|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 9, 2015 1:06:49 GMT -5
You asked me who things Jesus is not divine? Based on your response to Snow I take it that you believe Jesus was 100% human when on earth and was not divine? Others say that Jesus is divine but apparently not divine enough to be worshipped. Ross, why are asking Snow questions about Jesus while you will not respond to posts that question the truth of your trinity convictions? Could it possibly be that when Snow is asked questions her responses are thoughtful & in a kindly manner; the opposite to your answers?
And this is the really odd, -really weird part!
YOU are the one who "professes" to be an adherent, even a minister, of that Christian faith which states that they are suppose to treat others as they themselves would want to be treated!
|
|
|
Post by Commander Valiant Thor on Sept 9, 2015 7:34:33 GMT -5
Nate - you probably won't have any Scripture to validate Thor as Scripture was written shortly after Christ was on earth and as I understand it Thor came in the 1900's according to what you have written. It's a bit like expecting the Bible to mention TV's or the internet... :) Here are verses to Validate Valiant and Donn Thor mission to earth in Hebrews 1:14 Are they (angels) not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of Salvation?
Hebrews 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.
Page 3 and 4 are mostly about Valiant Thor and Donn Thor were sent by God the Father and the Lord God Jesus Christ Almighty God in the late 1930-2000s.... to help humans return to God and Christ.9 Orders/Levels duties/responsibilities of angelical beings/kingdom 2x2friendsworkers.proboards.com/thread/98/angel-god-talked-eisenhower-1957?page=32x2friendsworkers.proboards.com/thread/98/angel-god-talked-eisenhower-1957?page=4 NathanB, No, you still have it wrong. Stranges is a science fiction writer and had not ever written anything that can be classified as fact. Stranges pulled stories out of places where the sun doesn't shine in much the same way you select verses ouit of context to support your belief. Just trying to get you to see the light. Commander Valiant Thor
|
|
|
Post by Commander Valiant Thor on Sept 9, 2015 9:03:36 GMT -5
NathanB, No, you still have it wrong. Stranges is a science fiction writer and had not ever written anything that can be classified as fact. Stranges pulled stories out of places where the sun doesn't shine in much the same way you select verses ouit of context to support your belief. Just trying to get you to see the light. Commander Valiant Thor Commodore - can you please give me your supernatural insight....?? A senior online worker called Review005 has called me "Monk Thor". Please can you tell me whether I'm one of your monks and whether Review is (speaking) fact or fiction? :) Ross.Bowden, I do not profess to have supernatural insight, 6 digits on each hand, a very large heart, blue blood, a single lung, and any of the many things that Stranges wrote in his novels. Several others, including NathanB, have picked up the tales of Stranges and distributed them as truths and since most readers are not paying attention, it appears that the multiple mentions are from different sources but in fact every single "fact" published about the fictional Valiant Thor originated in the fertile mind of Stranges, and I think we know what makes it fertile. I do consider you to be one of the Thorine Monks because you have a keen mind and look through the curtain of lies perpetuated by Stranges and his band of followers who, as you have determined, are spreading a false and dangerous story. I have communicated with the Others and they and all in full support of my assessment of the situation. In answer to your question, @review005 is just speaking, much like a mountain brook. Some claim to hear words and wisdom and others find it background sound that induces sleep. Just to put your mind at ease, there is no Thorine doctrine you will have to follow nor is there anyone that you will have to answer to other than yourself. Your status as a Thorine Monk does give you the power to function as an indicator that will make the presence of other elements clear to yourself and others so appropriate action can be taken to neutralize the threat or distance yourself, and others, from danger. The Others exist in what many consider the great vacuum of the universe but if you look closely you will see the energy that exists and the source of the power of the Others. This power is also available to you and should make it clear that sending angels that have not power and have not ever been shown to help a single person is not what an intelligent life force would select as an option. As a warning - be prepared for a post from NathanB as he will attempt to hide the truth. He usually attempts a trivial stunt like believing Strages knows facts about me and then, when I tell him the truth, uses the falsehoods spread by Stranges in an attempt to discredit me and the Others. So, @poscoe, you have been selected to join the illustrious forces of goodness and truth and all of the members, past, present, and future, welcome you and know that with your keen insight you too will add in making the universe a more peaceful and forgiving place. I wish I could tell you that you could refuse to accept but that is not one of the options. You might think you are not going along with the plan of the Others but if that is the case you have followed the plan to the letter. You can say you do not accept and resign and refuse to acknowledge this honor and it will all be noted in the fabric of the universe. If you do decide to publicly renounce this path you will also be given extra credit and the Others will smile as they consider the progress you have made. Welcome! Commander Valiant Thor
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 9, 2015 14:43:07 GMT -5
“Spirit & research” in my mind shouldn’t go together. I don’t know how you can "research a spirit, or soul". You can research what people have written about the their beliefs, but it devalues the word “research”. All this trinity and polytheism arguing had me looking into some early Christian beliefs like, Gnosticism, & Marcionism. A belief in Valiant Thor doesn’t stand out as particularly exceptional, compared to some of the other god ideas. Valiant Thor need more powers.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 9, 2015 14:48:45 GMT -5
As Fixit has said before - the workers shouldn't change doctrine because people are leaving. There's no evidence that doctrine has changed in the last 15 years. There's a host of evidence that doctrine changed substantially in the first 50 years. Take a look at the graph of Anglican Church affiliation Ross: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_AustraliaYou'll notice that numbers peaked in 1921 and have dropped steadily since then. It's down to half what it was 100 years ago, in spite of Australia's population having grown substantially. Perhaps its time to change the doctrine to something more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Sept 9, 2015 15:25:30 GMT -5
As Fixit has said before - the workers shouldn't change doctrine because people are leaving. There's no evidence that doctrine has changed in the last 15 years. There's a host of evidence that doctrine changed substantially in the first 50 years. Take a look at the graph of Anglican Church affiliation Ross: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_AustraliaYou'll notice that numbers peaked in 1921 and have dropped steadily since then. It's down to half what it was 100 years ago, in spite of Australia's population having grown substantially. Perhaps its time to change the doctrine to something more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? How does that compare to the 40% decline in the fellowship in the last 25 years or so? Would that give reason to believe the same change of doctrine in your church would make your church more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? B-)
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 9, 2015 15:50:56 GMT -5
Take a look at the graph of Anglican Church affiliation Ross: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_AustraliaYou'll notice that numbers peaked in 1921 and have dropped steadily since then. It's down to half what it was 100 years ago, in spite of Australia's population having grown substantially. Perhaps its time to change the doctrine to something more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? How does that compare to the 40% decline in the fellowship in the last 25 years or so? Would that give reason to believe the same change of doctrine in your church would make your church more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? B-) Ross, as you know I'm concerned about the decline in our church and have put forward suggestions for improvement over many years. I don't believe the Trinitarian-agnostic stance of workers and friends is a cause for concern (I say Trinitarian-agnostic because the Trinity is not actively condemned in my experience, but its largely a non-issue). In this particular discussion Ross is blaming the lack of Trinitarian teaching as a major reason for the decline. I'm pointing out that Trinitarian teaching hasn't halted the decline in his own church.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Sept 9, 2015 16:03:49 GMT -5
Seems as if the trinity days brought many people into your fellowship in the early days. Your early hymns show to be mainstream trinity doctrine and people have left over the change in doctrine.
The ones most obsessed over the trinity are the 2 professing people on here namely Ross and Review.
Review seems like a little boy who has not been given a lolly pop when Ross refuses to get hooked into his behavior. Ross has answered reviews questions many times over. There was a time when review and fixit were fighting now they've kissed and made up and both gang up against Ross. Such is life! Ross is wise not to be get hooked in.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 9, 2015 16:15:05 GMT -5
Seems as if the trinity days brought many people into your fellowship in the early days. Your early hymns show to be mainstream trinity doctrine and people have left over the change in doctrine. The ones most obsessed over the trinity are the 2 professing people on here namely Ross and Review. Review seems like a little boy who has not been given a lolly pop when Ross refuses to get hooked into his behavior. Ross has answered reviews questions many times over. There was a time when review and fixit were fighting now they've kissed and made up and both gang up against Ross. Such is life! Ross is wise not to be get hooked in. Not only "Such is life!" -it is also the "stuff of Christianity!"
Put a group of Christians in a room & you will see just how much that they will agree on!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 9, 2015 16:22:57 GMT -5
How does that compare to the 40% decline in the fellowship in the last 25 years or so? Would that give reason to believe the same change of doctrine in your church would make your church more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? B-) Ross, as you know I'm concerned about the decline in our church and have put forward suggestions for improvement over many years.
I don't believe the Trinitarian-agnostic stance of workers and friends is a cause for concern (I say Trinitarian-agnostic because the Trinity is not actively condemned in my experience, but its largely a non-issue). In this particular discussion Ross is blaming the lack of Trinitarian teaching as a major reason for the decline. I'm pointing out that Trinitarian teaching hasn't halted the decline in his own church. You suppose that this could be the problem?
"And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 9, 2015 16:48:46 GMT -5
Ross, as you know I'm concerned about the decline in our church and have put forward suggestions for improvement over many years.
I don't believe the Trinitarian-agnostic stance of workers and friends is a cause for concern (I say Trinitarian-agnostic because the Trinity is not actively condemned in my experience, but its largely a non-issue). In this particular discussion Ross is blaming the lack of Trinitarian teaching as a major reason for the decline. I'm pointing out that Trinitarian teaching hasn't halted the decline in his own church. You suppose that this could be the problem?
"And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
I'm not sure what you are saying. Do you mean that new religious movements start off with a hiss and a roar and then gradually decline? That they can't be reformed, but are replaced with something new?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 9, 2015 16:55:49 GMT -5
Seems as if the trinity days brought many people into your fellowship in the early days. Your early hymns show to be mainstream trinity doctrine and people have left over the change in doctrine. The ones most obsessed over the trinity are the 2 professing people on here namely Ross and Review. Review seems like a little boy who has not been given a lolly pop when Ross refuses to get hooked into his behavior. Ross has answered reviews questions many times over. There was a time when review and fixit were fighting now they've kissed and made up and both gang up against Ross. Such is life! Ross is wise not to be get hooked in. I haven't notice Ross's answers to Reviews questions: 1. Why is Son of God mentioned 46 times, and God the Son 0 times? 2. Where is the trinity in Revelation chapters 4-22?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 9, 2015 17:13:53 GMT -5
Cmdre Monk Ross obviously reads each of my posts. He often responds in the 3rd person. He's clever! He has no answers or response for the scripture I quote that proves that trinity is unable to define God. No response at all to that...... But his trinity and rosshumour posts keep coming! It might be that the scripture you quote is not on as sound a footing as you believe. For example: Concerning the Story of the AdulteressI wonder what 'original bible text" really means.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 9, 2015 17:15:58 GMT -5
How does that compare to the 40% decline in the fellowship in the last 25 years or so? Would that give reason to believe the same change of doctrine in your church would make your church more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? B-) In my opinion and observation the last 40 yrs the Secret Sect book and William Irvine the founder story have made 30-40% friends leaving the fellowship and with the false teaching of the current workers on Jesus is NOT God will be bring down another 20% of the friends leaving the fellowship.Then you would see this as the work of the devil?
|
|
cooee
Junior Member
Posts: 69
|
Post by cooee on Sept 9, 2015 17:16:16 GMT -5
Dear poster review005,
Much earlier in this thread you posted that the inspired NT writers referred 46 times to Jesus as "the Son of God". Could you please share with us your understanding about why Jesus persistently referred to himself as "the Son of Man"?
Thanks and regards,
cooee
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 9, 2015 17:29:51 GMT -5
But I refer to neither of these in asking ross to validate his essentially invalid trinity dogma. It is a belief based on faith that requires neither material or logical support.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 9, 2015 17:41:18 GMT -5
Then you would see this as the work of the devil? Yes, I believe it's the work of the devil and the work of false brethren/tares among us. Peter had these kinds of people in his days so are we in our days... II Peter 2:1-2 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies (Arian 3rd century bishop teaching), even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
It's too bad people fight over religion. I don't expect it will ever end, as each is determined to "help" the other see the errors of their ways before it's hell to pay.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 9, 2015 18:11:41 GMT -5
You suppose that this could be the problem?
"And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
I'm not sure what you are saying. Do you mean that new religious movements start off with a hiss and a roar and then gradually decline? That they can't be reformed, but are replaced with something new? Well, it is a quote from a parable of Jesus. What do you think that parable means?
My feeling on posting it was in reply to your statement, " I'm concerned about the decline in our church and have put forward suggestions for improvement over many years."
Why does someone even try to put new patches (suggestions) on something like the *TRUTH** when it was so deceptive about it beginnings? Nothing can patch up that deception which was such a large part of what was preached supposedly making it the Only TRUE Way.
Your avatar is "fixit," but I don't think it can be "fixed."
|
|
|
Post by emy on Sept 9, 2015 18:48:51 GMT -5
How does that compare to the 40% decline in the fellowship in the last 25 years or so? Would that give reason to believe the same change of doctrine in your church would make your church more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? B-) I have not been to a convention yet that is half the size it used to be and in some regions attendance is growing. (Our local convention is extending the size of its meeting room for next year.)
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 9, 2015 18:50:12 GMT -5
I'm not sure what you are saying. Do you mean that new religious movements start off with a hiss and a roar and then gradually decline? That they can't be reformed, but are replaced with something new? Well, it is a quote from a parable of Jesus. What do you think that parable means?
My feeling on posting it was in reply to your statement, " I'm concerned about the decline in our church and have put forward suggestions for improvement over many years."
Why does someone even try to put new patches (suggestions) on something like the *TRUTH** when it was so deceptive about it beginnings? Nothing can patch up that deception which was such a large part of what was preached supposedly making it the Only TRUE Way.
Your avatar is "fixit," but I don't think it can be "fixed." I don't want to claim on TMB to know exactly what Jesus was referring to. Don't you think I'm in enough trouble here already??? Some say you can't patch an old wineskin as in a religious system. Nothing can be "fixed" unless there's an acknowledgement that its broken and a willingness to change.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 9, 2015 19:17:44 GMT -5
How does that compare to the 40% decline in the fellowship in the last 25 years or so? Would that give reason to believe the same change of doctrine in your church would make your church more intelligible and meaningful for younger generations? B-) I have not been to a convention yet that is half the size it used to be and in some regions attendance is growing. (Our local convention is extending the size of its meeting room for next year.) Emy, could the size of the conventions be the same because so many others are closing and those that would normally attend the ones closed are coming to the to the other conventions ?
Just a question. I don't know having not been to a convention for at least five years now.
The last one I went to was because my husband was becoming so dependent on other people helping him. Although everyone was really very kind in helping him, I felt I was burdening them & I should stay with him that last time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 20:33:59 GMT -5
Dear poster review005, Much earlier in this thread you posted that the inspired NT writers referred 46 times to Jesus as "the Son of God". Could you please share with us your understanding about why Jesus persistently referred to himself as "the Son of Man"? Thanks and regards, cooee Numbers 23:19 "God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?" I'm not review005, but I wanted to point this verse out. By claiming to be the Son of Man, Jesus was identifying with the human race. Since God is not a man, nor the Son of Man, then Jesus cannot be equated with Jehovah. Jesus was fully aware of this verse in Numbers 23:19. Jesus was emphasizing his humanness by calling himself 'the Son of Man.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 20:37:24 GMT -5
Yes, I believe it's the work of the devil and the work of false brethren/tares among us. Peter had these kinds of people in his days so are we in our days... II Peter 2:1-2 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies (Arian 3rd century bishop teaching), even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
It's too bad people fight over religion. I don't expect it will ever end, as each is determined to "help" the other see the errors of their ways before it's hell to pay. One good thing about fighting over religion: it sharpens one's wits. It makes you think. I've learned a lot by fighting over religion, and have even come to admit that some of what I've believed is actually not true. It's given me opportunity to change my thinking in the past. I'll bet you that anyone on this board would be cordial with one another if they met in person. We might 'fight,' but that doesn't mean we don't appreciate one another. Well, there may be a few exceptions to this. But, in general I think it's true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 20:55:46 GMT -5
I just noticed that too why only rev 4-22? is there something in rev 1-3 that doesn't want to be acknowledged?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 9, 2015 21:12:19 GMT -5
Rational, You are quite correct in what you state about that particular portion of Scripture, the last part of Mark 16 has similar questions about it. 1 John 5v7also (that was inserted by naughty pro-trinity folk! :P, But I refer to neither of these in asking ross to validate his essentially invalid trinity dogma. If the mentioned text was inserted and then discovered how can you be certain that the text you are asking Ross.Bowden about has not been inserted/edited?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 9, 2015 21:24:22 GMT -5
I also know a stack of people in the Anglican church that tick the Christian box in the Census and not the Anglican one. There is no 'Christian' box to tick on the Australian census form.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 23:18:02 GMT -5
i suppose we could say that God knows us. "come ye blessed of my Father" and i suppose we could say that Ross's comment has a very close likeness to pharisee comments in the Bible You can call me a Pharisee or anything - it's not the worst thing I've been called. The local Head Worker said that I was of the devil so it's all water of duck's back after that Paul also spoke to the Galatian church about how quickly they were deserting the One who called them to live in the grace of Christ adn are turning to a different gospel. Paul wasn't a Pharisee when he said this. I have no problem with most of what the early workers believed and did but they quickly deserted the truth with the Living Witness Doctrine and a bunch of other things that were gradually introduced. You only have to read John Long's account, Goodhand Pattison's account, Edward Cooney's writings to see that. Plenty of people, in particular Edward Cooney, have been called Pharisees before and much worse... We left the 2x2 church because of what we believed was heretical teaching on: - who God is - how we are saved (largely preached here that we are saved by our works); and - worker's belief that they are the only true apostles of Christ on earth and it's only through them that a person can access Jesus. As Fixit has said before - the workers shouldn't change doctrine because people are leaving. There's no evidence that doctrine has changed in the last 15 years. There's a host of evidence that doctrine changed substantially in the first 50 years. didn't call you pharisee,dingbat
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 9, 2015 23:29:53 GMT -5
There is no 'Christian' box to tick on the Australian census form. They tick the "Other" box and write Christian. From the 2011 Census the initial results on the religion question were: ◾One of the fastest growing religions was “No Religion”, up by 29%, to 22.3% of the population. ◾Hinduism up 86% in line with growth in the Indian population ◾Islam up 39.9% ◾Christianity total up 3.7%. Much of this increase is in the “Christian not further defined” category. The results reflect the growth in non-traditional denominations or non-denominational churches. For example, there is no Pentecostal box to tick so these folk just tick the Other box and write Christian as I understand. There was a bit of stir down here recently because the plan for the next census is to put "No religion" first rather than last. I haven't seen Bert posting or cartooning about this one yet but maybe it's coming from the production lab as we speak :) FWIW - In the data base available online the following fields are available: Religion Religious Affiliation (RELP)[9] Buddhism[1] Buddhism[1] Christianity[19] Christian, nfd[5] Anglican[2] Baptist[1] Brethren[1] Catholic[6] Churches of Christ[4] Jehovah's Witnesses[1] Latter-day Saints[3] Lutheran[1] Oriental Orthodox[6] Assyrian Apostolic[4] Eastern Orthodox[10] Presbyterian and Reformed[4] Salvation Army[1] Seventh-day Adventist[1] Uniting Church[1] Pentecostal[15] Other Protestant[10] Other Christian[15] The fields 'Christian', Christianity, other Protestant, and other Christian seem to be derived fields. AU census data (2011)
|
|