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.

 

Son of the Ruach ha Kodesh

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by Akragon
 


Akragon, I also wanted to add, that I appreciate how receptive you are to others views and how civilly you present your arguments.... you are one of the ATS members that I truly enjoy respectfully debating
God bless you Akragon and I pray we meet more often in this life or the hereafter to discuss more


haha... actually i can't wait to meet all my friends i've debated with over the years in the afterlife...

I believe me and Jesus will be standing there saying "i told ya so"... then we'll all go for beers


Lol, I wonder what kinda brew the Lord prefers. He strikes me as a lager type guy :p Maybe some Sam Adams for Him and a Guiness for me?
I'll bet the food and beverages in paradise are amazing




posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321
Well, I can understand your viewpoint and especially since you have issues with the Bible (which, I have lots of faith in, but unfortunately I know for a fact it is not the EXACT "infallible" word of God, it is one of Mans best attempts at putting God into words....a very hard feat to do, considering what God is....)

The important thing here, is that you have faith in Jesus and adhere to the commandments (love God, and love thy neighbor) and the golden rule (treat others as you wish to be treated...)

May the Lord bestow his blessings upon you and your family. Amen.



Now THAT... i definatly agree with... We all get caught up in these debates at times... but the important thing is what he taught us... Love for our fellow man/woman... That i will never argue about.




posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 




Why do you people always use the bridegroom analogy in this arguement?


That's not obvious to you?

It's based on the logical fallacy "Law of Non-Contradiction". Meaning something cannot be true and false simultaneously.

You cannot have "One" meaning "One" and "One" meaning "TWO" simultaneously. In BOTH instances "One" implies "One in nature, essence, spirit, will, purpose".


edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by Akragon
 


Akragon, I also wanted to add, that I appreciate how receptive you are to others views and how civilly you present your arguments.... you are one of the ATS members that I truly enjoy respectfully debating
God bless you Akragon and I pray we meet more often in this life or the hereafter to discuss more


haha... actually i can't wait to meet all my friends i've debated with over the years in the afterlife...

I believe me and Jesus will be standing there saying "i told ya so"... then we'll all go for beers


Lol, I wonder what kinda brew the Lord prefers. He strikes me as a lager type guy :p Maybe some Sam Adams for Him and a Guiness for me?
I'll bet the food and beverages in paradise are amazing


"Heaven's Best"



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 




Why do you people always use the bridegroom analogy in this arguement?


That's not obvious to you?

It's based on the logical fallacy "Law of Non-Contradiction". Meaning something cannot be true and false simultaneously.

You cannot have "One" meaning "One" and "One" meaning "two" simultaneously. In BOTH instances "One" implies "One in nature, essence, spirit, will, purpose".


edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


Alright... Lets use that...

IF Jesus is the truth... as he said. Then his words are truth... With that in mind... Jesus said there is ONE God... Not three in one...

How can that be true, and false at the same time?


Bloody edits:


One does not mean Equality....

edit on 16-3-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



Jesus said there is ONE God


I ALSO believe there is One God. You can't understand that Trinitarians are NOT Polytheists. Mormons would be an example of Polytheists.


One doesn't mean equal


Likewise, equality doesn't mean "Sameness". Husband and wife are equal, they are not the same.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
As I am reading this thread, I am observing as an outside spectator, and I see that both me and Noturtypical, and Akragon have both put up pretty solid defenses to our beliefs, and probably nothing any of us says or does to each other will sway our personal beliefs. I'm just glad all three of us agree on the "meat and potatoes" of it all though
God bless



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 



Jesus said there is ONE God


I ALSO believe there is One God. You can't understand that Trinitarians are NOT Polytheists. Mormons would be an example of Polytheists.


One doesn't mean equal


Likewise, equality doesn't mean "Sameness". Husband and wife are equal, they are not the same.


Trinitarian belief is that all three are Equal...

You seem to think i deny Christs divinity... i do not... i just accept the fact that there is ONE greater then He. I've also accepted the idea that its Alright to pray to Jesus as well... him being the son of the ONE God... Which is likely why he did not rebuke Thomas... although its possible he actually might have, and it was left out of the story... I can't base my belief on assumptions... the FACT is Jesus said one God... He did not consider himself equal to that one God... PAUL added that to religion. And that is also the main reason i reject his work.


edit on 16-3-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



PAUL added that to religion. And that is also the main reason i reject his work.


Jesus' #2 affirmed Paul's work in all his epistles.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Prove it...




posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


I just noticed something. Why do you have a link to my profile in your signature?



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


I just noticed something. Why do you have a link to my profile in your signature?


I don't its a link to mine...


That ain't good...



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Prove it...



"15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."

2 Peter 3:15-16 ESV



edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


I just noticed something. Why do you have a link to my profile in your signature?


I don't its a link to mine...


That ain't good...


Wow, maybe when people click it it takes them to their own profile?


yeah, just clicked it yet again, took me HERE.


edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Like i said... prove Jesus Affirmed pauls work...

That was a total fail bro...



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Like i said... prove Jesus Affirmed pauls work...

That was a total fail bro...


No man, that's moving the goalposts at halftime. I asked you why is it that Jesus' #2 man (Peter), affirmed Paul's ministry in all the epistles he wrote. To which you implored me to "Prove it". I did, then you claimed you told me to prove that "Jesus'" affirmed Paul's work. That's disingenuous man. I showed you where Peter affirmed Paul's work in all his epistles just as you asked me to when you said "prove it".

I think the only total fail was your reading comprehension of this post:


Jesus' #2 affirmed Paul's work in all his epistles.


Jesus' #2 man was Peter.


edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Like i said... prove Jesus Affirmed pauls work...

That was a total fail bro...


No man, that's moving the goalposts at halftime. I asked you why is it that Jesus' #2 man (Peter), affirmed Paul's ministry in all the epistles he wrote. To which you implored me to "Prove it". I did, then you claimed you told me to prove that "Jesus'" affirmed Paul's work. That's disingenuous man. I showed you where Peter affirmed Paul's work in all his epistles just as you asked me to when you said "prove it".


edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


Ah ha... i misunderstood... I was trying to figure out what that number was there for... guess i just didn't clue in.

Peter was shown to not completely understand Jesus as well...

I don't believe Jesus would agree with Peter's statement in that passage.... And considering it was written well after Jesus' death... he couldn't have corrected that statement, because as you said... he was the #2... who can argue after the boss is gone... Heh, even though paul did take issue with peter...




posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 



Peter was shown to not completely understand Jesus as well...


Only before Pentecost when the Spirit fell. And Peter wrote that after he and Paul had their bout. Peter either did that letter by his own pen or by an appointed Amanuensis, he was in prison at the time and on the verge of being martyred. If you look at Acts 15, I think, Peter is telling all the apostles in Jerusalem about that instance with Paul and that he was wrong. that was the first Jerusalem council, there were two. And Paul was at both.

There is absolutely no conflict with the apostles and Jesus, heck more people consider James and Paul are contradictory even though they aren't.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith WITHOUT THE DEEDS OF THE LAW

You don't find that in conflict with James and Jesus?




posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith WITHOUT THE DEEDS OF THE LAW


Who do you think that "WE" is above? ^^^ Romans was penned after the council at Jerusalem.


You don't find that in conflict with James and Jesus?


No, James is talking about the fruit of salvation, not the process of it. He's saying "This is what saved people look like." Paul above is saying: "This is how you get saved." they are talking about the same thing, they just take it in different directions. And most people think James was a rebuttal to Paul, not at all James was written first. He was murdered in like 52-54 AD in Jerusalem.

As for Jesus, read John 6. Jesus said those who place their trust in Him "already hath" eternal life. (Past-perfect tense in the Greek) Past-perfect tense in Greek would be something that happened previously is continuing and will continue into eternity/forever



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join