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

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by truejew
I asked you to provide the evidence the he was giving diplomas without standards. Not only did you not provide that evidence, but you provided evidence that he was using standards.

You're right, he has a standard. You have to pay him $1,300 for your degree. That's a standard, I guess.

Since his clown college is not accredited, and he has no academic credentials, anything that he applies as a "standard" beyond that is irrelevant, since he's demonstrated that he is not qualified to judge another person's qualifications.




posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

How about Polycarp?


Polycarp was oneness and a quartodeciman


Originally posted by adjensen

Ignatius?


Also oneness.


Originally posted by adjensen

Irenaeus?


Although he made some statements that showed some perversion by philosophy, he did make statements that were oneness and not compatible with the trinity.


Originally posted by adjensen

While you're at it, you never replied to my earlier questions -- at Jesus' baptism, the Transfiguration and the Crucifixion, it's obvious that "God the Father" and "Jesus" are two different entities. What's your explanation for that? Who was Jesus praying to in the Garden of Gethsemane? Himself? Did he ask himself to take the cup away from himself, deny himself, and bow to his own will?


What you are seeing is the relationship between God the Father and a man, the Son of God. Not three gods/persons, nor a God with multiple personality disorder.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

You're right, he has a standard. You have to pay him $1,300 for your degree. That's a standard, I guess.


I was speaking of standards, not money.


Originally posted by adjensen

Since his clown college is not accredited,


Many Bible colleges are not accredited. It prevents the government from stepping in and controlling doctrines that are taught.


Originally posted by adjensen

and he has no academic credentials,


Evidence?



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

How about Polycarp?


Polycarp was oneness and a quartodeciman


Originally posted by adjensen

Ignatius?


Also oneness.


Originally posted by adjensen

Irenaeus?


Although he made some statements that showed some perversion by philosophy, he did make statements that were oneness and not compatible with the trinity.

See, that's your error -- all three of them made statements that are clearly in support of the Trinity, and other things that, taken out of context, are used to imply your "oneness" foolishness. But if someone came into your church and said anything like what's in those quotes I cited, Reckart would run 'em out of town on a rail.

No, you fail on that count -- the early church fathers clearly saw Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three separate entities, prior to the year 200.



Originally posted by adjensen

While you're at it, you never replied to my earlier questions -- at Jesus' baptism, the Transfiguration and the Crucifixion, it's obvious that "God the Father" and "Jesus" are two different entities. What's your explanation for that? Who was Jesus praying to in the Garden of Gethsemane? Himself? Did he ask himself to take the cup away from himself, deny himself, and bow to his own will?


What you are seeing is the relationship between God the Father and a man, the Son of God. Not three gods/persons, nor a God with multiple personality disorder.

First, claiming that the Trinity teaches three gods is a lie. Stop doing that.

Secondly, what do you mean, "relationship between God the Father and a man"? You don't believe that Jesus was divine?


Many Bible colleges are not accredited. It prevents the government from stepping in and controlling doctrines that are taught.

The "government" bit isn't true, but whatever. The problem with Reckart's clown college is that he represents that it IS accredited:


ATBC is accredited through the Christian Education Accreditation Commission ( CEAC).

Unfortunately, the CEAC is just Reckart, again, and it's not accredited, so it has no basis for accrediting his school. So he's clearly being deceptive there.



and he has no academic credentials,


Evidence?

In my investigations of him, his college and his church, I've never seen any evidence that his supposed PhD is anything but self-granted. If it was earned, through an accredited university (or any school, for that matter,) he does a pretty good job of hiding the fact.

As a negative cannot be proven, the burden of proof is on you to show that he has a legitimate degree, not on me to show that he doesn't.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

See, that's your error -- all three of them made statements that are clearly in support of the Trinity, and other things that, taken out of context, are used to imply your "oneness" foolishness. But if someone came into your church and said anything like what's in those quotes I cited, Reckart would run 'em out of town on a rail.


Incorrect. The only quotes by Polycarp and Ignatius that could be mistaken as trinitarian, use language that is used in Scripture, which is not trinitarian. There are however spurious letters from later centuries which use trinitarian language.


Originally posted by adjensen

No, you fail on that count -- the early church fathers clearly saw Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three separate entities, prior to the year 200.


Incorrect. They taught one God. Ignatius even taught that God suffered which is something that Catholics deny and even attack us for.


Originally posted by adjensen

First, claiming that the Trinity teaches three gods is a lie. Stop doing that.


No, it is not. You even described the trinity as "three separate entities" in your previous post.


Originally posted by adjensen

Secondly, what do you mean, "relationship between God the Father and a man"? You don't believe that Jesus was divine?


Jesus was a man whose Spirit was God. His Spirit humbled Himself to be as a man.

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.


Originally posted by adjensen

In my investigations of him, his college and his church, I've never seen any evidence that his supposed PhD is anything but self-granted. If it was earned, through an accredited university (or any school, for that matter,) he does a pretty good job of hiding the fact.

As a negative cannot be proven, the burden of proof is on you to show that he has a legitimate degree, not on me to show that he doesn't.


Not having information on where his degree came from, is not evidence enough to claim that he did not receive his degree in the proper way. You seem to judge people like the Pharisees judged Jesus, without proper evidence.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew
Incorrect. They taught one God.

Yes, they taught one God. Three persons, one God. The Trinity.



Originally posted by adjensen

First, claiming that the Trinity teaches three gods is a lie. Stop doing that.


No, it is not. You even described the trinity as "three separate entities" in your previous post.

Three persons, one God -- whether you agree with it or not, or whether you understand it or not, that's what the Doctrine of the Trinity is, so stop lying.


Jesus was a man whose Spirit was God. His Spirit humbled Himself to be as a man.

So, when Jesus was talking, who was speaking? A man, or God?


Not having information on where his degree came from, is not evidence enough to claim that he did not receive his degree in the proper way. You seem to judge people like the Pharisees judged Jesus, without proper evidence.

The evidence is that he sells phony degrees, he misrepresents his college as being accredited, he gives no evidence of being college educated (I read some things that he posted on his Facebook page, and he has pretty poor writing skills) and he's given himself other fake titles, so, in the absence of a diploma that he earned from an accredited institution, it is a safe assumption that his doctorate is as illegitimate as the ones that he sells to others.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Yes, they taught one God. Three persons, one God. The Trinity.


Do you have quotes from non-spurious sources showing that they taught three persons/the trinity/three separate entities?


Originally posted by adjensen

Three persons, one God -- whether you agree with it or not, or whether you understand it or not, that's what the Doctrine of the Trinity is, so stop lying.


And that doctrine is not taught in Scripture. And about lying... You are the one saying "three separate entities" does not equal three separate gods.


Originally posted by adjensen

So, when Jesus was talking, who was speaking?


Jesus.


Originally posted by adjensen

A man, or God?


Both.


Originally posted by adjensen

The evidence is that he sells phony degrees, he misrepresents his college as being accredited, he gives no evidence of being college educated (I read some things that he posted on his Facebook page, and he has pretty poor writing skills) and he's given himself other fake titles, so, in the absence of a diploma that he earned from an accredited institution, it is a safe assumption that his doctorate is as illegitimate as the ones that he sells to others.


Assumptions are not evidence.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

Yes, they taught one God. Three persons, one God. The Trinity.


Do you have quotes from non-spurious sources showing that they taught three persons/the trinity/three separate entities?

I have already provided them.


And about lying... You are the one saying "three separate entities" does not equal three separate gods.

Again, the Doctrine of the Trinity, which is what Trinitarians believe in, does NOT teach that there are three separate gods -- your claiming that it does is either ignorance or lying. I'll leave the choice of which it is up to you -- are you ignorant, or dishonest?



A man, or God?


Both.

So, whose voice was heard at Jesus' baptism and at the Transfiguration?

And if both man and God spoke when Jesus spoke, why did God say "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."? Why would he be asking himself to forgive the Romans?


Assumptions are not evidence.

As I said, it is for you to demonstrate that he has a valid doctorate. Your assumption that he does is not evidence.
edit on 25-1-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

I have already provided them.


You did not provide the names of the letters so that I could tell if they were spurious or non-spurious sources. I also saw no mention of a trinity doctrine in them.


Originally posted by adjensen

Again, the Doctrine of the Trinity, which is what Trinitarians believe in, does NOT teach that there are three separate gods -- your claiming that it does is either ignorance or lying.


You were the one who said "three separate entities".


Originally posted by adjensen

So, whose voice was heard at Jesus' baptism and at the Transfiguration?


God.


Originally posted by adjensen

And if both man and God spoke when Jesus spoke, why did God say "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."? Why would he be asking himself to forgive the Romans?


He humbled Himself as a man.


Originally posted by adjensen

As I said, it is for you to demonstrate that he has a valid doctorate.


I am not the accuser. It's your job to support your accusations with evidence.


Originally posted by adjensen

Your assumption that he does is not evidence.


I am not assuming anything. Neither am I judging without evidence.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen
Again, the Doctrine of the Trinity, which is what Trinitarians believe in, does NOT teach that there are three separate gods -- your claiming that it does is either ignorance or lying.


You were the one who said "three separate entities".

Three persons, one God. What's wrong with you?



Originally posted by adjensen

So, whose voice was heard at Jesus' baptism and at the Transfiguration?


God.

So God looked down from heaven at himself, threw his voice, and described himself as both father and son? And in the case of the baptism, also sent himself down as a dove? So you've got God existing in Heaven, on Earth as Jesus, and coming down as a dove, simultaneously, AND referring to all three as separate entities? How does that work?



Originally posted by adjensen

And if both man and God spoke when Jesus spoke, why did God say "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."? Why would he be asking himself to forgive the Romans?


He humbled Himself as a man.

That doesn't answer either question.



Originally posted by adjensen

As I said, it is for you to demonstrate that he has a valid doctorate.


I am not the accuser. It's your job to support your accusations with evidence.

I've shown evidence that Reckart is a liar, a fraud and ignores the teachings of Christ. I guess there's nothing more to say about it, then.

Frankly, even if your "oneness theology" made any sense, Reckart's behaviour, and your mindless defense of it, would be enough to convince me to stay away from it. You two are your own church's worst enemies (well, apart from the error laden theology, of course.)
edit on 25-1-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by colbe
 


Colbe,

Not to interrupt the tennis match going on, but in an attempt to get this thread back on track; yes!

Very amazing! Many converts to the faith have similar stories. I like Scott and Kimberly Hahn's stories.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   
This seems to be a part two from a previous argument...

I have some suggestions...

1. Get back on topic so as not to derail Colby's thread..

2. I would like to see a thread about this "oneness" church...

Maybe you to could resolve this little spat there...

I'd star and flag it... this ongoing arguement is completely amusing!!


Oh and one more thing.... Truejew... are we living in the "tribulation" according to your church?

edit on 25-1-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Three persons, one God. What's wrong with you?


"Three separate entities" cannot equal one God.


Originally posted by adjensen

So God looked down from heaven at himself, threw his voice, and described himself as both father and son? And in the case of the baptism, also sent himself down as a dove?


There is one God, the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ (the Father manifest in the flesh as a man). Any doctrine that teaches something else is false.

1 Corinthians 8:4-7 (KJV)
4As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. 5For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) 6But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.


Originally posted by adjensen

That doesn't answer either question.


Perhaps you don't understand the answer.


Originally posted by adjensen

Frankly, even if your "oneness theology" made any sense, Reckart's behaviour, and your mindless defense of it, would be enough to convince me to stay away from it.


Asking you for evidence to back up your accusations is not mindless defense.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Oh and one more thing.... Truejew... are we living in the "tribulation" according to your church?


Not yet, but probably soon.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by Akragon

Oh and one more thing.... Truejew... are we living in the "tribulation" according to your church?


Not yet, but probably soon.


So this thread was just a hoax?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Or perhaps just something your church taught you?

edit on 25-1-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
This seems to be a part two from a previous argument...

I have some suggestions...

1. Get back on topic so as not to derail Colby's thread..

Well, I've been trying. Remember, it all started when truejew piped up that neither Catholics nor Protestants were true, just his goofy church, so I'm trying to refute that nonsense.


2. I would like to see a thread about this "oneness" church...

His specific cult, or the movement in general?

Because there are quite a lot of different "Pentecostal Oneness" churches, but Reckart's seems to be universally viewed as a fringe church that isn't very well respected by others in the movement.

I've debated writing a thread on Reckart and his specific flavour of cultism, given the amount of time I've whizzed away researching it, but I doubt there would be much interest, and it would just generate a lot of whining on someone's part.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Well you'd already have one S&F so it would be worth writing in that sense...

It seems to be you two go back and forth a lot...

Hey since you're one of the members who debates in that forum, why don't you issue a formal challenge?

edit on 25-1-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by adjensen

Three persons, one God. What's wrong with you?


"Three separate entities" cannot equal one God.

Yes, they can. Are you saying that God isn't omnipotent?



Originally posted by adjensen

So God looked down from heaven at himself, threw his voice, and described himself as both father and son? And in the case of the baptism, also sent himself down as a dove?


There is one God, the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ (the Father manifest in the flesh as a man).

That doesn't answer the question. Geez, do you ever answer anything specific?


Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”

Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.

As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:13-17 NIV)

In that passage, there are clearly three entities -- Jesus, a voice from heaven, which refers to Jesus in the third person, and the Spirit of God, descending like a dove.

Now you claimed that when Jesus spoke, it was God speaking. One presumes that you wouldn't think Jesus' father being anyone other than God, so there are clearly two separate instances (at least) of God in that scene.

How do you come up with one?



That doesn't answer either question.


Perhaps you don't understand the answer.

No, you simply didn't give one, just as you won't give an answer to my questions above.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by adjensen
 


Well you'd already have one S&F so it would be worth writing in that sense...

I'll give it some thought, though I'm going on holiday shortly (to Florida, ironically, maybe I'll go look Reckart up, lol,) so probably not any time soon.


It seems to be you two go back and forth a lot...

I have very few pet peeves, but three of them are elitism, dishonesty and people who take advantage of others' faith for their own reward, so Reckard is a bit of a "perfect storm" of things that irritate me.


Hey since you're one of the members who debates in that forum, why don't you issue a formal challenge?

I've never gotten the impression that he's capable of that sort of discussion, and the subject isn't really appropriate for the ATS Debate Forum.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by colbe

I asked and with a "please", keep my posts together. You replied the same way. Pride.


My answers will be the same whether I do as you asked or not. The way I do it makes it easier for me and you. There is no pride involved.


Who has time to reply to everyone of your separated comments. Besides, what I or someone else said isn't all there. Keep a post together and people can read what is said in context. People who do this want to separate or delete commentary that is important.


you are dear,





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join