It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Satan the deceiver or not ..

page: 15
6
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
And you have no idea what they mean by "True God of True God", but it's there, and it's there for a reason. Skip down and see what it says about the Holy Spirit and why it gives life to those who worship the Father AND the Son.

You are the one who have no idea what it mean by the Son.
God cannot be the Son. Your concept of son, defy everything God teaches.


God has no beginning. God is not created. God is everlasting. Your Son God fail all this criteria. Your son God make no sense. A paradox invented by pagan.

Explain, if God is the Son, then who created the Son? Surely God cannot create Himself.

Which come first, the egg or the chicken?




posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow


God has no beginning. God is not created. God is everlasting. Your Son God fail all this criteria. Your son God make no sense. A paradox invented by pagan.


It doesn't make sense to you because you're not using the Holy Spirit. It reads easily to me...

John 1:1-2, 14

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Try reading that Nicene Creed again and look up the verses if you need to.

If you need 160 more reasons...

www.scionofzion.com...

You act like I'm throwing out something new. This has been the same Christian message for ages. It hasn't changed and neither has God.



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: EasternShadow
Whether it's God the Father or God the Son, its the same way.

The way is the same. The person is not the same. God can be the Holy Spirit manifest in human. But God cannot be the son, because the concept of Son, who Is creation Himself, is absolutely nonsense. Only pagan worshippers can rational this nonsense. But then again, pagan worshippers don't lie their follower that God is the First, uncreated but the creator of all things and Everlasting.


originally posted by: Deetermined
Even if you don't believe that the Father and Son are one,

The Father and Son is not literally and physically the one.


originally posted by: Deetermined
the Son is still the only mediator between man and God to get to the Father.

Everyone can claim themselves as the "son of God." In fact, in Hebrew, the son of God simply refer to one who is close to God. It's common for Jews to call their Rabbis as the son of God. The Pagan gentiles dont understand Jews tradition, misinterpret this title. Even if, God literally adopted Jesus as his son through baptism, it does not make Jesus the tirune God. The role of Jesus is well defined as the son, by God ( through John's baptism ). This is further illustrated by Jesus' prayers. Nowhere Jesus prays to triune God. Jesus simply pray to the father. Not "In the name of father, son and holy spirit," as Christian Practise. Through Jesus prayers, it is no doubt, Jesus is not a mad man talking to himself. He is talking to the father, the one who send him, and whose will he abides. For the son cannot do anything without the Father. Everything is for the glory of the father. Not the son.


originally posted by: Deetermined
You must repent to Jesus and ask Him to become the Lord and Savior of your life.

Blasphemy.


originally posted by: Deetermined
Jesus is the door and the bridge to the Father, if that's the way you prefer to look at it. We won't be facing the Father directly until Jesus puts all of Gods' enemies under his feet.

But you claim Jesus is God. Allow me to translate your claim into your own word above.

"Jesus is the door and the bridge to Jesus, if that's the way you prefer to look at it. We won't be facing Jesus directly until Jesus puts all of Jesus' enemies under his feet." - Does this make sense to you?
edit on 9-9-2018 by EasternShadow because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow


Jesus simply pray to the father. Not "In the name of father, son and holy spirit," as Christian Practise.


Matthew 28:18-20

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

1 John 5:7

7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: EasternShadow

It doesn't make sense to you because you're not using the Holy Spirit. It reads easily to me...

John 1:1-2, 14

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

If God is the only one, then explain "the Word was with God" - the word WITH refer two separate things: 1) word and 2) God.

If "the Word was God," and God is ONE, then how come "the Word was WITH God?"


originally posted by: Deetermined
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

If the Word was made flesh, then who made it? "was made" implied something else outside the word.


originally posted by: Deetermined
You act like I'm throwing out something new. This has been the same Christian message for ages. It hasn't changed and neither has God.

Nope. I already said, I don't trust your corrupted first century monks. I have already proven how your bible has been tempered by words that are not original there. Even your Martin Luther admit tampering your bible.



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow

Look at it this way; you have a mind, body, and soul. While they are all separate from one another, they are all still a part of one person. Think of God the Father as the mind, Jesus as the body, and the Holy Spirit as the soul. They all work together to make up one God.



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
Matthew 28:19
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

"baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." was deliberately added later by your corrupted church.


The consensus of even the most conservative scholars is that the trinitarian formula at Matthew 28:19 was added to the original Matthew at a very late point in time: after the adoption of the trinity doctrine. The book of Acts and Paul’s epistles repeatedly show the original baptismal formula was to baptize into only Jesus’ name. See Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15. The Protestant authority The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (Funk & Wagnalls, 1908) at 435 agrees that Matthew 28:19’s trinity formula is a false addition:
Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61...Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula...is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas... [T]he formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed....




1. Eusebius pre-325 AD seventeen times fully quoted this passage, and every time it did not have the trinitarian baptismal formula. However, his post-325 AD / Nicea quotes all contained the trinitarian formula. Professor Tabor comments: “Lack of Trinitarian formula for baptism in Matt 28:19-20 is unique [to Shem-Tob] but seems to be in codices that Eusebius found in Caesarea: he quotes (H.E. 3.5.2): ‘They went on their way to all the nations teaching their message in the power of Christ for he had said to them, “Go make disciples of all the nations in my name.’” (Tabor, supra.) See also et seq infra.
2. Mark 16:15 says: “Go you into all the world, and preach the gospel to the whole creation.”

www.jesuswordsonly.com...


originally posted by: Deetermined
1 John 5:7
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Ah the infamous KJV's Comma Johanneum.
Hate to break your bubble, but there is no historical evidence the text is even considered as authentic.



The Textual Problem in 1 John 5:7-8
“5:7 For there are three that testify, 5:8 the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three are in agreement.” ‑‑NET Bible

Before τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα, the Textus Receptus reads ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσι. 5·8 καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ (“in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 5:8 And there are three that testify on earth”). This reading, the infamous Comma Johanneum, has been known in the English-speaking world through the King James translation. However, the evidence—both external and internal—is decidedly against its authenticity. Our discussion will briefly address the external evidence.1

The Trinitarian formula (known as the Comma Johanneum) made its way into the third edition of Erasmus’ Greek NT (1522) because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared (1516), there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma because he found no Greek manuscripts that included it. Once one was produced (codex 61, written by one Roy or Froy at Oxford in c. 1520),3 Erasmus apparently felt obliged to include the reading. He became aware of this manuscript sometime between May of 1520 and September of 1521. In his annotations to his third edition he does not protest the rendering now in his text,4 as though it were made to order; but he does defend himself from the charge of indolence, noting that he had taken care to find whatever manuscripts he could for the production of his Greek New Testament. In the final analysis, Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns: he did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold.

Modern advocates of the Textus Receptus and KJV generally argue for the inclusion of the Comma Johanneum on the basis of heretical motivation by scribes who did not include it. But these same scribes elsewhere include thoroughly orthodox readings—even in places where the TR/Byzantine manuscripts lack them. Further, these KJV advocates argue theologically from the position of divine preservation: since this verse is in the TR, it must be original. But this approach is circular, presupposing as it does that the TR = the original text. Further, it puts these Protestant proponents in the awkward and self-contradictory position of having to affirm that the Roman Catholic humanist, Erasmus, was just as inspired as the apostles, for on several occasions he invented readings—due either to carelessness or lack of Greek manuscripts (in particular, for the last six verses of Revelation Erasmus had to back-translate from Latin to Greek).

In reality, the issue is history, not heresy: How can one argue that the Comma Johanneum must go back to the original text when it did not appear until the 16th century in any Greek manuscripts? Such a stance does not do justice to the gospel: faith must be rooted in history. To argue that the Comma must be authentic is Bultmannian in its method, for it ignores history at every level. As such, it has very little to do with biblical Christianity, for a biblical faith is one that is rooted in history.

bible.org...

Read also
A Spurious Reference to the Trinity Added in 1 John 5 verses 7-8
edit on 9-9-2018 by EasternShadow because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: EasternShadow

Look at it this way; you have a mind, body, and soul. While they are all separate from one another, they are all still a part of one person. Think of God the Father as the mind, Jesus as the body, and the Holy Spirit as the soul. They all work together to make up one God.

You are dodging my questions. This does not explain how on earth the father create himself to be the son. Your understanding in logic is as screwed as the question, "which come first? The egg or the chicken?"

An endless nonsense of circular logic.

A mind, body and soul does not explain father-son relationship.

I ask again. Which one come first? The father or the son? The egg or the chicken? If the father is the son, then who is the father to the father-son?
edit on 9-9-2018 by EasternShadow because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow

You can make up all the excuses and dig up every poor opinion from man that you want on the matter, but it doesn't change who God is.

I bet if I were to ask you if God was omnipresent, that you wouldn't hesitate to say, "yes". If you can wrap your head around that, why do you make is so difficult on yourself to understand that He has the ability to be three persons in one?

Revelation 1:8

8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

Revelation 4:8

8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.

You have to ask yourself, who is the one who was? And is? And which IS TO COME?

The answer is Jesus. Jesus was the one who was in the beginning with God, died (was), but is now alive (is). Jesus is the one returning and is to come.






edit on 9-9-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: EasternShadow

You can make up all the excuses and dig up every poor opinion from man that you want on the matter, but it doesn't change who God is.

Still no answers? Apparently you do not know your own God. How on earth do you love someone you don't know?


originally posted by: Deetermined
I bet if I were to ask you if God was omnipresent, that you wouldn't hesitate to say, "yes".

Being omnipresent does not excuse you from dodging my previous questions. You don't even understand your own God. Otherwise, you could have answers all my previous questions easily. You don't understand, " the Word was WITH God and the Word was God".You don't understand the concept of the son BEING CREATED -is a total insult to God's Everlasting. For you are denying the CREATOR GOD being the FIRST EVERLASTING.

How on earth, can you love something you don't know?


originally posted by: Deetermined
If you can wrap your head around that, why do you make is so difficult on yourself to understand that He has the ability to be three persons in one?

There is no three in one. There is ONLY ONE.


originally posted by: Deetermined
Revelation 1:8

8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

Then what the heck with the SON GOD? Explain to me how on earth THE SON GOD can be an Alpha?


originally posted by: Deetermined
Revelation 4:8

8 And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.

You said Holy Holy Holy Lord God Almigthy, yet you forget, you lamb god is burdened by the world's sin. How is it logic?


originally posted by: Deetermined
You have to ask yourself, who is the one who was? And is? And which IS TO COME?

You haven't answers your own twisted interpolated verses in your previous posts, now you come out with more verses? Where is your Holy Spirit? You should have divine inspiration to answer all questions logically. Don't be like Paul who speak "as angel, even Jesus" yet "die" everyday due to lack of Holy Spirit.


originally posted by: Deetermined
The answer is Jesus. Jesus was the one who was dead, but is now alive. Jesus is the one returning and is to come.

But your God was DEAD, remember? If your God is dead then who revive your GOD? Surely the Dead cannot revive by themselves? Otherwise, they are not dead.
edit on 9-9-2018 by EasternShadow because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-9-2018 by EasternShadow because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 06:05 AM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow


Being omnipresent does not excuse you from dodging my previous questions. You don't even understand your own God. Otherwise, you could have answers all my previous questions easily. You don't understand, " the Word was WITH God and the Word was God".You don't understand the concept of the son BEING CREATED -is a total insult to God's Everlasting. For you are denying the CREATOR GOD being the FIRST EVERLASTING.


Your problem is that your mind is trapped in human thought. The term "Father" and "Son" are human terms used to help us come to the closest understanding of how God/Jesus works. Jesus is God in the flesh. Jesus' human body was conceived by the Holy Spirit, but we also know that the Holy Spirit didn't have to have human sex with Jesus' human mother in order to make that happen, now don't we. That's how the Word was made flesh. John 1 also explains to us how Jesus was the Creator and through him, all things consist and hold together. Without the physical aspect of God (through Jesus) nothing was made.

John 1:2-3,10

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

All things were created BY him AND FOR him. Being the "firstborn" of every creature (including the angels) only means that Jesus was the first physical manifestation, not the first creation. This is how/why God said, "Let us make man in OUR image".

Colossians 1:

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:


edit on 10-9-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 06:08 AM
link   
God is the original Demon.
There from forth he blew his breath and created the Sun (son)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 06:16 AM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow


You said Holy Holy Holy Lord God Almigthy, yet you forget, you lamb god is burdened by the world's sin. How is it logic?


The lamb was only burdened by the world's sin up until his human death. Remember, he was raised on the third day and is now alive. Who raised Jesus from the dead?

John 10:17-18

17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.

18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

Once again, this shows how the "Father" is the mind of the invisible spirit and Jesus is the physical aspect with the power to lay down his own life and take it up again.




edit on 10-9-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 07:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: EasternShadow

Your problem is that your mind is trapped in human thought. The term "Father" and "Son" are human terms used to help us come to the closest understanding of how God/Jesus works.

What is that suppose to mean? It's either you understand how God/Jesus works or you don't. Do you understand what son mean? If your God is neither the Father or the Son as we understand, then why make such bold claim? We have better term, such as God to refer to a Single Supreme Creator. Why not just stick to God or the father? Why do you have to make such contradictions? What is the purpose of three in God when you cannot understand their relationship as the one God?


originally posted by: Deetermined
Jesus is God in the flesh.

So God become human. No longer immortal and Al-Mighty for thirty years. Then what happen to entire Cosmos for thirty years during God's absence? Who watch over heaven? Satan?


originally posted by: Deetermined
Jesus' human body was conceived by the Holy Spirit, but we also know that the Holy Spirit didn't have to have human sex with Jesus' human mother in order to make that happen, now don't we. That's how the Word was made flesh.

But John neither mentioned the Holy Spirit in the beginning, nor the Holy Spirit was God? So where does Holy Spirit come from? Who created Holy Spirit?


originally posted by: Deetermined
Being the "firstborn" of every creature

Being the firstborn of whom?


originally posted by: Deetermined
13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

Son of whom?


originally posted by: Deetermined
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

So you are saying, your god Jesus is the firstborn and the image of ANOTHER God? Is that what you are trying to say?



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow


So God become human. No longer immortal and Al-Mighty for thirty years. Then what happen to entire Cosmos for thirty years during God's absence? Who watch over heaven? Satan?


There you go limiting God again to time and space. This is why God tells us that his thoughts and ways are higher than ours. You're not able to comprehend it.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow


But John neither mentioned the Holy Spirit in the beginning, nor the Holy Spirit was God? So where does Holy Spirit come from? Who created Holy Spirit?


I already told you. Bash it all you want, but 1 John 5:7 tells us that the Holy Spirit is a part of God/Jesus also.

John writes about the Holy Spirit in John chapters 1, 3, 4, 6, 14, 15, 16.



edit on 10-9-2018 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: EasternShadow


So you are saying, your god Jesus is the firstborn and the image of ANOTHER God? Is that what you are trying to say?


No. How did you come up with that? Read those verses that I posted again.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 07:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

The problem is 'matter' is believed in.
Life...aliveness...is spirit.
The belief in things is the denial of spirit.

Thought (the serpent with the forked tongue) speaks about 'things in time' and he is believed.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: EasternShadow


So God become human. No longer immortal and Al-Mighty for thirty years. Then what happen to entire Cosmos for thirty years during God's absence? Who watch over heaven? Satan?


There you go limiting God again to time and space. This is why God tells us that his thoughts and ways are higher than ours. You're not able to comprehend it.

You are the one who limit God into human. There is nothing incomprehendable about human. Your human god eat, sleep, feel pain, and died as any human does. Ironically, your human god cursed the earth in Genesis, he later walk himself. Plus, your human god has to taint himself carrying world's sin, if that make any sense to you. So, I guess your human god is not so holy as the scripture describe.



posted on Sep, 10 2018 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: EasternShadow


But John neither mentioned the Holy Spirit in the beginning, nor the Holy Spirit was God? So where does Holy Spirit come from? Who created Holy Spirit?


I already told you. Bash it all you want, but 1 John 5:7 tells us that the Holy Spirit is a part of God/Jesus also.

John writes about the Holy Spirit in John chapters 1, 3, 4, 6, 14, 15, 16.


And here we go again, with the egg and chicken analogue. So your answer is, Jesus the holy spirit conceive himself, Jesus the word.




top topics



 
6
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join