Ex. 31:13; Rom. 10:4; Gal. 4:9, 10; Col. 2:16, 17

Now do you have any real questions you want me to answer or are you going to keep shooting these elementary questions at me, that even my little girl can answer with 100% accuracy.

You know what your problem is Irman? Here I'll explain it to you. You are not anywhere close to knowing the Bible to even deal with the likes of me. This subject in regards to True Christianity I'm so far over your head you can't even see me.

Originally Posted by imran_p

Many Christians believe that this verse was directed only at the Jews. But Jesus himself says during the Sermon on the Mount; "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill."

The old laws. The laws given to moses, and Abraham, the Jewish laws.
And not it is not based on Jewish culture it is based on Jewish Religion as to why Jews do these things. (as you can see by the frist quote,so dont repeat Keepers inept defense when I asked HIM this question.)
You should also be circumscised.[/b]

I don't want to see anymore quotes from you Irman if you quote anything else you better follow it with the Scriptures and the verses as I have done. We are talking about referencing the Bible, so start supplying your references in accordance to the Biblical Scriptures and not some Christendom Doctrine. Because I have already shut you down in this area unless you one of those people who likes humiliation.

Originally Posted by imran_p

You reject the doctrine of the Church, and you reject the the words of the Bible.
What you are follwng is not Christianity, but a jumble of ideologised youi mixed yourslef together to suit yourslef. Removing all the hypocrysises from the religion, ignroing them if you will.[/b]

Yes I do reject the Christendom Doctrine because it shows major conflictions with original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek Scriptures. No I do not reject the Bible as you see I quote from the Bible all the time, something that I haven't seen you do at all. You're attempt in trying to make me look like the bad guy is going to be your ultimate demise on this subject. Now you still haven't answered my question. You mentioned this and I quote

Jesus Christ is described as "God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God," confirming his divinity. When all light sources were natural, the essence of light was considered to be identical, regardless of its form.[/b]

So once again would you care to point this scripture out from the Bible?
__________________________________________________ __________________________

Beacondreamer:

Originally Posted by imran_p

Jesus was with God in the very beginning of creation. In Genesis 1: 26 is says "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness...". Who do you think God was talking to? He was talking to Jesus.[/b]

Yes I agree Jesus had an existence in heaven before coming to the earth. But was it as one of the persons in an almighty, eternal triune Godhead? No, for the Bible plainly states that in his prehuman existence, Jesus was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God. Neither the angels nor Jesus had existed before their creation. Jesus, in his prehuman existence, was "the first-born of all creation." (Colossians 1:15, NJB) He was "the beginning of God's creation." (Revelation 3:14, RS, Catholic edition).

Originally Posted by imran_p

And in John 14:7 Jesus says "If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."[/b]

Doesn't it strike you as Odd that If a Trinity was in full exsistance that Jesus would've also mentioned, that if you've seen me then you have also seen the Father and the Holy Spirit? Why wasn't the Holy Spirit mentioned here? But then Jesus turns around and says The Father is greater than I."—John 14:28, Does this dictate that Jesus and the Father are co-equal?

Originally Posted by imran_p

and in John 14:9 Jesus answered "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."[/b]

Jesus Christ was not literal when telling Philip he was actaully looking at the Father, but looking at the Father's likeness and his works. Jesus was implying that he and the Almighty Father are in Union on an idealistic level. They are in harmony with one another.

Originally Posted by imran_p

God has given full authority to his son Jesus to give life to the dead and to judge all. In John 5: 21 - For just as the Father gives life to those he raises from the dead, so the Son gives life to anyone he wants. In addition, the Father judges no one. Instead, he has given the Son absolute authority to judge, so that everyone will honor the Son, just as they honor the Father.[/b]

The apostles and the prophets Elijah and Elisha had that power too, but that did not make them more than men? God gave the power to perform miracles to the prophets, Jesus, and the apostles to show that He was backing them. But it did not make any of them part of a plural Godhead.

Originally Posted by imran_p

A simple way to explain the Trinity is to look at H2O. H2O can be in a liquid form, "water", it can be in a solid form, "ice", and it can be in another form "steam". But it is all still H2O.
[/b]

Well, that’s pretty clever, but it overlooks the fact that ice, mist and water are all different objects. When you evaporate, liquify or solidify something, you get a completely new item. Anyone can tell that water, ice and mist are all different things, and that they can all exist independently of each other. Unforntunately that explains nothing about three persons, only three manifestations.

Now I have some questions of My own.

WHY, for thousands of years, did none of God's prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the "central doctrine" of faith?

JESUS called God "the only true God." (John 17:3) Never did he refer to God as a deity of plural persons. That is why nowhere in the Bible is anyone but Jehovah called Almighty. Otherwise, it voids the meaning of the word "Almighty." Neither Jesus nor the holy spirit is ever called that, for The Almighty God alone is Supreme. At Genesis 17:1 he declares: "I am God Almighty." And Exodus 18:11 says: "Jehovah is greater than all the other gods."

WHEN Jesus gave his prophecy about the end of this system of things, he stated: "But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Mark 13:32, RS, Catholic edition) Had Jesus been the equal Son part of a Godhead, he would have known what the Father knows. But Jesus did not know, for he was not equal to God.

Can you explain any of this if the bible supports the Trinity?

Someone explain how this quote system works for me, and I'll make a full reply.
By quote system I mean the one on this forum, how do i quote people.
Hmmmmm NE-YO, refrain from the verbal abuse and just stick to the topic.

Imran

Originally Posted by imran_p

Hmmmmm NE-YO, refrain from the verbal abuse and just stick to the topic.
Imran
[/b]

Do me a favor and point out where I've been veribaly abusive to you?

Because it sounds like you're trying to find a way out without losing face to me.
Besides you can either answer my rebutals or you can drop out, it's up to you.

[attachmentid=252][attachmentid=252]Okay, I'm not l;ike a lot of people. I can accept when i'm wrong. If you dont eat pork it seems your one of the few people actually folliwng the Bible. and you ask for refrecnes, thats fine fro mnow on all Bible quotes will contain references.

On the topic of my quote it does not come fro mthe bible but the council of nicea.
I now duenrstand we are dicussing evidence for the trinity in the bible not in worldwide accepted christian doctrine.
Let me apologise and change tact.

i will label my points


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

John 1:14 "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

So the word was God, and the word became flesh.
Therefore God became flesh. who else could this flesh ahve been but Jesus?


2 1.John 5:20: "We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life."

I dont beleive the above quote requires explanation.


3 Isaiah 43:11: I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior

Titus 2:13: while we wait for the blessed hope, the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ


So God is the only savior, and Jesus is a savior?

CONCLUSIVE

Imran

Excellent Imran_P

I know you see why I don't follow the Christendom Doctrine and their belief in the Trinity because it's not supported by the Holy Scriptures thus is not true Christianity. And there is no need for apologies, you didn't do anything wrong.

If you ever have time Listed below is the reason why I do not believe in the Trinity nor do I support the doctrine. In your spare time take a look at it. I'll see ya around.

THE ante-Nicene Fathers were acknowledged to have been leading religious teachers in the early centuries after Christ's birth. What they taught is of interest.

Justin Martyr, who died about 165 C.E., called the prehuman Jesus a created angel who is "other than the God who made all things." He said that Jesus was inferior to God and "never did anything except what the Creator . . . willed him to do and say."

Irenaeus, who died about 200 C.E., said that the prehuman Jesus had a separate existence from God and was inferior to him. He showed that Jesus is not equal to the "One true and only God," who is "supreme over all, and besides whom there is no other."

Clement of Alexandria, who died about 215 C.E., called Jesus in his prehuman existence "a creature" but called God "the uncreated and imperishable and only true God." He said that the Son "is next to the only omnipotent Father" but not equal to him.

Tertullian, who died about 230 C.E., taught the supremacy of God. He observed: "The Father is different from the Son (another), as he is greater; as he who begets is different from him who is begotten; he who sends, different from him who is sent." He also said: "There was a time when the Son was not. . . . Before all things, God was alone."

Hippolytus, who died about 235 C.E., said that God is "the one God, the first and the only One, the Maker and Lord of all," who "had nothing co-eval [of equal age] with him . . . But he was One, alone by himself; who, willing it, called into being what had no being before," such as the created prehuman Jesus.

Origen, who died about 250 C.E., said that "the Father and Son are two substances . . . two things as to their essence," and that "compared with the Father, [the Son] is a very small light."

Summing up the historical evidence, Alvan Lamson says in The Church of the First Three Centuries: "The modern popular doctrine of the Trinity, derives no support from the language of Justin [Martyr]: and this observation may be extended to all the ante-Nicene Fathers; that is, to all Christian writers for three centuries after the birth of Christ. It is true, they speak of the Father, Son, and . . . holy Spirit, but not as co-equal, not as one numerical essence, not as Three in One, in any sense now admitted by Trinitarians. The very reverse is the fact."

Thus, the testimony of the Bible and of history makes clear that the Trinity was unknown throughout Biblical times and for several centuries thereafter

So if the Trinity is not a Biblical teaching, how did it become a doctrine of Christendom?' Many think that it was formulated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E.

That is not totally correct, however. The Council of Nicaea did assert that Christ was of the same substance as God, which laid the groundwork for later Trinitarian theology. But it did not establish the Trinity, for at that council there was no mention of the holy spirit as the third person of a triune Godhead.

Constantine's Role at Nicaea

FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended.

Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: "Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians."

What role did this unbaptized emperor play at the Council of Nicaea? The Encyclopædia Britannica relates: "Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, 'of one substance with the Father' . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination."

Hence, Constantine's role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. But why? Certainly not because of any Biblical conviction. "Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology," says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.

None of the bishops at Nicaea promoted a Trinity, however. They decided only the nature of Jesus but not the role of the holy spirit. If a Trinity had been a clear Bible truth, should they not have proposed it at that time?

After Nicaea, debates on the subject continued for decades. Those who believed that Jesus was not equal to God even came back into favor for a time. But later Emperor Theodosius decided against them. He established the creed of the Council of Nicaea as the standard for his realm and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E. to clarify the formula.

That council agreed to place the holy spirit on the same level as God and Christ. For the first time, Christendom's Trinity began to come into focus.

Yet, even after the Council of Constantinople, the Trinity did not become a widely accepted creed. Many opposed it and thus brought on themselves violent persecution. It was only in later centuries that the Trinity was formulated into set creeds. The Encyclopedia Americana notes: "The full development of Trinitarianism took place in the West, in the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages, when an explanation was undertaken in terms of philosophy and psychology."

i will be sure to read that
i am extremly disapppointed that there is no rebuttal to my points
labelled 1,2 and 3
I await your reply
=D
Imran

Originally Posted by Ne

Imran_P
To answer your questions Imran No I do not eat Pork and as for the Sabbath. Sabbath observance was given only to Israel and ended with Mosaic Law. You know what? Better yet Take a look at these verses, would you care to explain to me what does the following verses mean?Deut. 5:15; Ex. 31:13; Rom. 10:4; Gal. 4:9, 10; Col. 2:16, 17

Now do you have any real questions you want me to answer or are you going to keep shooting these elementary questions at me, that even my little girl can answer with 100% accuracy.

You know what your problem is Irman? Here I'll explain it to you. You are not anywhere close to knowing the Bible to even deal with the likes of me. This subject in regards to True Christianity I'm so far over your head you can't even see me.
I don't want to see anymore quotes from you Irman if you quote anything else you better follow it with the Scriptures and the verses as I have done. We are talking about referencing the Bible, so start supplying your references in accordance to the Biblical Scriptures and not some Christendom Doctrine. Because I have already shut you down in this area unless you one of those people who likes humiliation.
Yes I do reject the Christendom Doctrine because it shows major conflictions with original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek Scriptures. No I do not reject the Bible as you see I quote from the Bible all the time, something that I haven't seen you do at all. You're attempt in trying to make me look like the bad guy is going to be your ultimate demise on this subject. Now you still haven't answered my question. You mentioned this and I quote



So once again would you care to point this scripture out from the Bible?
__________________________________________________ __________________________

Beacondreamer:
Yes I agree Jesus had an existence in heaven before coming to the earth. But was it as one of the persons in an almighty, eternal triune Godhead? No, for the Bible plainly states that in his prehuman existence, Jesus was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God. Neither the angels nor Jesus had existed before their creation. Jesus, in his prehuman existence, was "the first-born of all creation." (Colossians 1:15, NJB) He was "the beginning of God's creation." (Revelation 3:14, RS, Catholic edition).
Doesn't it strike you as Odd that If a Trinity was in full exsistance that Jesus would've also mentioned, that if you've seen me then you have also seen the Father and the Holy Spirit? Why wasn't the Holy Spirit mentioned here? But then Jesus turns around and says The Father is greater than I."—John 14:28, Does this dictate that Jesus and the Father are co-equal?
Jesus Christ was not literal when telling Philip he was actaully looking at the Father, but looking at the Father's likeness and his works. Jesus was implying that he and the Almighty Father are in Union on an idealistic level. They are in harmony with one another.
The apostles and the prophets Elijah and Elisha had that power too, but that did not make them more than men? God gave the power to perform miracles to the prophets, Jesus, and the apostles to show that He was backing them. But it did not make any of them part of a plural Godhead.



Well, that’s pretty clever, but it overlooks the fact that ice, mist and water are all different objects. When you evaporate, liquify or solidify something, you get a completely new item. Anyone can tell that water, ice and mist are all different things, and that they can all exist independently of each other. Unforntunately that explains nothing about three persons, only three manifestations.

Now I have some questions of My own.

WHY, for thousands of years, did none of God's prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the "central doctrine" of faith?

JESUS called God "the only true God." (John 17:3) Never did he refer to God as a deity of plural persons. That is why nowhere in the Bible is anyone but Jehovah called Almighty. Otherwise, it voids the meaning of the word "Almighty." Neither Jesus nor the holy spirit is ever called that, for The Almighty God alone is Supreme. At Genesis 17:1 he declares: "I am God Almighty." And Exodus 18:11 says: "Jehovah is greater than all the other gods."

WHEN Jesus gave his prophecy about the end of this system of things, he stated: "But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Mark 13:32, RS, Catholic edition) Had Jesus been the equal Son part of a Godhead, he would have known what the Father knows. But Jesus did not know, for he was not equal to God.

Can you explain any of this if the bible supports the Trinity?
[/b]

I would like to end my part of this discussion with I beleive I have already answered your questions. In order to see the answers to your questions you have to piece all of the scriptures together. Every piece of scripture is like a piece of a puzzle. When all the pieces are put together as a whole then you will see the full picture. If you pray to God that you truely seek Him and the truth, then your eyes and spirit will be open to receive it. As far as your question as to why only God the Father knows the day and hour of the end of our world system as we know it, that is a good question. I don't know why Jesus would not know. But I can be sure of this...Jesus will be the second one to know when the time has come. As far as the water, ice, and steam explanation of the Trinity. I agree, water, ice, and steam are all different and independent of each other, just as God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are independent of each other. But you can not have steam without water, you can not have ice without water. I'm not a science expert but water, ice, and steam are all made of the same thing, H2O. You can't have one without the other. And last but not least, Jesus, in the new testiment did mention that when he in human flesh leaves our world that he would send the Holy Spirit. The actual words, Trinity were not mentioned in the Bible, but the Father mentioned the Son and the Son mentioned the Holy Spirit. Thank you for an interesting dicussion and may your life be filled with peace and joy. Take care and God bless.

BeaconDreamer

It seems beacon dremer has ended your discussion, i hwoever, am still waiting

for free simple rebuttals
marked 1,2 and 3

Imran

Sorry it took a while for my reply but I'm not here every single day and sometimes I will be away for an entire week. So just kinda be patient with me. I have other people that requires a great deal of my attention. Be sjure that I will never leave you hanging. I may not get back to you when you want me to but don't worry I will get around to it.

Originally Posted by imran_p

1 John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:14 "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
So the word was God, and the word became flesh.
Therefore God became flesh. who else could this flesh ahve been but Jesus?[/b]

Yes the Word was God and Jesus is a God but keep in mind he is not the Almighty God. THAT text, at John 10:30, is often cited to support the Trinity, even though no third person is mentioned there. But Jesus himself showed what he meant by his being "one" with the Father. At John 17:21, 22, he prayed to God that his disciples "may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, . . . that they may be one just as we are one." Was Jesus praying that all his disciples would become a single entity? No, obviously Jesus was praying that they would be united in thought and purpose, as he and God were.—See also 1 Corinthians 1:10

Originally Posted by imran_p

2 1.John 5:20: "We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life."[/b]

What's so confusing about this one. It's pretty much self explanatory the Scriptures clearly states that Jesus Christ is the Son of the Almighty Father.

Originally Posted by imran_p

3 Isaiah 43:11: I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior

Titus 2:13: while we wait for the blessed hope, the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ
So God is the only savior, and Jesus is a savior?[/b]

Isaiah gives reference that once again Jesus is a God but is not the Almighty God. There is no savior on The face of the Planet apart from Jesus Christ.
Titus This scripture is pretty much mentioning the same thing. It's pretty clear that Jesus Christ has been given permission to reign over the world during the end of days but this authority has been given by the ALmighty Father himself. Jesus is a savoir through the Blood of Christ you have a chance.

Originally Posted by imran_p

I would like to end my part of this discussion with I beleive I have already answered your questions. In order to see the answers to your questions you have to piece all of the scriptures together. Every piece of scripture is like a piece of a puzzle. When all the pieces are put together as a whole then you will see the full picture. If you pray to God that you truely seek Him and the truth, then your eyes and spirit will be open to receive it. As far as your question as to why only God the Father knows the day and hour of the end of our world system as we know it, that is a good question. I don't know why Jesus would not know. But I can be sure of this...Jesus will be the second one to know when the time has come. As far as the water, ice, and steam explanation of the Trinity. I agree, water, ice, and steam are all different and independent of each other, just as God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are independent of each other. But you can not have steam without water, you can not have ice without water. I'm not a science expert but water, ice, and steam are all made of the same thing, H2O. You can't have one without the other. And last but not least, Jesus, in the new testiment did mention that when he in human flesh leaves our world that he would send the Holy Spirit. The actual words, Trinity were not mentioned in the Bible, but the Father mentioned the Son and the Son mentioned the Holy Spirit. Thank you for an interesting dicussion and may your life be filled with peace and joy. Take care and God bless.

BeaconDreamer
[/b]

Actually I'm sorry it's pretty clear that you did not answer my quesitons. You answered the last one and I appreciate that. As I mentioned before I have more respect for people if they just say "I don't know" I believe in that last question it's pretty clear and understandable that Jesus doesn't know the Hour or the Day because he and the ALmighty Father are not the same person. Keep in mind also that the Holy Spirit did not know either. If they were truely one and the same person then doesn't seem kind of odd that know one else but the Father knows the exact time of his Wraith?

And on the H20 Example once again it's pretty clear and distinct that Water, Ice and Steam can be distingushed against one another with no problem. All 3 are manifestations and once they are transformed are clearly unidentical no matter what the source. Okay How about a more simple question. If the Trinity is true for what it is then how is it that no where in the Bible is the Holy Spirit ever mentioned of having a distinctive personality?

And what about this one because you didn't answer it? WHY, for thousands of years, did none of God's prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the "central doctrine" of faith?

Yes, Yes your answeres are well elarned
but by saying Jesus is a God but not THE almighty God, you are suggesting that Christanty is a polytheistic religion.

,and the Word was God

This refers to only one god and that Jesus is that God
it does not say and the word was a God
if you read
John 1:14
and
John 1:14

they clearly imply that Jesus is God
bnot Jesus is a God,
therefore we must take it that Jesus is the same God
never have I seen a Christian oppose the trinity but blatantly argue for polytheism
its baffling
you suggest there is more than one god

pol·y·the·ism (pŏl'ē-thē-ĭz'əm, pŏl'ē-thē'ĭz-əm) Pronunciation Key
n. The worship of or belief in more than one god.


You just asserted belief in more than one God

Imran

Originally Posted by imran_p

Yes, Yes your answeres are well elarned
but by saying Jesus is a God but not THE almighty God, you are suggesting that Christanty is a polytheistic religion.

,and the Word was God

This refers to only one god and that Jesus is that God
it does not say and the word was a God
if you read
John 1:14
and
John 1:14

they clearly imply that Jesus is God
bnot Jesus is a God,
therefore we must take it that Jesus is the same God
never have I seen a Christian oppose the trinity but blatantly argue for polytheism
its baffling
you suggest there is more than one god

pol·y·the·ism (pŏl'ē-thē-ĭz'əm, pŏl'ē-thē'ĭz-əm) Pronunciation Key
n. The worship of or belief in more than one god.
You just asserted belief in more than one God

Imran
[/b]

Okay Irman now you're just twisting my words around. You're not making since how is it that you see I am quoting words in support of the Bible through it's scriptures but you are claiming I support Polytheism? That doesn't even sound right. I do not believe nor support that Zeus, Apollo, Aphrodite, Poseidon, etc.. were Gods' As a matter of fact the clearest modern example of polytheism is Hinduism. Although Hinduism is, in essence, pantheistic, it does hold to beliefs in many gods. Does Hinduism and Christainty share the same beliefs? Of course not so why are you trying to lable Hinduism on me?

The Bible clearly teaches against polytheism. There is only one true God. Deuteronomy 6:4 tells us, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one." Psalms 96:5 declares, "For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the LORD made the heavens." James 2:19 says, "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that - and shudder."


I cannot simply make it anymore clearer to you. Yes Jesus is a God but he is not Jehovah the Almighty GOD They are two different entities. Jesus Christ was created by the Father. See the reason why you are so confused is because you are taking reference from a transgressed scripture or doctrine. Man has transgressed the bible to fit their needs and most words have either been altered or completely omitted.

Now in regards to this scripture. AT JOHN 1:1 the King James Version reads: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." <---- Transgressed passage the original Hebrew passage did not dictate it in this fashion. See trinitarians claim that this means that "the Word" (Greek, ho lo&#39;gos) who came to earth as Jesus Christ was Almighty God himself. This is not true.

Even the King James Version says, "The Word was with God." Someone who is "with" another person cannot be the same as that other person. In agreement with this, the Journal of Biblical Literature, edited by Jesuit Joseph A. Fitzmyer, notes that if the latter part of John 1:1 were interpreted to mean "the" God, this "would then contradict the preceding clause," which says that the Word was with God. Need me to break it down a little more for ya? Transgressed information Each bible reads something different than the other why is that? If it came from one source and one language path then why so many different phrases? Look below.

1808: "and the word was a god." The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome&#39;s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

1864: "and a god was the word." The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.

1928: "and the Word was a divine being." La Bible du Centenaire, L&#39;Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.

1935: "and the Word was divine." The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.

1946: "and of a divine kind was the Word." Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.

1950: "and the Word was a god." New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

1958: "and the Word was a God." The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.

1975: "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.

1978: "and godlike kind was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.

At John 1:1 there are two occurrences of the Greek noun the·os&#39; (god). The first occurrence refers to Almighty God, with whom the Word was ("and the Word [lo&#39;gos] was with God [a form of the·os&#39;]"). This first the·os&#39; is preceded by the word ton (the), a form of the Greek definite article that points to a distinct identity, in this case Almighty God ("and the Word was with [the] God").

On the other hand, there is no article before the second the·os&#39; at John 1:1. So a literal translation would read, "and god was the Word." Yet we have seen that many translations render this second the·os&#39; (a predicate noun) as "divine," "godlike," or "a god." On what authority do they do this?

The Koine Greek language had a definite article ("the"), but it did not have an indefinite article ("a" or "an"). So when a predicate noun is not preceded by the definite article, it may be indefinite, depending on the context.

The Journal of Biblical Literature says that expressions "with an anarthrous [no article] predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning." As the Journal notes, this indicates that the lo&#39;gos can be likened to a god. It also says of John 1:1: "The qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun [the·os&#39;] cannot be regarded as definite."

So John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word, that he was "divine," "godlike," "a god," but not Almighty God. This harmonizes with the rest of the Bible, which shows that Jesus, here called "the Word" in his role as God&#39;s Spokesman, was an obedient subordinate sent to earth by his Superior, Almighty God.

There are many other Bible verses in which almost all translators in other languages consistently insert the article "a" when translating Greek sentences with the same structure. For example, at Mark 6:49, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, the King James Version says: "They supposed it had been a spirit." In the Koine Greek, there is no "a" before "spirit." But almost all translations in other languages add an "a" in order to make the rendering fit the context. In the same way, since John 1:1 shows that the Word was with God, he could not be God but was "a god," or "divine."

please, I dont want to post a huge rebuttal
I want a simple answer
not beacuse I am bieng arguemtnative, or wish to hammer across MY point
i merely wish to understand YOURS

You bleieve in God, the almighty?
do you agree here?

You also bleieve that Jesus was a God but not the almighty God?
do you agree here?

Polytheism, is the bleief in more than one God,


If my first two staements are ciorrect.
You practice a polytheist form of Christianity
regardless if other part denounce polytheism

you are, to suit your purposes, stating jesus is a god.
2 gods = dualtheism

as I said above, I am confused as to your justification
please assist me in removal of this confusion.

and how am i labelling hindusim on you?
I can say you are polytheist without saying you follwo Hinduism.
I have not once said you follow Kali, and Vishnu, and numerous other Gods

Just the almighty God
and a lower God you call the Word (Jesus)

Imran

Okay to break it down my belief is simple "monotheism" Point blank. I&#39;m sorry but I really don&#39;t know how to explain it to you more bluntly. I&#39;ll put it this way, I worship ONE GOD, JEHOVAH. I pray to ONE GOD JEHOVAH, I do not show worship toward anyone else but JEHOVAH GOD. Jesus is the son of God and through Christ can you reach the Father. So no I do not pray to Jesus and I do not walk around with a cruxifix with Jesus on it around my neck because I only worship ONE GOD. Is that clear enough for you? And sorry if My post are long and extensive but thats what I am. I cover all areas when I&#39;m making a statement when it comes to the scriptures It&#39;s not just a simple reply to me you have to understand in great detail. Once again to back my point there is Only ONE TRUE GOD the ALMIGHTY FATHER JEHOVAH. Jesus is not the Almighty nor is the Holy Spirit

I understand what your saying hre
but its hypocrytical
do you not udnerstand my point
ok lets break it down step by step

I post bible refrences reffering to Jesus as God, in an attmept to prove that the bible speaks of the trinity

In reply you rebutt me saying that Jesus is a God but not the almighty God

I accept this to mean that you believe Jesus is a god

You also bleieve in the Almighty God (Jehova)

You therefore beleive in two Gods

meaning you believe in more than one god

belief in more than one God is polytheism


so either, number one: you retract youre statemnt that jesus is a god
and rebutt my original statments i na differnt fashion
or you accept your polytheist approach to christianity
unless you can find a single flaw in my logic
=)

Imran

Yup I see a major flaw in your logic. It&#39;s not Hypocritcal if you are actaully reading anything I&#39;m inputting which at this point you&#39;re suspect of not reading anything that I&#39;ve typed. You are wrong, Polytheism is the Belief and Worship of multiple gods. How many Gods did I tell you that I worshipped? Now Jesus Christ is called a God because He was a Man of superior qualities that seemed like a diety to other people.

I don&#39;t think you understand what a God intells so let&#39;s break it down a little futher
The capitalized form "God" was first used in Ulfilas&#39; Gothic translation of the New Testament, to represent the Greek Theos and the Latin Deus (etymology "*Dyeus"). Because the development of English orthography was dominated by Christian texts, the capitalization (hence personalization and personal name) continues to represent a distinction between monotheistic "God" and the "gods" of pagan polytheism.

In the Old Testement the name God was universal amongst anyone from superior to the eyes of other people or as a leader, to the supernatural. This is the reason why The Almighty Father made it quite clear in

Exodus 6:3
I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty. But I did not let myself be known to them by my name JEHOVAH.Yahweh, Jehovah (Hebrew: &#39;Yud-Hay-Vav-Hay&#39;, יה-וה )
The Hebrew consonants are YHWH, probably pronounced Yahweh, but traditionally read Jehovah.

Definition ofGOD
the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe; the object of worship in monotheistic religions
deity: any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force
a man of such superior qualities that he seems like a deity to other people; "he was a god among men.

Now once again. Jehovah is called the Almighty God Why? because he is a supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient orignator and ruler of the universe and the object of worship in monotheistic religions.

Jesus Christ is referred to as a god Why? because he is the personification of a force as well as a man of superior qualities in his human state.

Why is it not Ploytheism? Because Jesus is not worshipped plain and simple. Now if you can&#39;t understand this then it&#39;s hopeless. I had this same discussion with my Little girl who is only 8 and she didn&#39;t have any problem with understanding that there is only "One True God" even though Jesus Christ is referred to as a God. How can you not see what I am implying? I&#39;m going to be honest with you I never had to break anything down to the simplest variables like this before for anyone.

Ne Yo,

I did want to end this discussion with you but I asked my Pastor about the question of if Jesus is God then why does He not know the hour and the day of his own return. My Pastor gave me another simple Illustration how that could happen and also explain the Trinity.

Think of it as cloneing. The Holy Spirit and Jesus are clones of God. Jesus and the Holy Spirit have the exact same DNA as God. If you were to clone yourself two more times, your clones had the exact DNA as you, would that make your clones any less than you? And you could know something that your clones don&#39;t know if you wish to not tell them. But your clones are still an exact duplicate of you. I know what you&#39;re thinking. God was the original, but that only works in our time demension.

My Pastor didn&#39;t mention anything about time demension. The time demension aspect is my own theory. Time as we know it does not exist for God. When God stated he is the beginning and the end, he was talking about the beginning and end of time as humans know it. But God does not live constrained to time as we do. There is No Beginning and No End for God because God always was and will allways be. God is not constrained by time. So my point is that because there is no time constraint for God, God&#39;s clones, Jesus and the Holy Spirit also do not have a time constraint. They will always be exact duplicates of God with no beginning and no end.

BeaconDreamer

Hi everyone&#33; Good discussion.

Originally Posted by Ne

He is a God but this is not the "Almighty God."
Now don&#39;t get me wrong Jesus Christ is definately an entity to be loved, cherished and given praises to, however Jesus has a position far higher than angels, imperfect men, or Satan. Since these are referred to as "gods," mighty ones, surely Jesus can be and is "a god." Because of his unique position in relation to Jehovah, Jesus is a "Mighty God."—John 1:1; Isaiah 9:6; Isaiah 10:21 The reference of the name "Yahweh" is not speaking of Jesus Christ. That name belongs to the "Almighty God"

But does not "Mighty God" with its capital letters indicate that Jesus is in some way equal to The Almighty God? Not at all. Isaiah merely prophesied this to be one of four names that Jesus would be called, and in the English language such names are capitalized. Still, even though Jesus was called "Mighty," there can be only one who is "Almighty." To call Jehovah God "Almighty" would have little significance unless there existed others who were also called gods but who occupied a lesser or inferior position.
[/b]

Hi Ne-yo&#33; Please let me know if I misunderstood your reply, but can the Almighty also be known as the Mighty and vice-versa?

No actually dictionary defintion states tat polytheism is the belief or/and worship of kore than one God
simply by beleiving two Gods but only worshipping one of them, that is polytheistic.

the Bible often speeks of many gods, Imran. Does that make it poly?
It says that the other gods bow before God. does that make it poly?

indenfintely
and id aprpeciate refrences to the bible talkign about "MANY gods"

Imran