An Honest Question For ATS Preachers

reply to post by truejew


So Christianity is, in fact, a polytheistic religion. Is that right?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Here.. let me address Legalism.

1. Do you eat shrimp, lobster, clams, scallops, or mollusks?
2. Do you wear blended clothing?
3. Do you cut the hair on your sideburns?

Wow, that's being specific.
I sent you some U2U (two, I think).

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Ah, but Jesus performed those miracles by himself, which implies that he and the Father were separate. Similarly, the Holy GHost cannot be both THE Father and WITH the Father. WITH implies beside, separate from.

On the other hand, if they really are separate, then Christians are polytheists. And if they are monotheistic, that means they worship three-in-one, something that many members here have been arguing against for a while now.

So which one is it? 'Fess up.

edit on 21-7-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

No we are not polytheists. As I've already stated we call God "Him" and not "Them". God is One.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Catholics and Protestants are, but I am not.

reply to post by truejew


So what are you, and how does that make you NOT polytheistic? Because obviously, if they follow the Holy Bible and that makes their faith polytheistic, you're following something else.

Care to explain in further detail?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

...God is One.

In your previous post you said He was three. 1 does not = 3. So which is it?

reply to post by truejew


NOTurTypical is not known for making sense, True. Don't even bother trying to get logic out of him. It's against his... religion. *rimshot*

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by truejew

 

So what are you, and how does that make you NOT polytheistic? Because obviously, if they follow the Holy Bible and that makes their faith polytheistic, you're following something else.

Care to explain in further detail?

edit on 21-7-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I am a Christian/Jew/Apostolic Jew/Apostolic Christian...

Catholics and Protestants only follow the Bible when it does not contradict their pope.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

That's legalism? Okay, I want to say something here.

No, the other member made a ridiculous legalistic comment that my questions are addressing. His answers unless all "yes" are highlighting hypocrisy and Legalism.

The Bible is the Word of God. The Holy Scripture. All of it. You cannot pick and choose, because it is all equally valid, yes? So if you follow one rule but ignore the other, that means one of two things: either you are allowed to break rules and not have to repent, or there are parts of the Bible that are invalid.

No one is picking and choosing. For one thing, gentiles were never a party to the OT Mosaic Law, and were never Levite priests. Secondly, the Law was fulfilled in Christ, we are no longer under it's yoke. And thirdly, if one wants to keep the Mosaic or Levitical Law one must do so on all points and at all times.

So, if you can break rules and not repent, how do you decide that? Who has the authority to deem that appropriate? Who figures that out?

Christianity isn't about rules, it's about relationship with God on a personal daily level through His Son Jesus Christ. Judaism was about rules, we are no longer under that yoke, we are free in Christ. And secondly, Christ gave two commandments, He said His yoke was easy and His burden was light. We are commanded to love God with all out strength, might, and heart and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

And if there are parts that are invalid, how do you know which parts are and which parts aren't? How do you know any of it is valid after all?

The real question is were Gentiles ever a party to the original covenant in the first place, that's the number 1 question we need to answer first. Then the second question is when Gentiles become Christians do the need to become Jews first? And that was answered at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15.

And how can you choose between legalism and something else? How is there any choice at all? Either you follow the Word, or you don't. There shouldn't be any gray area. How do you figure that out?

edit on 21-7-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

The difference between Legalism and Holiness is motive and application. The same way the difference between making love and rape is motive and application.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by truejew

 

NOTurTypical is not known for making sense, True. Don't even bother trying to get logic out of him. It's against his... religion. *rimshot*

edit on 21-7-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

We actually agree on something. How did that happen?

reply to post by truejew

I am a Christian/Jew/Apostolic Jew/Apostolic Christian...

This alone shows why the Bible is no longer valid. People will remove half of it, then put a prefix and call it a new religion.

This is what I call political spirituality. It's a crock, especially when you proceed to quote the Bible like you actually care what it says (considering you mutilated it in the process of building your church).

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

...God is One.

In your previous post you said He was three. 1 does not = 3. So which is it?

The most contemporary christian view is that we are made in the image of Elohim. We have 3 parts to us, body spirit and soul. Since we are made in His Image, then he too has Body, Spirit and Soul. Yeshua is his physical self, the Body he gave us through which we could see him and not die, in which all the fullness of the "Godhead" exists. Who we call Yeshua, or Jesus is really Yahweh. Now to a person with common sense who can read the OT where Yahweh says he is the Savior, and then compare Yeshua to being the Savior and when Yeshua tells Philip and Thomas if they have seen him they have seen the Father, you can easily deduce who he is truly is. And i only see Him. I don't know how he did it, but it is written with Him all things are possible and he did do it, and who we call Jesus is actually Yahweh. It was his hands who crafted Adam, and who stood with Abraham the day Sodom and Gomorrah burned and it was he who wrote the Decalogue and showed Moses his Glory on Mt. Sinai.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Secondly, the Law was fulfilled in Christ, we are no longer under it's yoke.

You're twisting everything to make yourself feel better about following a religion that "guarantees" you safety after you die. Be afraid, little mouse, be very afraid.

And thirdly, if one wants to keep the Mosaic or Levitical Law one must do so on all points and at all times.

So why did you even bother arguing with me? You just proved exactly what I said. Anyone reading this post, check back to the post I'm responding to and refer to this particular section to see what I'm talking about. I want it to be perfectly clear what I'm doing here.

Christianity isn't about rules, it's about relationship with God on a personal daily level through His Son Jesus Christ.

Where does the Bible say the rules don't matter? Show me some scripture. See, it's painfully obvious that you are all high and mighty and righteous and all that awesome hypocritical stuff, but you don't understand the Bible worth jack. Not that I'm surprised; the book is vague at best.

And secondly, Christ gave two commandments, He said His yoke was easy and His burden was light. We are commanded to love God with all out strength, might, and heart and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

If that's true, why are there ten commandments? And don't give me luffy-fluffy tosh about "he said, she said". I want a real answer that makes sense.

The real question is were Gentiles ever a party to the original covenant in the first place, that's the number 1 question we need to answer first. Then the second question is when Gentiles become Christians do the need to become Jews first? And that was answered at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15.

Wow...so God's love only comes to Jews? That's what you just proved to me. Actions speak so much louder than words, as they say, and according to you, that's what happened at the so-called "council". Thanks so much.

The difference between Legalism and Holiness is motive and application. The same way the difference between making love and rape is motive and application.

Define holy for me, if you would.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by truejew

 

I am a Christian/Jew/Apostolic Jew/Apostolic Christian...

This alone shows why the Bible is no longer valid. People will remove half of it, then put a prefix and call it a new religion.

This is what I call political spirituality. It's a crock, especially when you proceed to quote the Bible like you actually care what it says (considering you mutilated it in the process of building your church).

Like how you like to talk about the bible but you've never read it? Now THAT is what i call a crock. You trash talk something you have no knowledge of, which is what a fool does.



Run along little clown.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

...God is One.

In your previous post you said He was three. 1 does not = 3. So which is it?

I have never said HE was three. You keep saying I said that. That's called a "Straw Man Argument". As I have said three times now, God is a "Him" not a "them". And don't ask me any more questions until you answer the ones I already asked you on the previous page. You want to ask me questions, that's fine, bring them.. but you will answer mine in return.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

We have 3 parts to us, body spirit and soul.

I'd like to explain something here. Part of the Bible's whole message, in riddle format, was that our bodily interaction would be that of Jesus, our thought processes would be that of God, and our spiritual growth would be that of the Holy Ghost.

Through spirit, we would create wonders. Through our bodies, we would show compassion and restraint. In our minds, we would seek to know all and understand all. The rest of it were merely processes, examples of how we should take lessons from each event in our lives. We don't have to react the same way, we just needed to see "This is what I'm talking about, and this is what it looks like in action. I want you to do something similar, so you can learn from it." We don't have to be EXACTLY like God or Jesus, although if it turns out right, we'll be close enough that it won't make a difference.

But before we can become like Jesus, or God, or the Holy Ghost, we have to get rid of our current system. Money has destroyed our path, and we must rebuild it before we can go on.

Does anyone disagree with this?

reply to post by AfterInfinity


If you follow Christ's 2 commands you cannot violate the 10 commandments.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Then why the hell are there ten commandments?!?!?! God didn't think to simplify?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Then why the hell are there ten commandments?!?!?! God didn't think to simplify?

The point of the law was to magnify our sin, to point us to a cross. To show us we were utterly impotent to keep God's perfect standard. God tried to have a personal relationship with the Jews and they rejected that when they told Moses no that they wanted Laws to follow and him to deal personally with God. He gave them only what they asked for.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

I have never said HE was three. You keep saying I said that.

Ok. So you do believe the Father is the Holy Spirit and was the Spirit manifest as the Son of God?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
And don't ask me any more questions until you answer the ones I already asked you on the previous page.

I must have missed them can you repost the questions? Also, would you like to answer the question on if repentance is necessary for salvation? I asked that a couple of times and it was never answered.