|
Post by Mary on Apr 19, 2015 3:34:38 GMT -5
The trinity does not say that there are 3 Gods. The trinity says there is one God - these 3 are one. Like Nathan said Jesus clearly accepted worship when we were told to only worship God. Of course Jesus prayed to his Father while on earth and the prayer was an example teaching us how to pray.
On another note. Your posts Ross are full of Christ, unlike the person who accuses them of not being. Jesus is clearly the focus of your life, Ross.
|
|
|
Post by responding on Apr 19, 2015 4:04:36 GMT -5
A question for those of you who keep mentioning the word 'trinity': Do you subscribe to the whole doctrine, including "Mother of God", "Eternal Virgin" and "Queen of Heaven"? They form part of the Roman Catholic dogma of trinity, Jesus as God.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 19, 2015 4:09:28 GMT -5
Jesus had to be strengthened by God in the garden before he went through the crucifixion, God gave him strength, and he overcame Satan and never sinned although he was tempted just as we are! According to my bible, God cannot be tempted. Jesus the Son of God was tempted though...
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 19, 2015 4:21:54 GMT -5
Did the apostle John see God?
Not according to what he wrote...
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 19, 2015 4:32:03 GMT -5
Jesus had to be strengthened by God in the garden before he went through the crucifixion, God gave him strength, and he overcame Satan and never sinned although he was tempted just as we are! According to my bible, God cannot be tempted. Jesus the Son of God was tempted though... I might tempt you and so you were tempted, but you might not be tempted and so you were not tempted. Thus, you were both tempted and not tempted at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Apr 19, 2015 4:34:17 GMT -5
It does not say that the devil could not try to tempt God. As we know the devil tried to tempt Jesus but Jesus was not tempted. We say you can try all you want but you can't tempt me. E.g.offer me some cocolate and I might say offer me it all you want but you can't tempt me. That is exactly how I read it.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Apr 19, 2015 4:39:47 GMT -5
I also see it as no man has seen the Father.
John clearly says that the word who dwelt among us (Jesus) was God. John 1:1.
Jesus left His glory and took on the form of a human. We didn't see him in His glory. We saw him in his human form.
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Apr 19, 2015 4:58:06 GMT -5
It does not say that the devil could not try to tempt God. As we know the devil tried to tempt Jesus but Jesus was not tempted. We say you can try all you want but you can't tempt me. E.g.offer me some cocolate and I might say offer me it all you want but you can't tempt me. That is exactly how I read it. Jesus was tempted, just like we are, but never sinned! Luke 4 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, Being forty days tempted of the devil Hebrews 4 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin God cannot be tempted James 1 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Apr 19, 2015 5:01:52 GMT -5
Like I said the Devil tried to tempt Jesus but Jesus was not tempted. Nothing to stop the devil trying to tempt God.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 19, 2015 5:06:34 GMT -5
It does not say that the devil could not try to tempt God. As we know the devil tried to tempt Jesus but Jesus was not tempted. We say you can try all you want but you can't tempt me. E.g.offer me some cocolate and I might say offer me it all you want but you can't tempt me. That is exactly how I read it. You seem to be denying that Jesus has come in the flesh. If Jesus couldn't be tempted just as we are, and if he in fact wasn't just as we are, the following verses don't mean much...
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Apr 19, 2015 5:28:12 GMT -5
Like I said the Devil tried to tempt Jesus but Jesus was not tempted. Nothing to stop the devil trying to tempt God. Hebrews 4:15 It says Jesus had the same feelings as us! For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities He came in the flesh and felt what we felt and denied Satan! Because his love for God was greater than his love for the world. He came to please God and not to please his flesh.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 19, 2015 5:49:44 GMT -5
So did he give into temptation? No. The devil tried to tempt him but couldn't. He did not sin, we do. The Bible says if any man says he has not sinned he is a liar. So if Jesus didn't sin is he a liar? Yes - if Jesus sinned yet said he never sinned, that would make him a liar. Did Jesus say he never sinned? If Jesus couldn't sin then being tempted by the devil, and the following scripture, is rather pointless... So we have one who has been tempted in every way, yet he cannot be tempted because he is God?
|
|
|
Post by Ross.Bowden on Apr 19, 2015 7:59:16 GMT -5
A question for those of you who keep mentioning the word 'trinity': Do you subscribe to the whole doctrine, including "Mother of God", "Eternal Virgin" and "Queen of Heaven"? They form part of the Roman Catholic dogma of trinity, Jesus as God. I am not sure what you mean by the whole doctrine of the Trinity. Many 2x2's think that the Trinity is a Catholic Church doctrine which of course it is not. It is a core Christian doctrine which is at the very heart of Christianity. The Biblical understanding is that God is one and unique, and at the same time three persons, - the Father, Son and Holy Spirit - living and interrelating in undivided unity. Mary is clearly not the Father, or the Son or the Holy Spirit and is therefore not God. Every Christian church I know of believes in the doctrine of the Trinity - there are some Christian sects such as the JW's that do not. It is not clear what the 2x2's believe as it is not published. However, based on what has been preached over the years I think it is more than fair to say that most workers do not believe in the Trinity. It is clear that the early workers did but this belief has been diluted to the point where in our local area in Australia Head Workers completely reject the doctrine. Having said that, I have heard one senior Canadian worker preach in the 1990's at Silverdale Convention in Sydney about the "truth of the Trinity" and another senior US worker preach in the 1990's in NSW about Jesus as the great "I AM". Clearly, they understood who Jesus was and is. Nathan will attest to his experience with Leo Stancliffe and Leo's clear understanding about Jesus as Lord and God. Christians understand that the full divinity of Jesus was essential in him paying the penalty for our sins. If Jesus was not fully God, then God was punishing an innocent third party instead of the guilty. This would have not only been unjust, but ineffective - the death of a mere man, even a perfect man, could pay for no more than the sin of one other person. But if God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, then God was bearing the penalty for our crime, and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world. Some thoughts on Mary which may be helpful...In relation to Mary (who is clearly not part of the Trinity), at the council of Chalcdeon in 451AD the Greek term theotokos meaning "mother of God" was coined to express that indeed Jesus was fully God. If, at his birth, he was divine, then Mary could rightly be designated the 'mother of God'. At the time this was a helpful litmus test for a right view of who Jesus was. However, unfortunately over the centuries the phrase was taken completely incorrectly as a point of devotion to Mary. Instead of emphasising the divinity of Jesus, it was used to emphasise the place of Mary and so we have Catholics praying to her, declaring her sinless, and in 1950 the declaration by the RCC that Mary had risen bodily to heaven. Sadly, she has been declared Queen of Heaven and effectively worshipped in official Papal prayers. This catalogue of "Maryolatry" is a travesty of the gospel and deeply offends all true Bible believers. Christians simply shake their heads in disbelief at the doctrines of Mary that have developed over the centuries.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Apr 19, 2015 8:03:06 GMT -5
I said the devil tried to tempt him but he did not give in to temptation. It says he did not sIn. You quote verses which support what I am saying. In fact we are saying exactly the same thing. The difference is the meaning or context of the word tempted.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Apr 19, 2015 8:07:32 GMT -5
Agree, Mary is not part of the Trinity. The trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 19, 2015 9:38:28 GMT -5
Peter Liddle has contacted me and asked me to post the following: It's unfortunate that the sentence, "One other thought, Percy was a humble man", was not included at the beginning of the paragraph quoted, as this might have made my point clearer. Jesus' words came to mind in reference to the humility we saw in Percy. I think that every one of the numerous people present at Percy's funeral - people who knew him - would say that Percy was good; but to be called good meant very little to Percy. That Jesus is good, and that He is divine whilst partaking of flesh and blood, I don't dispute. The last sentence, "none of us are good, we all need the mercy of God, we all need the cleansing that Jesus affords, and we're grateful for the hope that we have today", should show that I believe Jesus to be sinless and therefore able to offer us cleansing. I acknowledge that it was a misquote to say that Jesus said, "No one is good but my Father in heaven", and apologise for having caused confusion, and possibly offence. Peter Liddle Otto, thanks for posting this for Peter. Peter, thank you for your gracious clarification. Peter Liddle says "That Jesus is good, and that He is divine whilst partaking of flesh and blood, I don't dispute." Jesus said "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God." (Mark 10:18, KJV) That pretty much settles this little dispute - why indeed do we call Jesus good? There is only one way in which both statements can be reconciled. Peter, warm wishes for your ministry in uplifting the Lord Jesus Christ. admin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 9:52:35 GMT -5
Thank you, Peter L. for reading here, and clarifying your belief on this point over your own true identity. As a former "brother" who has long wished for this type of open honesty and clarity expressed by and among "workers" everywhere, it was pleasant to read. If you ever visit the USA Pacific Northwest, and if I should still be alive, please include a visit with me?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 19, 2015 12:09:22 GMT -5
Those of you that say Jesus was perfect, I'd like to know how you can believe that? He had a temper and he killed a fig tree and got bent out of shape tossing things around in the temple. Is having a temper and giving into it Godly or perfect? I think not. There would have been more 'Godly' solutions to both incidences I'm sure. But then you might be right about God's having a temper because didn't God get angry and kill everyone except Noah and his family? So we must accept that having a temper and giving in to it is a Godly thing in order to believe Jesus or even God himself is a perfect being.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Apr 19, 2015 12:43:27 GMT -5
Peter Liddle has contacted me and asked me to post the following: It's unfortunate that the sentence, "One other thought, Percy was a humble man", was not included at the beginning of the paragraph quoted, as this might have made my point clearer. Jesus' words came to mind in reference to the humility we saw in Percy. I think that every one of the numerous people present at Percy's funeral - people who knew him - would say that Percy was good; but to be called good meant very little to Percy. That Jesus is good, and that He is divine whilst partaking of flesh and blood, I don't dispute. The last sentence, "none of us are good, we all need the mercy of God, we all need the cleansing that Jesus affords, and we're grateful for the hope that we have today", should show that I believe Jesus to be sinless and therefore able to offer us cleansing. I acknowledge that it was a misquote to say that Jesus said, "No one is good but my Father in heaven", and apologise for having caused confusion, and possibly offence. Peter Liddle Otto, thanks for posting this for Peter. Peter, thank you for your gracious clarification. Peter Liddle says "That Jesus is good, and that He is divine whilst partaking of flesh and blood, I don't dispute." Jesus said "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God." (Mark 10:18, KJV) That pretty much settles this little dispute - why indeed do we call Jesus good? There is only one way in which both statements can be reconciled. Peter, warm wishes for your ministry in uplifting the Lord Jesus Christ. admin I'm not sure what dispute is settled. Surely not that Peter believes "Jesus is God".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 13:17:20 GMT -5
Ma'am, the definition of perfection has not always been "without perceived human flaw," rather, whole and complete. Such was Yahu'shuah ha Mesciach, the name and title by which He was known as He lived upon this earth.
Now you have repeatedly asserted you knew there was no God at age 12, and have lived by that knowledge ever since. He, on the other hand sought to be about His Heavenly Father's business ever since that age. You have made your choice perfectly clear. Well and good for you, by your own admission.
You obviously believe there is nothing more for you to learn regarding God. Does this make you a bad person in my sight/perception? No, not at all. Absolutely not at all! We have simply chosen different paths of belief. I am not trying to persuade you nor anyone else to believe as I, for that is not for me to do.
Yes, I constantly share what I believe as true and why each time, however it is not aimed at you nor any other non-believer! Why? Because I give everyone, believers and non-believers alike, right to believe as they will, wanting to follow my Lord's example in this matter. I do grow weary of your, and other non-believers, attempts to assault any and every aspect of belief.
Do I think believers ought to do that to non-believers? I do not. Snow, why not just accept us the way you appear to wish us accept you, and you must admit I make every attempt to do in this forum, and elsewhere if you knew me personally.
If shoes don't fit, for goodness sakes, nobody should constantly try to wear them. In fact, if we don't even think they might fit, why should we even try to put them on? I simply try to pass over every assault on my belief, even though I am not always successful. Non-believers seem to make every attempt at every occasion to show disrespect or contempt of my post, usually with some form of self-justification. It is my goal to just let them.
Please. Peace to you, snow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 13:47:50 GMT -5
Greg, in the sense that only the Father is God, I do not believe Yahu'shuah is God neither. His given name means God-savior. I did not give Him that name. According to the Bible, His parents were told to give Him that name, and further records by that name Yahu'shuah, and Him and it alone (not by a faulty transliteration, even translation of it) should all humanity be saved.
My God is a Spirit, consisting of will, word and power. For me, only that Being directs which is which and by which name to be known. We can create divisions, disputes beyond measure, none of which please the God I serve and worship. It is reported back to me that at least some of the workers are at least beginning to serve and worship in this generation the same God as myself. I do NOT want focus upon that which might divide, rather upon that which might unite.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Apr 19, 2015 13:58:51 GMT -5
It wasn't like Jesus just lost it, Snow. He was there for some time making a sourge of small cords before he did any thing. So depends what you mean by temper. Jesus spent time there contemplating before he drove them out.
Is it not ok to get angry about certain things. I for one would hope that people would get angry about child sexual abuse and how people have just sat passively by and ignored it for so long.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 19, 2015 14:05:57 GMT -5
Ma'am, the definition of perfection has not always been "without perceived human flaw," rather, whole and complete. Such was Yahu'shuah ha Mesciach, the name and title by which He was known as He lived upon this earth.
Now you have repeatedly asserted you knew there was no God at age 12, and have lived by that knowledge ever since. He, on the other hand sought to be about His Heavenly Father's business ever since that age. You have made your choice perfectly clear. Well and good for you, by your own admission.
You obviously believe there is nothing more for you to learn regarding God. Does this make you a bad person in my sight/perception? No, not at all. Absolutely not at all! We have simply chosen different paths of belief. I am not trying to persuade you nor anyone else to believe as I, for that is not for me to do.
Yes, I constantly share what I believe as true and why each time, however it is not aimed at you nor any other non-believer! Why? Because I give everyone, believers and non-believers alike, right to believe as they will, wanting to follow my Lord's example in this matter. I do grow weary of your, and other non-believers, attempts to assault any and every aspect of belief.
Do I think believers ought to do that to non-believers? I do not. Snow, why not just accept us the way you appear to wish us accept you, and you must admit I make every attempt to do in this forum, and elsewhere if you knew me personally.
If shoes don't fit, for goodness sakes, nobody should constantly try to wear them. In fact, if we don't even think they might fit, why should we even try to put them on? I simply try to pass over every assault on my belief, even though I am not always successful. Non-believers seem to make every attempt at every occasion to show disrespect or contempt of my post, usually with some form of self-justification. It is my goal to just let them.
Please. Peace to you, snow. Not sure how this relates to my question about Jesus being perfect or not. However, in answer to your post, I do allow you to be and believe as you wish. As far as losing a belief in a god, it wasn't a choice. It just happened. I don't think anyone on here that doesn't believe in God can say it was a choice. In fact when it happened it scared me and I fought it. I thought for sure something was wrong with me I was so indoctrinated from my early years. I do understand what it's like to believe and I don't condemn you or anyone else for it as you seem to think I do. I do think that these beliefs can be dangerous and have pointed out before what ones those were and why. For the most part people of faith are loving, good people. Also, you always seem to think non believers are constantly showing you disrespect or contempt. I don't think that's true at all. Questioning is not contempt Dennis. You need to understand that. If I was to feel every time I was questioned that you were somehow disrespecting me, I would be feeling disrespected a lot on here. You continually state you don't have a problem with non believers but this post indicates to me that you must have and that's sad imo.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 19, 2015 14:08:59 GMT -5
It wasn't like Jesus just lost it, Snow. He was there for some time making a sourge of small cords before he did any thing. So depends what you mean by temper. Jesus spend time there contemplating before he drove them out. Is it not ok to get angry about certain things. I for one would hope that people would get angry about child sexual abuse and how people have just sat passively by and ignored it for so long. Good point. Most people do equate anger or temper with imperfection though. I agree anger has it's place, but then I'm not a God. Should Gods get angry, or should they do something positive to change things? Premeditated temper? Interesting concept that I never thought about when we're talking about God, but I do find it fits.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 19, 2015 14:45:28 GMT -5
It does not say that the devil could not try to tempt God. As we know the devil tried to tempt Jesus but Jesus was not tempted. We say you can try all you want but you can't tempt me. E.g.offer me some cocolate and I might say offer me it all you want but you can't tempt me. That is exactly how I read it. Jesus was tempted, just like we are, but never sinned! Luke 4 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, Being forty days tempted of the devil Hebrews 4 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin God cannot be tempted James 1 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man. The pro-trinity group haven't explained how this scripture can be reconciled. I'm left with some questions: 1. Wouldn't the Omniscient be touched with the feeling of our infirmities even before Jesus? 2. God cannot be tempted with evil, so why did the writer to the Hebrews consider it important that Jesus the Son of God was in all points tempted like as we are - and that he was without sin. 3. God cannot sin, so how could it be a big deal that God was without sin when tempted?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 15:12:26 GMT -5
Those of you that say Jesus was perfect, I'd like to know how you can believe that? He had a temper and he killed a fig tree and got bent out of shape tossing things around in the temple. Is having a temper and giving into it Godly or perfect? I think not. There would have been more 'Godly' solutions to both incidences I'm sure. But then you might be right about God's having a temper because didn't God get angry and kill everyone except Noah and his family? So we must accept that having a temper and giving in to it is a Godly thing in order to believe Jesus or even God himself is a perfect being. Careful what you say or you might incur the wrath of God.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2015 15:32:58 GMT -5
I do grow weary of your, and other non-believers, attempts to assault any and every aspect of belief. Goodness Dennis. You have certainly chosen an odd thread to make this particular point. I have followed this thread from the beginning and it seems to me that the overwhelming theme of this thread has been (what you might term) assaults, not by non believers on beliefs, but by believers on other believers' beliefs. And some very unsavoury indeed. Indeed the thread opened no less than with link to a document containing details of the funeral of a preacher introduced in a most unsavoury manner. The thread then descended into a battle between trinitarians and non trinitarians over whose interpretation of the nature of (the biblical) God was the correct one. On and on in it goes, for five pages now of rather unsophisticated assaults (to use your term) by believers on other believers' beliefs. And not only on their beliefs either. And not only on this thread. I sense that some think it is fair game to attack the beliefs of the 2x2 church but yet do not welcome their own beliefs being challenged. Personally, I think that challenging both beliefs and unbeliefs is perfectly acceptable and to an extent what this board is all about. It is worth remembering that this board is not just a board for believers but for believers and non believers alike. Of course if one's belief or non belief stands up to scrutiny all the better. It can only help us in our quest for universal truth. Certainly no one here has yet demonstrated that their particular belief or non belief is the one and only version of truth. Indeed some who have been promoting their own beliefs on this thread have a history of being remarkably flawed (by their own admission) when it comes to the small matter of beliefs. Regards Matt10
|
|
|
Post by responding on Apr 19, 2015 16:05:14 GMT -5
"Mother of God", "Eternal Virgin" and "Queen of Heaven" are all included in the Roman Catholic dogma of trinity. Also the communion wafer, which is GOD in the flesh. Mary is not "part of the trinity" - the trinity teaching is that Mary is the mother of God (not of Jesus, as we read in the NT).
|
|