And, of course "Human Logic" doesn't work in regards to that, of which we know little or nothing.
and bob you an expert in that field!
Rich Are you rejecting the Athanasius creed?
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
And, of course "Human Logic" doesn't work in regards to that, of which we know little or nothing.
Do you not think God gave us brains and minds that work with logic? If you think no, you wouldn't be able to prove it. I think proof of anything requires logic, so even if there was a trinity nobody could prove it. It would have to be accepted by blind faith, which in itself is an oxymoron. We have faith in with which we are familiar and know to be reliable, hence it can't be blind.
Anyway, that's how see things. I could be wrong, but I don't think so. We'll all find out when Jesus comes back.
Who decided it has heresy in it?has heresy in it!
Who decided it has heresy in it?
Jesus called Peter satan so he must be satan since there is no verse in the bible that says he wasn't satan. Jesus called himself a door and there is no verse in the bible that says he really wasn't a door. No verse in the bible with the word Trinity in it...I could go on and on. But you get my point.the Teachings of the Bible
There is NO verse in the entire Bible that even suggests, that God the Father eternally "begets" Jesus Christ! This heresy was pushed by the heretic Origen, and was rather foolishly adopted into the eary "creeds", in the name of a false "peace"!
Jesus called Peter satan so he must be satan since there is no verse in the bible that says he wasn't satan. Jesus called himself a door and there is no verse in the bible that says he really wasn't a door. No verse in the bible with the word Trinity in it...I could go on and on. But you get my point.
So, once again, WHO decided that? What man interpreted Scripture for you that brought you to that conclusion?
what is the definition of being? Nature or person?
We in the modern West think of a mystery as something that can't be understood. That's not how the 1st Near Eastern people understood it. Here's Strong's definition of "mystery"yes man is created in the image and likeness of God having intellect and will but still there are mysteries
eph 5:32
interesting for those who want to push their own theories, they disregard Sacriptures that are against them!
I see no mention of Mark 1:15, or Luke 13:1-3, and Luke 24:47 (as in the NASB, ESV, better text), which are the very words of God Incarnate, Jesus Christ!
Did you know that Mark 16:16 is absent from many Greek manuscripts, and Bible Versions? This means that you cannot really build any firm teaching on these verses?
You will still ignore the thief on the cross, who was ever baptised, and as he was there when Jesus had died, is under the New Testament, and not the Old!
Likewise you ignore Paul's words, "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel" (1 Cor. 1:17), which shows that water baptism is NOT part of the Gospel!
interesting for those who want to push their own theories, they disregard Sacriptures that are against them!
I see no mention of Mark 1:15, or Luke 13:1-3, and Luke 24:47 (as in the NASB, ESV, better text), which are the very words of God Incarnate, Jesus Christ!
Did you know that Mark 16:16 is absent from many Greek manuscripts, and Bible Versions? This means that you cannot really build any firm teaching on these verses?
You will still ignore the thief on the cross, who was ever baptised, and as he was there when Jesus had died, is under the New Testament, and not the Old!
Likewise you ignore Paul's words, "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel" (1 Cor. 1:17), which shows that water baptism is NOT part of the Gospel!
interesting for those who want to push their own theories, they disregard Sacriptures that are against them!
I see no mention of Mark 1:15, or Luke 13:1-3, and Luke 24:47 (as in the NASB, ESV, better text), which are the very words of God Incarnate, Jesus Christ!
Did you know that Mark 16:16 is absent from many Greek manuscripts, and Bible Versions? This means that you cannot really build any firm teaching on these verses?
You will still ignore the thief on the cross, who was ever baptised, and as he was there when Jesus had died, is under the New Testament, and not the Old!
Likewise you ignore Paul's words, "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel" (1 Cor. 1:17), which shows that water baptism is NOT part of the Gospel!
Not me lol and the Chalcedon. My online screen names are Jesus is YHWH, Chalcedon and Christophany :). That should be obvious as to what I believe lol.and bob you an expert in that field!
Rich Are you rejecting the Athanasius creed?
It is. :)Not me lol and the Chalcedon. My online screen names are Jesus is YHWH, Chalcedon and Christophany :). That should be obvious as to what I believe lol.
No, I do believe in the Athenasian Credit, but it's not me that believes it. I don't believe it.and bob you an expert in that field!
Rich Are you rejecting the Athanasius creed?
Since there is NONE that seeks after God, how can anyone have the power to accept Him, seeing he is "spiritually dead"?