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.

 

Arianism - still kicking

page: 7
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





So as a non-Trinitarian what is your choice?


I agree with Jesus, but not with your perception of scripture, and that's all it is, a perception, God gives us the freedom to fail, look at Saul before he become Paul. I hope he opens your eyes like he opened Sauls, before it is to late for you.
Romans 10:2

I can assure you that they are deeply devoted to God, but they are misguided.




posted on May, 26 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





So as a non-Trinitarian what is your choice?


I agree with Jesus, but not with your perception of scripture, and that's all it is, a perception, God gives us the freedom to fail, look at Saul before he become Paul. I hope he opens your eyes like he opened Sauls, before it is to late for you.
Romans 10:2

I can assure you that they are deeply devoted to God, but they are misguided.


Then you have a serious problem, Genesis 18 clearly says the Lord came with two angels and spoke face to face with Abraham and Sarah.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 



sorry... still intentional... the same form is used in arabic when saying prayers... its a plural singular... for a reason


Oh, I know it's 'for a reason', that wasn't my point. The reason is it's speaking of at least 3 "El". (Hebrew has a duo for two). But these 3 are One, that's why there is a singular context.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





Genesis 18 clearly says the Lord came with two angels and spoke face to face with Abraham and Sarah.


God first spoke to Abram in a vision

Genesis 15:1


15 After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, saying, “Do not be afraid, Abram. I am your shield, your exceedingly great reward.”


Interestingly Jehovah appears to Abram in Genesis 17:1


17 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless.


Abraham fell on his face.



Genesis 18 says


18 Then the Lord appeared to him by the terebinth trees of Mamre,[a] as he was sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day.


Genesis 18 does not differentiate between the three men


2 So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing by him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the ground,


Abraham bows himself to the ground.

They speak to Abraham and he speaks to the Lord.

2 of the three men go to Sodom

Abraham stood yet before the Lord

Notice the similarity between Abraham's encounter and Lot's encounter:



Genesis chapter 19:1


19 Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground.



For the first time the men are identified as angels.

Lot bows himself with his face to the ground.

Just like Abraham.

Lot bows to angels.


Later Lot addresses the angels saying in Genesis 19:18


18 And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my Lord:






To recap

Three men visit Abraham.

Abraham bows to them.

Abraham addresses the Lord or Jehovah.


Two of the men are latter revealed to be angels.

Lot bows to them.

Lot also addresses the Lord or Jehovah



It is logical to conclude that the three men were three angels that were representing God.


Hebrews 13:2

2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

edit on 26-5-2012 by dusty1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-5-2012 by dusty1 because: (no reason given)
extra DIV



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Then you have a serious problem, Genesis 18 clearly says the Lord came with two angels and spoke face to face with Abraham and Sarah.

Or . . .
you could make this little statement into an argument.
I get the impression that you just like saying, "Oh no, for you!!"
There are all these characters in the OT called, YHWH.
I get the feeling that someone went through and added that in.
Probably after the Northern Kingdom was destroyed, where they used the name, Elohim, as opposed to the Southern Kingdom's standard usage of YHWH.
The editor went through and replaced Elohim with YHWH, where some of those cases may have been originally more ambiguous, rather than the more specific type name YHWH which is more usually associated with a god rather than angel, which Elohim can often mean.

edit on 27-5-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Since the trinity isn't mentioned in the bible, only something created by the Roman Catholic Church, then it's actually a viable theory that the concept of the trinity is wrong. If people choose to believe that the father, the son and the holy spirit are completely separate entities, they let them. It doesn't affect YOUR beliefs, it doesn't affect YOUR relationship, it doesn't affect YOU at all. It's THEIR belief and relationship. ....and.... what if they're right and you are trying to undermine their belief as well as undermine God by raising such a fuss?

If somebody else believes God is a flying spagetti monster, it doesn't affect my belief. If somebody else wants to believe that some guy over in Italy speaks for God here on earth, it doesn't affect my belief. If somebody else wants to believe that we should go to church on Saturday instead of Sunday, it doesn't affect my belief. That's there belief and they have the right to believe it just as I have a right to believe mine.

I prefer we keep it that way because what happens to be the majority right now may not be the majority 10 years from now. I don't want some future majority that happens to be Islamic to dictate what I can and can't believe and I'm not going to dictate what somebody else can or can't believe.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


The word "Bible" isn't in the Bible either. Moot point that the word "Trinity" isn't found in the Bible, that argument is a red herring at best. "Trinity" is a Latin term that is carried over from the Latin Bible, same with "rapture". They are English theological terms carried over from the Latin. If you don't like "Trinity" then you can use the term "Godhead".


"Although the New Testament does not use the word "Τριάς" (Trinity) nor explicitly teach it, it provided the material upon which the doctrine of the Trinity was formulated. Reflection by early Christians on passages such as the Great Commission: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" [Matt 28:19] and Paul the Apostle's blessing: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all," [2 Cor. 13:13] while at the same time the Jewish Shema Yisrael: "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is One." [Deuteronomy 6:4] led the early Christians to question which way the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are in unity. Later, the diverse references to God, Jesus, and the Spirit found in the New Testament were systematized into a Trinity—one God subsisting in three persons and one substance—to combat heretical tendencies of how the three are related and to defend the church against charges of worshiping two or three gods.

In addition, the Old Testament has also been interpreted as foreshadowing the Trinity, by referring to God's word,[Ps 33:6] his spirit,[Isa 61:1] and Wisdom,[Prov 9:1] as well as narratives such as the appearance of the three men to Abraham.[Gen 18] However, it is generally agreed that it would go beyond the intention and spirit of the Old Testament to correlate these notions directly with later Trinitarian doctrine.

Some Church Fathers believed that a knowledge of the mystery was granted to the prophets and saints of the "Old Dispensation", and that they identified the divine messenger of Genesis 16:7, 21:17, 31:11, Exodus 3:2 and Wisdom of the sapiential books with the Son, and "the spirit of the Lord" with the Holy Spirit. Other Church Fathers, such as Gregory Nazianzen, argued in his Orations that the revelation was gradual:


Trinity ~ Wiki



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Then you have a serious problem, Genesis 18 clearly says the Lord came with two angels and spoke face to face with Abraham and Sarah.

Or . . .
you could make this little statement into an argument.
I get the impression that you just like saying, "Oh no, for you!!"
There are all these characters in the OT called, YHWH.
I get the feeling that someone went through and added that in.
Probably after the Northern Kingdom was destroyed, where they used the name, Elohim, as opposed to the Southern Kingdom's standard usage of YHWH.
The editor went through and replaced Elohim with YHWH, where some of those cases may have been originally more ambiguous, rather than the more specific type name YHWH which is more usually associated with a god rather than angel, which Elohim can often mean.


"I get the feeling"
"Probably"

You're using the language of conjecture. Why not formulate doctrine from the wording of the text itself? It says the Lord (YHVH) appeared as a man with two angels and spoke to Abraham face to face.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


The word "Bible" isn't in the Bible either.


Sure it is, it's right there on the cover that they thump all the time


Your logic would insinuate that Christ was schitzophrenic, talked to himself and was suicidal. I don't see that as the case though.
edit on 27-5-2012 by PurpleChiten because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


The word "Bible" isn't in the Bible either.


Sure it is, it's right there on the cover that they thump all the time


Wow. lol

Buit do you see the sillines of the argument that the term "Trinity" isn't in the Bible therefore it's a false doctrine? It's a Latin term, the NT epistles were not penned in Latin.


Your logic would insinuate that Christ was schitzophrenic, talked to himself and was suicidal. I don't see that as the case though.


No, I'm a Trinitarian. Not someone who believes in oneness doctrine. Jesus was praying to His Father.


edit on 27-5-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Your logic would insinuate that Christ was schitzophrenic, talked to himself and was suicidal. I don't see that as the case though.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Your logic would insinuate that Christ was schitzophrenic, talked to himself and was suicidal. I don't see that as the case though.


See Above, you added that portion after I had replied.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

No, I'm a Trinitarian. Not someone who believes in oneness doctrine. Jesus was praying to His Father.


edit on 27-5-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


So based on your own attacks and posts, you would jump on yourself for being a cult? Got it.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

No, I'm a Trinitarian. Not someone who believes in oneness doctrine. Jesus was praying to His Father.



So based on your own attacks and posts, you would jump on yourself for being a cult? Got it.


I am in a cult, see to the left under my username, I'm in the "Jesus Freak Cult". But I don't know what "attacks" you're talking about, I'm generally of the business end of the attacks around here. But adhering to the doctrine of a Trinue God isn't anything new to Christianity. And Jesus wasn't praying to Himself, He was praying to His Father. The Son isn't the Father, they are separate persons of the same Godhead. The Ruach ha'Kodesh is the 3rd person of the Trinity, and He isn't the Father or the Son, He is the Holy Spirit.

There are people who believe all three persons are the same entity, they are practitioners of "Oneness doctrine".



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

No, I'm a Trinitarian. Not someone who believes in oneness doctrine. Jesus was praying to His Father.



So based on your own attacks and posts, you would jump on yourself for being a cult? Got it.


I am in a cult, see to the left under my username, I'm in the "Jesus Freak Cult". But I don't know what "attacks" you're talking about, I'm generally of the business end of the attacks around here. But adhering to the doctrine of a Trinue God isn't anything new to Christianity. And Jesus wasn't praying to Himself, He was praying to His Father. The Son isn't the Father, they are separate persons of the same Godhead. The Ruach ha'Kodesh is the 3rd person of the Trinity, and He isn't the Father or the Son, He is the Holy Spirit.

There are people who believe all three persons are the same entity, they are practitioners of "Oneness doctrine".


Then why are we having this discussion??

Go take care of those who say the opposite



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
The Gnostic's believe that there is a spark of the one true God in all of us.

All we need to do is get in touch with this spark of God, and carry out his works by becoming creators ourselves.

We are all God's children.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 


What do you mean by "go take care of"? I post here for fun. It's best to not get worked up over things one reads on the internet, it's not healthy. No need to "take care of" anyone.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Why not formulate doctrine from the wording of the text itself?

Because I am not "formulating doctrine".
Pretty strange language for a person using a signature that says they hate religion.
If you believe God wrote the Bible and that it has remained unchanged for 3500 years, then have a good time with that.
I see fundamentalism as a symptom of ignorance, or insanity, depending on the individual's circumstances.
Some people are willfully ignorant, so have questions when they see someone who actually wants to know things.
edit on 27-5-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


I go by what the text says, I know that's quite offensive to some folks, but then again I've never been one to care about impressing other people and have no plans to begin to try. It says the Lord (YHVH) appeared as a man with two angels and spoke to Abraham face to face. So I believe the Lord appeared as a man with two angels and spoke to Abraham face to face.


edit on 27-5-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



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

Would you like to respond to my post? (about fundamentalism)
Do you have any explanation for how you arrived at your opinion?
I can say how I arrived at mine, which is this mysterious to me appearance in Genesis of YHWH, when in Exodus, the angel of Sinai says no one had previously known him by that name.
Then I had my suspicions confirmed by reading the book, Early Israelites: Two Peoples, One History: Rediscovery of the Origins of Biblical Israel, by Igor P. Lipovsky, where it describes where this name YHWH came from, and how it was practically exclusively used by the Southern Kingdom.
edit on 27-5-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join