|
|
Post by Eleazar on Jun 27, 2023 4:22:49 GMT -8
There are three terms in the New Testament which indicate the eternal pre-existence and deity of Christ: John 3:16 / His unique Son John 5:18 / His own Father Rom. 8:3 / His own Son These three epithets distinguish the eternal sonship of the second Trinitarian person, from the adoptive sonship of believers, spoken of in Romans 8:14–17 The eternal pre-existence of Christ is something clearly assumed by the authors of the New Testament. Indeed, it would be impossible for them to write such passages as Romans 8:3, if they did not believe in it. ie "in the beginning was the word" You forgot to include, begotten son, which specifically denotes conception in Mary's ovaries via her egg cell. It didn't work that way, Mary wasn't impregnated in the normal fashion. Her ovaries and her eggs had nothing to do with it. It was all about the seed of Jesus. The one from the woman’s seed, the “He” who bruises Satan’s head but is bruised in the heel by Satan. He was conceived in her by the Holy Spirit. Marriage reproductive organs weren't involved. In other words the holy spirit and Mary didn't have sex. That's why it's called the Virgin Birth. There is a difference between active and passive conception. The former consists in the act of the parents which causes the body of the child to be formed and organised, and so prepared for the reception of the rational soul which is infused by God. The passive takes place at the moment when the rational soul is actually infused into the body by God. It is the passive, not the active. Lets look at some Biblical Text: So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this... I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:14,15) We're talking about Jesus here, The second member of the trinity, And truly God and truly man. |
|
|
|
Post by praiseyeshua on Jun 27, 2023 4:37:54 GMT -8
By the "force"..... Jedi nonsense?  Are you actually being serious or not? Jokingly serious. I used "the force" instead of saying Satan has blinded Christendom to think that God is not inside Jesus and never was. His trick is for Christians to tell sinners that God became a human microscopic cell, no wait, a man.... Then folks get more confused when they attempt to process that. Jesus is Eternally God. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever. Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. This nonsense fascination you have with "in" demanding a "inside' view is ridiculous. Jesus Christ IS GOD. There is no such thing as "inside". There is the WHOLE. God is not DIVIDED.... |
|
|
|
Post by praiseyeshua on Jun 27, 2023 4:38:58 GMT -8
Who baptized John the Baptist? Remember when John told Jesus that he had need to be baptized of Him...... You're lost in man made doctrine. There have been plenty of Saints of God who have had their sins forgiven and washed away by the Blood of Jesus Christ whom have never been baptized nor had the opportunity to get baptized... Besides, you don't have the right to claim you've been properly baptized just because SOMEONE said some "words of over you". It matters who did the baptizing. I don't expect you do anything more than rant without answering or dealing with issues. You haven't thus far. No reason to expect this to change. Discard Acts 2:38 because the Bible doesn't tell us who baptized John the Baptist? Plenty of saints in the NT that disobeyed this... 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,... Yet still got their sins remitted another way? The context of Peter's statement are those that Peter was talking to.... Not you. Stop pretending you're 2000 years old. |
|
|
|
Post by praiseyeshua on Jun 27, 2023 4:41:16 GMT -8
Are you saying that only Peter can baptize in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins? No. I'm saying that just because SOMEONE baptized you don't mean you were properly baptized..... 1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. See.... See how the Scriptures deal with "myopic" views such as you have with Acts 2:38? You were not baptized by anyone that God sent. Jesus sent HIS disciples. God sent JOHN.... Jesus didn't send Paul to baptize. |
|
|
|
Post by praiseyeshua on Jun 27, 2023 4:43:44 GMT -8
Amazing...... as I've already said....."in" isn't an indication of "inside". Did Thomas not SEE THE OUTWARD works of Christ? Thomas should have recognized the Father from the Glorious appearance of Jesus Christ. John said... We beheld His GLORY..... the Only Begotten of the Father. In doesn't mean in? Out doesn't mean out? Is the Bible written in abstract? You do know that your redefinitions are the seeds of false teachings, correct? You're the one demanding that "in" mean "inside"..... How about "in his name"..... Act 3:16 And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, |
|
|
|
Post by Truther on Jun 27, 2023 5:09:16 GMT -8
That's 1/3rd plus 1/3rd plus 1/3rd making a whole. Also add flesh to 1/3rd of the persons, accounting for 1/2 a person, pretending to have a God. Don't use heavenly mathematics either. No as God is not a math equation, He is Miraculous and defies human logic and reasoning. In the good ol days before Christendom there was a lone God in the Jewish faith. Christendom tweaks endless ideas. They are far from finished too. |
|
|
|
Post by Truther on Jun 27, 2023 5:11:12 GMT -8
3 God's. I can count just fine, and so can the rest of the world. No its One God who is 3 in Persons. Trinitarians are not Tritheists, they are Monotheists. Say it. 3 divine persons. Not 3 divine persons in 1 person. |
|
|
|
Post by Truther on Jun 27, 2023 5:13:32 GMT -8
You forgot to include, begotten son, which specifically denotes conception in Mary's ovaries via her egg cell. It didn't work that way, Mary wasn't impregnated in the normal fashion. Her ovaries and her eggs had nothing to do with it. It was all about the seed of Jesus. The one from the woman’s seed, the “He” who bruises Satan’s head but is bruised in the heel by Satan. He was conceived in her by the Holy Spirit. Marriage reproductive organs weren't involved. In other words the holy spirit and Mary didn't have sex. That's why it's called the Virgin Birth. There is a difference between active and passive conception. The former consists in the act of the parents which causes the body of the child to be formed and organised, and so prepared for the reception of the rational soul which is infused by God. The passive takes place at the moment when the rational soul is actually infused into the body by God. It is the passive, not the active. Lets look at some Biblical Text: So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this... I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:14,15) We're talking about Jesus here, The second member of the trinity, And truly God and truly man. If Mary's egg was not involved then Jesus lied by calling himself the son of man, Abraham or David. The entirety of prophecy is then a lie. |
|
|
|
Post by Truther on Jun 27, 2023 5:15:07 GMT -8
Jokingly serious. I used "the force" instead of saying Satan has blinded Christendom to think that God is not inside Jesus and never was. His trick is for Christians to tell sinners that God became a human microscopic cell, no wait, a man.... Then folks get more confused when they attempt to process that. Jesus is Eternally God. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever. Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. This nonsense fascination you have with "in" demanding a "inside' view is ridiculous. Jesus Christ IS GOD. There is no such thing as "inside". There is the WHOLE. God is not DIVIDED.... Jesus is still the same microscopic cell today as he was in Mary? Or, Jesus never changes towards us? |
|
|
|
Post by Truther on Jun 27, 2023 5:16:23 GMT -8
Discard Acts 2:38 because the Bible doesn't tell us who baptized John the Baptist? Plenty of saints in the NT that disobeyed this... 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,... Yet still got their sins remitted another way? The context of Peter's statement are those that Peter was talking to.... Not you. Stop pretending you're 2000 years old. I see now...the plan of salvation evolves via modernism. Hmmmm. |
|
|
|
Post by Truther on Jun 27, 2023 5:18:24 GMT -8
Are you saying that only Peter can baptize in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins? No. I'm saying that just because SOMEONE baptized you don't mean you were properly baptized..... 1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. See.... See how the Scriptures deal with "myopic" views such as you have with Acts 2:38? You were not baptized by anyone that God sent. Jesus sent HIS disciples. God sent JOHN.... Jesus didn't send Paul to baptize. Since you refuse being baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins as the 3000 at pentecost were baptized, what new baptism did you try? |
|
|
|
Post by Truther on Jun 27, 2023 5:24:40 GMT -8
In doesn't mean in? Out doesn't mean out? Is the Bible written in abstract? You do know that your redefinitions are the seeds of false teachings, correct? You're the one demanding that "in" mean "inside"..... How about "in his name"..... Act 3:16 And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, "In" has context per the sentence. Did you know that English words mean different things per the context? Did you know that they cannot be swapped? Do you think this... ...but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Does also mean this?... ...but the Father that dwelleth OUTSIDE OF me, he doeth the works. |
|
|
|
Post by praiseyeshua on Jun 27, 2023 5:32:11 GMT -8
Jesus is Eternally God. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever. Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. This nonsense fascination you have with "in" demanding a "inside' view is ridiculous. Jesus Christ IS GOD. There is no such thing as "inside". There is the WHOLE. God is not DIVIDED.... Jesus is still the same microscopic cell today as he was in Mary? Or, Jesus never changes towards us? The same yesterday today and forever is a statement of the substance of Character and Divine power. You're shifting your argument. At least be honest and admit that you are. You're not dealing with each and every statement you're making. You're making mistakes and need to admit it. |
|
|
|
Post by praiseyeshua on Jun 27, 2023 5:33:43 GMT -8
You're the one demanding that "in" mean "inside"..... How about "in his name"..... Act 3:16 And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, "In" has context per the sentence. Did you know that English words mean different things per the context? Did you know that they cannot be swapped? Do you think this... ...but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Does also mean this?... ...but the Father that dwelleth OUTSIDE OF me, he doeth the works. Geesh.... "In" is a statement relativating "through". There are ALWAYS multiple meanings associated most any English word. The same is true of most any language. |
|
|
|
Post by civic on Jun 27, 2023 6:06:56 GMT -8
No its One God who is 3 in Persons. Trinitarians are not Tritheists, they are Monotheists. Say it. 3 divine persons. Not 3 divine persons in 1 person. God is One in nature , essence , being , substance etc and Three in Persons. One God who is Tri- Personal, Tri-Unity, Trinity. |
|
