Posted on 02/05/2007 10:35:59 AM PST by MichaelTheeArchAngel
The proof is over whelming that the Trinitarian doctrine was added to the bible. Obviously some here just want to be obstinate. Constantine the Great who proclaimed himself head of the Christian Church, was also the Pagan high priest at the same time. He is the one who added the Sunday Sabbath and Trinitarism. Its Satanic to what was originally taught.
My point was not about sacrifice but of substance being of infinite and eternal
Something Pagans are incapable of!
In the Godhead is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost which is divine, infinite, and eternal!
Your reply was to #50. Did you read my posts in that old thread?
Did you read my post #148 in this thread?
I'm a father, a son, and a husband, but I'm not three persons.
Any further discussion on my part will have to wait a couple of days, as my time is very limited right now.
Yes. But, this is an endless argument. Either they believe or they don't. Theology has a very precise logic, but it is based upon premises that not everyone will accept. So, let the heathen rage.
Can you provide me a scripture that will explain that to me?
It used to be hard for me to comprehend why those ancient Israelites would tenaciously cling to The Baalim. These kinds of threads do a really good job of explaining such mysteries.
Off topic, but a really could word study is the "vinegar" present at the crucifixion, esp. WRT the dietary restrictions of Passover. Chet, mem, tsaddi IIRC...
Exodus 15
The Song of Moses
3 YHVH is a man of war;
YHVH is His name.
Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
There She is!
The Hebrew is emphatic, No man EL…
YHVH masculine
EL feminine
But then again Christians aren’t taught to analyze, are they?
I don't know the tricks of tranferring data to another thread, so here's a supplemental explanation from this 'oneness' one.
a trinitarian said:
**God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.**
As someone has already pointed out, those phrases are not found in the Bible.
Why would the Son of God have to ask the Father to send twelve legions of angels if he, as the Son, has his own separate, yet equal power to the Father?
Simple. As the Son of God, any miraculous happening was the Father(Spirit; John 4:23,24) in him doing the works, telling him what to say and do when the matter was spiritual.
The man Christ Jesus said, "I, of myself can do nothing", or "I thirst". That wasn't God talking in those instances.
Jesus Christ(fleshly man with a soul) knew AND felt the presense of the Father(Spirit) in him right up to the cross. Then the Father(Spirit) left, and Jesus cried, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" At that moment, the Christ knew that the Father had departed from him. How strange that must have felt. Then the moment of death. Diety can NOT die. The Son died. Jesus had said he had power IN himself to lay his life down and take it back up. That power was the Father in him.
"Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell..". Acts 2:27
"Him hath God raised up.." Acts 10:40
The Christ is the focal point, the heir of all things. He who has had all things from the beginning, is not an heir but the original owner.
All power has been GIVEN Jesus Christ by the Father(Spirit) in him.
"God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself".
It's the revelation of Jesus Christ. Who he REALLY is!
"..The blessed and ONLY Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who ONLY hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting, Amen." 1Tim. 6:15,16
Zuriel,
It isn't my job to try to convince you not to believe what you believe. This is America, where you have the right to believe as you wish.
You don't want to believe in the Blessed Trinity...fine. Your choice.
You won't find me going to Protestant threads, Oneness Pentacostal threads, Jehovah's Witness threads, or whatever and start slamming them and telling them they are going to hell and that they are part of a heretical cult, or whatever. You WILL find me going and defending the Church against attacks. But that wasn't the case here (at least in the opening post) -- it appeared that the article was a defense of a statement of beliefs, not an attack.
Bottom line: thanks for the ping, but it's not my personal style to try to attack somebody's belief system, no matter how wrong I may personally believe that belief system is.
Sure, whatever.
If you're the English-usage-impaired originator of this thread, my stylistic criticisms stand.
Cheerio!
**If you're the English-usage-impaired originator of this thread..**
Not me. I'm a slacker. I've yet to be the originator of any thread on FR.
**Cheerio!**
Thanks, preferably plain, not the 'honey-nut' version. :)
I've been on FR almost 5 years, and I think I'm responsible for 6 or 7 threads.
My kids like the flavored Cheerios ... we call them "Sticky-O's"!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.