a former Evangelical "born again" explains why Protestantism isn't true

reply to post by FlyersFan


Im a bitch because you disobeyed one of my most sacred of commandments and im punishing you for it? Interesting. Is this how the catholic church operates? Seems pretty blasphemous. Im gonna pray for you.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen
They clearly, no interpretation needed, speak of Father and Son being two separate persons. That violates your "oneness".

I saw mention of Father and Son, but no mention of God being separate persons.

Well, hooray for you -- I wouldn't expect you to see it, in spite of the fact that everyone else outside of your cult sees it.

When a normal person sees "Joe was standing over there, and Tom shouted down from the window above 'Hey, Joe'" their conclusion is that Joe and Tom are two separate persons. Similarly, when they see "Jesus came up out of the water, the spirit descended on him and a voice from heaven said 'this is my son, with whom I am well pleased'" they conclude that Jesus and voice are two separate persons.

Almost every book of the New Testament has the Father, Son and Holy Spirit named as separate persons. You claim your whole theology on four instances of the Book of Acts, even though none of those four say anything about the Trinity, they just speak of Jesus alone.

History is against you, theology is against you and scripture is against you.

But the real thing that's against you is Christ himself, because your cult treats salvation exactly like magic. You have to say these exact words. This exact series of events has to take place. You have to react in this exact way. And if any of those things isn't exactly the way it's supposed to be, then it doesn't work.

That's magic, that's not salvation, and that kind of nitpicky "if you mess up the details, you're doomed" mentality is one of the chief things that Christ preached against when speaking of the Pharisees. Yet that's the load of bunk that your cult leader has sold you on. Good luck with it.

Patripassianism

Patripassianism is the claim that the Father suffered, which isn't what I said.

Originally posted by adjensen

When a normal person sees "Joe was standing over there, and Tom shouted down from the window above 'Hey, Joe'" their conclusion is that Joe and Tom are two separate persons. Similarly, when they see "Jesus came up out of the water, the spirit descended on him and a voice from heaven said 'this is my son, with whom I am well pleased'" they conclude that Jesus and voice are two separate persons.

You are doing three things:

1. Limiting God to the abilities of man.

2. Forgetting that those present had a strong belief in one God.

3. Slipping further into polytheism.

Originally posted by adjensen

Almost every book of the New Testament has the Father, Son and Holy Spirit named as separate persons.

There is nothing about separate persons. In addition, separate persons equals separate gods. When you separate them, putting one in heaven, one on earth, and one descending, and claim them to be separate personalities, you have three gods.

Originally posted by adjensen

You claim your whole theology on four instances of the Book of Acts, even though none of those four say anything about the Trinity, they just speak of Jesus alone.

One God is taught in more than the book of Acts.

Originally posted by adjensen

History is against you, theology is against you and scripture is against you.

Sadly, Scripture and the writings of the early Christians are against you. The lack of fruit of your church reveals that God is not with you.

Originally posted by adjensen

Patripassianism is the claim that the Father suffered, which isn't what I said.

The early Church were Patripassianists. Does your Church teach Patripassianism like the early Church?

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen
Almost every book of the New Testament has the Father, Son and Holy Spirit named as separate persons.

There is nothing about separate persons.

That is incorrect -- in each case, the individuals are named in relation to each other. Unless you have mental issues, you don't refer to yourself in the third person, and with multiple titles that are in relation to each other. That only works in the case of separate persons (or the mentally ill, which I feel safe in assuming you and I would agree is not the case.)

In addition, separate persons equals separate gods. When you separate them, putting one in heaven, one on earth, and one descending, and claim them to be separate personalities, you have three gods.

No, you don't. What you have is Trinitarianism.

And, after reading your responses, I've come to the conclusion that you are also a Trinitarian, you're just so put off by the concept that you feel the need to misrepresent it. No matter how you couch it, if, as you say, when Jesus spoke, it was God speaking, then God is incarnate in the person of Jesus, and if, as you say, it was God speaking from heaven about his son, then he is present in that scene as a distinct person.

Even if you use your previously mentioned twisted logic, you're still portraying it in a manner consistent with Trinitarianism.

After reading some more of Reckart's blathering, it seems like most of this is due to your belief that the name of God is actually "Jesus", right? As in "those who call upon my name will be saved" and you need to get his name right in order to call upon it?

Originally posted by vaelamin
Im a bitch because you disobeyed one of my most sacred of commandments and im punishing you for it? Interesting. Is this how the catholic church operates? Seems pretty blasphemous. Im gonna pray for you.

So you think God is going to send people who love him and worship him to hell simply because they all get together and pray to Him on Sunday instead of on Saturday. Lovely 'god' you have there ...

reply to post by truejew

YOU are limiting God to the abilities of men.

God .. three persons on God.
A clover leaf ... three leaves and yet one leaf.

Simple example but ... same/same.

reply to post by FlyersFan


just wondering...

have you read this?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by adjensen

That is incorrect -- in each case, the individuals are named in relation to each other.

Incorrect. The titles of the roles of God are written about, not individuals

Originally posted by adjensen

No, you don't. What you have is Trinitarianism.

Then the trinity is three gods, as I believe.

Originally posted by adjensen

And, after reading your responses, I've come to the conclusion that you are also a Trinitarian, you're just so put off by the concept that you feel the need to misrepresent it.

Incorrect. There is a difference between three gods/persons and roles. Modalists also differ in that we do not believe that the Son of God is eternal, The Father within the Son is, but not the Son. He really is the only begotten Son of God. We believe that Jesus is God the Father in flesh, you deny that. You deny that the Father suffered. just to name a few.

Originally posted by adjensen

Even if you use your previously mentioned twisted logic, you're still portraying it in a manner consistent with Trinitarianism.

Trinitarianism is a perversion of God's oneness.

Originally posted by adjensen

After reading some more of Reckart's blathering, it seems like most of this is due to your belief that the name of God is actually "Jesus", right? As in "those who call upon my name will be saved" and you need to get his name right in order to call upon it?

The Son of God inherited His name from the Father.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
reply to post by truejew

 

YOU are limiting God to the abilities of men.

God .. three persons on God.
A clover leaf ... three leaves and yet one leaf.

Simple example but ... same/same.

Incorrect. I teach that God can do anything in many places at the same time. You limit God to three.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

That is incorrect -- in each case, the individuals are named in relation to each other.

Incorrect. The titles of the roles of God are written about, not individuals

You're delusional if you think that the scene depicted in Jesus' baptism regards "titles", as they are clearly separate persons -- a "title" doesn't have two separate physical locations, voices and presences. But we've long since determined that you don't have a handle on reality, so we'll move along.

Originally posted by adjensen

After reading some more of Reckart's blathering, it seems like most of this is due to your belief that the name of God is actually "Jesus", right? As in "those who call upon my name will be saved" and you need to get his name right in order to call upon it?

The Son of God inherited His name from the Father.

As usual, that doesn't answer a direct question -- is the name of God, creator of the universe, Old Testament God of the Israelites, and so on, the English word "Jesus". Such that, if you "called on the name of the Lord", and the name you used wasn't "Jesus" (the English form, not the Greek Ἰησοῦς or the Hebrew ישוע) then you are not saved?

Adj, et, al,

I think we have a case of "pearls before swine" here when it comes to presenting evidence to Truejew. I would recommend to abandon this lost cause. Adj, as you yourself said, at this point only God can change his heart and mind regarding these issues. I say let Him work. .

I'd recommend we return the comments back to the OP's original statement, and perhaps open a new thread regarding the Blessed Trinity.

Just my $.02.

Originally posted by truejew
Incorrect. I teach that God can do anything in many places at the same time. You limit God to three.

Incorrect.
OF COURSE God can do anything in many places at the same time.
Being God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit IN NO WAY limits God.

Originally posted by adjensen

You're delusional if you think that the scene depicted in Jesus' baptism regards "titles", as they are clearly separate persons -- a "title" doesn't have two separate physical locations, voices and presences.

Titles can if they belong to an all powerful, everywhere present God.

Originally posted by adjensen

But we've long since determined that you don't have a handle on reality, so we'll move along.

The reality is that there is no teaching of God being a trinity until around 170, by Tertullian, who was kicked out of the Church for heresy.

Originally posted by adjensen

As usual, that doesn't answer a direct question -- is the name of God, creator of the universe, Old Testament God of the Israelites, and so on, the English word "Jesus". Such that, if you "called on the name of the Lord", and the name you used wasn't "Jesus" (the English form, not the Greek Ἰησοῦς or the Hebrew ישוע) then you are not saved?

"Jesus" is the English spelling of the Hebrew name "Yehshas". Both are pronounced the way we pronounce "Jesus". The same for the Greek "Iesous".

Originally posted by IsidoreOfSeville

Adj, as you yourself said, at this point only God can change his heart and mind regarding these issues.

In times past, your church's way of letting God change someone's heart and mind, was code for burning at the stake.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Incorrect.
OF COURSE God can do anything in many places at the same time.
Being God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit IN NO WAY limits God.

Incorrect. Your God is limited to being in three places at a time. If God would manifest Himself as the burning bush at the same time, you would have to add a fourth person to explain it. You put limits on God.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

You're delusional if you think that the scene depicted in Jesus' baptism regards "titles", as they are clearly separate persons -- a "title" doesn't have two separate physical locations, voices and presences.

Titles can if they belong to an all powerful, everywhere present God.

Yeah, whatever. You're nuts. Omnipotence can be used to explain anything, that doesn't mean it should be.

The reality is that there is no teaching of God being a trinity until around 170, by Tertullian, who was kicked out of the Church for heresy.

Actually, he left the church, he wasn't "kicked out". And he left to follow Montanism, which, ironically, is very similar to Pentecostalism. As much as you'd like to imply he was excommunicated for teaching Trinitarianism, that's not true.

Originally posted by adjensen

As usual, that doesn't answer a direct question -- is the name of God, creator of the universe, Old Testament God of the Israelites, and so on, the English word "Jesus". Such that, if you "called on the name of the Lord", and the name you used wasn't "Jesus" (the English form, not the Greek Ἰησοῦς or the Hebrew ישוע) then you are not saved?

"Jesus" is the English spelling of the Hebrew name "Yehshas". Both are pronounced the way we pronounce "Jesus". The same for the Greek "Iesous".

As usual, that's not an answer to a direct question, as I did not ask you how to spell Jesus in Hebrew or Greek.

Do you think your evasion, lying and intellectual dishonesty serves your purposes?

What do you want us to say? "Oh yes Truejew, you are absolutely right! Thank you so much for the epiphany!" We cannot convince you, nor can you convince us. Might I suggest you let this topic lie?

You guys can banter back and forth all you'd like. I for one, will no longer be responding in this thread.

Originally posted by adjensen

Yeah, whatever. You're nuts. Omnipotence can be used to explain anything, that doesn't mean it should be.

The apostles did not teach your three gods/persons doctrine. The doctrine goes against or at least weakens the Bible's teaching of one God. Therefore God's omnipotence is the only explanation that we have. It is not "nuts" to follow only the evidence given.

Originally posted by adjensen

Actually, he left the church, he wasn't "kicked out". And he left to follow Montanism, which, ironically, is very similar to Pentecostalism. As much as you'd like to imply he was excommunicated for teaching Trinitarianism, that's not true.

Either way, he did not teach trinitarianism until after he left/was kicked out. His previous writings were binitarian. Which shows his teaching of a trinity was evolved by him, not received from the apostles by him.

Originally posted by adjensen

As usual, that's not an answer to a direct question, as I did not ask you how to spell Jesus in Hebrew or Greek.

My answer had two parts... 1. correction to your claim (that Jesus is a English name) and 2. showing that Jesus is pronounced the same in Hebrew, Greek, and English. There is only one name given by which we must be saved.

Originally posted by adjensen

Do you think your evasion, lying and intellectual dishonesty serves your purposes?

Saying false things about me is not a fruit of the Spirit.

Originally posted by IsidoreOfSeville
What do you want us to say? "Oh yes Truejew, you are absolutely right! Thank you so much for the epiphany!" We cannot convince you, nor can you convince us. Might I suggest you let this topic lie?

You guys can banter back and forth all you'd like. I for one, will no longer be responding in this thread.

I will let the topic "lie" in this thread when there are no more attacks or questions.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by truejew
You are viewing God as not all powerful, not present everywhere, and ignoring that the Son of God was a man.

Jesus ... fully human and fully God. He is BOTH. Scripture is very clear on that.

Yes, He is. However the Spirit, in flesh, humbled Himself as a man. God, in flesh, was in the role of a man, not in the role of God.
Philippians 2:5-8 (KJV)
5Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

God gave the gift to interpret Holy Scripture to the Church NOT to each person individually, that's a heresy
called private interpretation of Scripture. Look at it's awful fruit. Error and division. You keep repeating this same misinterpretation truejew. You have no authority to interpret Scripture.

Humility is a VIRTUE, God can be humble and still be God. Your error of misinterpreting Scripture so you can reject Jesus is fully God and fully man, always was, always will be. Quit following that "oneness" fella. We all care, God wants you to become Roman Catholic.

colbe