Do you believe the lie?

[marks]

We never know who we are really talking to. Such a waste of time having to figure that out first, in order to attempt how to even process their ridiculous posts.

Yes, it's true we don't know the other views held by the one we are engaging. However, we can simply address what is in front of us, and allow the Lord to lead us where we need to go.

Did you ever hear of, or listen to Rich Buhler? He was the long time host of Talk from the Heart, KBRT AM 740. He'd sometimes take calls from people essentially ranting about all sorts of strange things, but he'd reach into that, reply to some particular part with a spiritual reply, and establish a rapport with the person, and have a meaningful conversation. I've heard him do that time and again, and have never forgotten. (he died a number of years ago) Not to say anyone here is ranting, but on his show they were. This left a deep impression in me.

I'm seeing a great deal of presumption (I assume sincerity) among some people who don't really know the other, with various emotionalism being bandied about, in a medium that doesn't really do a good job at communicating unstated emotions.

I simply assume others are doing their best to sincerely communicate their view with the desire to give a gift, until they plainly show something otherwise. And if the course cannot be corrected, sometimes it's better, I think, to let it go, and wait for a more opportune moment.

Much love!

 

[PS95]

Yes, it's true we don't know the other views held by the one we are engaging. However, we can simply address what is in front of us, and allow the Lord to lead us where we need to go.

Did you ever hear of, or listen to Rich Buhler? He was the long time host of Talk from the Heart, KBRT AM 740. He'd sometimes take calls from people essentially ranting about all sorts of strange things, but he'd reach into that, that reply to some particular part, and establish a rapport with the person, and have a meaningful conversation. I heard him do that time and again, and have never forgotten. Not to say anyone here is ranting, but on his show they were. This left a deep impression in me.

I'm seeing a great deal of presumption (I assume sincerity) among some people who don't really know the other, with various emotionalism being bandied about, in a medium that doesn't really do a good job at communicating unstated emotions.

I simply assume others are doing their best to sincerely communicate their view with the desire to give a gift, until they show something otherwise. And if the course cannot be corrected, sometimes it's better, I think, to let it go, and wait for a more opportune moment.

Much love!

No, I have never heard of him, but that's a great thing to learn how to do.

Online brings out the worst in some people- that's for sure. We also have access to people that we would never meet in 10 lifetimes. There are so many types of mental instabilities that we have no clue about as well. I have never seen people treat each other in real life interactions the way I do on here. Various denominations in study groups and no one argued over the areas where they didn't see 100% eye to eye. The big picture should always prevail. Honestly, I prefer in person contact by far.

I joined here to expose false teachings of JWs.- which of course got me shunned pretty fast by them. Typical. Whether they read my posts or not is not what matters though. The Lord guides whom he will. It's very hard to come out of that brainwash- it's not like just switching churches one day. It takes a lot of time and prayer and bible study unlike what most people will ever experience. The XJW ministry is a behind the scenes invaluable help for those affected. I hate it, but it's needed. Pastors are not much of a help to those who newly leave because most pastors know very little about the cults- and what they do know is usually semi accurate- and they have no idea about the spiritual rape and it's consequences that need to be overcome.
Because most people have no experience with it- they can tend to see JWs as just another denomination with some odd teachings-
It's far from it. It is very dangerous, emotionally, as well as spiritually and can be physically as well. I wish the moderators could grasp that. I hold out no hope for that though,

 

[marks]

I have never seen people treat each other in real life interactions the way I do on here.

It's my thinking that most of us, if serving together side by side in a soup kitchen, would be the best of brothers.

And while this particular verse in the King James may not be the most accurate translation for today, as we understand "conversation" to relate to our daily conduct, it certainly seems to apply:

James 3:13 KJV
Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.

Much love!

 

[Hiddenthings]

I'm sorry , but that its just a tad of a convoluted reply to a simple yes or no question.
A bit of my background- I was raised in a JW family, so the concept of a trinity was taught as pure evil, antichrist, and that those who believe it are flat out satanic. I was horrified and terrified at the mere thought of what was called a pagan induced demonic teaching. By the time I was in my 30's it was so engrained in me, that I could not even enter into a church for a funeral and especially if they had a cross anywhere, without feeling rather ill. After all, the demons were there.
So, you are not talking with someone who is a minor leaguer in your hatred for the teaching. Been there done that. I had to humble myself and lose myself and ask my Heavenly Father for His truth. I am not taught by any man or creed. I can guarantee you that!
I have asked the same question that I asked you of several Uni's and all have said, NO.

The straightforwardness of John's prologue is disregarded as some sort of a trick that must be exposed for both JWs and Uni's. Both groups deny what is plainly being said. It's a big translator conspiracy! So let's just cut to the chase- John1:1, 1:14
For the sake of clarity- I'm asking for a simple yes or a no. That's all. Simple just as John's prologue is simple. So please let's not waste each other's time. A yes or no will do and is all I ask of you. Two verses. You may even change the "Word was God" to divine for all I care. I've been taught "a god" all of my life. It makes no difference to me since context is all that is needed for truth and the Good Lord always brings true light on a matter that never changes.


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God...
..And The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

The Word of God is mentioned 4x in those 2 verses- Is it your belief that those 4 mentions are speaking about the Lord Jesus who became flesh or not?

Convoluted? No more than your reply would you agree?

 

[Hiddenthings]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God...
..And The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

The Word of God is mentioned 4x in those 2 verses- Is it your belief that those 4 mentions are speaking about the Lord Jesus who became flesh or not?

Yes! The Word "became" flesh and his name was given as Jesus. PS I don't play with the Greek as I know what the Word was from the Beginning. He was given life out of the fallen line of man, died on the cross and was immortalized by his Father which is when he "became" the Word. Hope that was not to convoluted for you

 

[Hiddenthings]

@marks, just out of curiosity, do you require a verse to support every single belief you hold? Do you have personal thoughts or perspectives that, while perhaps not compelling to others, help complete the bigger picture for you?

I’d be happy to walk you through the reasons why I believe Judas didn’t partake of the wine, if that’s something you’re genuinely interested in. As for the baptism question, it feels a bit unnecessary, Jesus and John were both baptized, and while we don’t have explicit records for every individual, it’s reasonable to assume the others were as well. Unless you had some compelling reason why they weren't? I'd be happy to hear it.

 

[Sister-n-Christ]

Yes! The Word "became" flesh and his name was given as Jesus. PS I don't play with the Greek as I know what the Word was from the Beginning. He was given life out of the fallen line of man, died on the cross and was immortalized by his Father which is when he "became" the Word. Hope that was not to convoluted for you

Nah, false teaching can't be convoluted. Because those of us in the truth see it right away.

 

[marks]

I’d be happy to walk you through the reasons why I believe Judas didn’t partake of the wine, if that’s something you’re genuinely interested in.

I'm sure you have reasons, as long as you understand it's your own speculation. Scripture is silent on this point.

As for the baptism question, it feels a bit unnecessary, Jesus and John were both baptized, and while we don’t have explicit records for every individual, it’s reasonable to assume the others were as well. Unless you had some compelling reason why they weren't? I'd be happy to hear it.

You had said, "baptized into the Lord" in a certain context. Let's not pretend now that it was something else. It's better just to be real.

Much love!

 

[Hiddenthings]

Nah, false teaching can't be convoluted. Because those of us in the truth see it right away.

It's okay, Sister, to rest in that confidence for now, but know that it may not always remain unchanged! As long as you remain teachable...

 

[Hiddenthings]

I'm sure you have reasons, as long as you understand it's your own speculation. Scripture is silent on this point.


You had said, "baptized into the Lord" in a certain context. Let's not pretend now that it was something else. It's better just to be real.

Much love!

So you don't believe the disciples were baptized into Christ? Or is it more important for you to have a record of the event to believe it happened? And I'm curious what you mean about being real?

 

[Hiddenthings]

@marks as Johns account is the most detailed of the memorial I tend to rest on John 13:21–30 which indicates that Judas left the meal after Jesus identified him as the betrayer. Verse 30 states, “As soon as Judas took the bread, he went out. And it was night (John 11:10)” This suggests that Judas departed during the institution of the memorial, implying he did not partake of the wine. It was no doubt a deeply stressful time for him, marked by many forms of affliction. Getting away from the intimacy of that moment was clearly a priority. I'm not dogmatic on these points, just interesting to think about.

 

[Zao is life]

@Zao is life @Spiritual Israelite @marks

I hope you guys don't mind me butting in here. I have to say it truly breaks my heart when I see believers treat each other this way. Our Lord suffered so much for us on that cross, and what He asks is that we treat others the way we want to be treated and LOVE one another. Is not obedience to the Lord's command worth much?
False teachers- are those such as JWs, SDA etc..
YOU 3 are believers.- we are one body- Christ's body -and this way of behaving toward each other disrespects the Lord's body.
We all agree on the foundational salvational issues! Some things we will not all agree on but is it salvational? Do we tear apart Christ's body over non-essentials? I can't do it! We are all at varying places in our walk with the Lord. WE need to exhibit patience with each other and try to walk in the Spirit of love and gentleness, This is just not right. WE are ONE standing against the other spiritual forces here that love when you fight. Please reconcile? If not for my sake, that's fine- then do it for Jesus.
Kiss and make up people..!

Ask yourself if someone quotes a passage to you that every believer would trust and believe implicitly, and then asks you if you believe the passage, saying, "I believe this scripture - do you?" and he does so because you disagree with him about his interpretation of something completely unrelated, what would you think?

Why would someone ask you if you believe scripture when you make it obvious you believe scripture - and almost demand an answer from you, just because you do not agree with his interpretation of scripture regarding a particular topic? Would you wonder what his motive would be?

What if he adds to the above statements like, "My sheep hear My voice" telling you that he hears Christ's voice, and that's why he does not agree with you? What do you think he might be implying?

What if he did that even after you have tried to explain to him that we are all human beings and just because we have a certain interpretation, doesn't of necessity mean we are correct - because the human intellect still interferes with the teaching of the Holy Spirit - and it's the same for all of us?

What if he added to all those sorts of remarks the repeated statement that "he loves the truth" in such a way as to imply that that is why he knows you are wrong? What does that imply?

Then you point out to him what he's doing and he shoots back that you are "attacking him personally" and ensures that you understand that he has taken offense.

IMO @marks has very subtle ways.

Jesus my Lord and Savior is the Lord around here - the only Lord around here. He is The Way, The Truth, and The Life, and He alone knows the hearts AND MINDS (thoughts) of each person. No one - @marks or anyone else, has the right to ask you, me, or anyone else questions in such a way as to imply that you do not believe the scriptures just because you disagree with his interpretations (and then still add to his posts claims that "he loves the truth", and "he hears the voice of Christ" (so therefore you don't), and that's why you are wrong. etc etc

I asked him long ago - pages back - for us to agree to disagree, but he took offense to that too, which is why I felt obliged to continue with discussing the subject with him.

Thank goodness, he has now decided he's taken offense again and won't continue. What a relief.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Ask yourself if someone quotes a passage to you that every believer would trust and believe implicitly, and then asks you if you believe the passage, saying, "I believe this scripture - do you?" and he does so because you disagree with him about his interpretation of something completely unrelated, what would you think?

Why would someone ask you if you believe scripture when you make it obvious you believe scripture - and almost demand an answer from you, just because you do not agree with his interpretation of scripture regarding a particular topic? Would you wonder what his motive would be?

What if he adds to the above statements like, "My sheep hear My voice" telling you that he hears Christ's voice, and that's why he does not agree with you? What do you think he might be implying?

What if he did that even after you have tried to explain to him that we are all human beings and just because we have a certain interpretation, doesn't of necessity mean we are correct - because the human intellect still interferes with the teaching of the Holy Spirit - and it's the same for all of us?

What if he added to all those sorts of remarks the repeated statement that "he loves the truth" in such a way as to imply that that is why he knows you are wrong? What does that imply?

Then you point out to him what he's doing and he shoots back that you are "attacking him personally" and ensures that you understand that he has taken offense.

IMO @marks has very subtle ways.

Jesus my Lord and Savior is the Lord around here - the only Lord around here. He is The Way, The Truth, and The Life, and He alone knows the hearts AND MINDS (thoughts) of each person. No one - @marks or anyone else, has the right to ask you, me, or anyone else questions in such a way as to imply that you do not believe the scriptures just because you disagree with his interpretations (and then still add to his posts claims that "he loves the truth", and "he hears the voice of Christ" (so therefore you don't), and that's why you are wrong. etc etc

I asked him long ago - pages back - for us to agree to disagree, but he took offense to that too, which is why I felt obliged to continue with discussing the subject with him.

Thank goodness, he has now decided he's taken offense again and won't continue. What a relief.

Are you saying @marks engages in spiritually manipulative dialogue? frames disagreement as a lack of faith or truthfulness? resists calls for mutual respect? and deflects criticism as personal attack?

If that's the case, then I’ve had a similar experience reading your posts. They often seem poorly structured, with little regard for context, and at times come across as aggressive, almost as if you're trying to force your doctrine on others rather than engage in thoughtful discussion.

 

[PS95]

Yes! The Word "became" flesh and his name was given as Jesus. PS I don't play with the Greek as I know what the Word was from the Beginning. He was given life out of the fallen line of man, died on the cross and was immortalized by his Father which is when he "became" the Word. Hope that was not to convoluted for you

Why do all other Unitarians say no? Perhaps, it's the way you word things- I am a simple straightforward person. You say Jesus became the Word at His death?
If that was the case- the scriptures would say and the Word became flesh and did not dwell among us because he died.
I wonder if Zao is correct and you are a troll. That was more convoluted than before, but I understand you loud and clear as a
certified nut.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Why do all other Unitarians say no?

Because it's a knee jerk reaction to try to explain away truine dogma rather than dealing with a certain reality about Yahweh's Logos!

Perhaps, it's the way you word things- I am a simple straightforward person. You say Jesus became the Word at His death?

Correct this is basis of the Gospel - Romans 1:1-3 - a person held under deaths dominion and in a corruptible nature cannot be the Word made Flesh - I think you must get that on some level.

If that was the case- the scriptures would say and the Word became flesh and did not dwell among us because he died.

John is speaking to the whole the Jesus' life, death and resurrection - i.e he understands the New Creation which encompasses all of the Lords life not just his sufferings in the flesh.

I wonder if Zao is correct and you are a troll.

Zao is licking his wounds after being corrected on 1 Tim 6 - I expect he will either get harder or eventually come around and admit his error.

That was more convoluted than before, but I understand you loud and clear as a certified nut.

Thanks, its the certified nuts who seem to have been revealed God's hidden things.

Welcome to join His Lot any time!

 

[PS95]

Ask yourself if someone quotes a passage to you that every believer would trust and believe implicitly, and then asks you if you believe the passage, saying, "I believe this scripture - do you?" and he does so because you disagree with him about his interpretation of something completely unrelated, what would you think?

Why would someone ask you if you believe scripture when you make it obvious you believe scripture - and almost demand an answer from you, just because you do not agree with his interpretation of scripture regarding a particular topic? Would you wonder what his motive would be?

What if he adds to the above statements like, "My sheep hear My voice" telling you that he hears Christ's voice, and that's why he does not agree with you? What do you think he might be implying?

What if he did that even after you have tried to explain to him that we are all human beings and just because we have a certain interpretation, doesn't of necessity mean we are correct - because the human intellect still interferes with the teaching of the Holy Spirit - and it's the same for all of us?

What if he added to all those sorts of remarks the repeated statement that "he loves the truth" in such a way as to imply that that is why he knows you are wrong? What does that imply?

Then you point out to him what he's doing and he shoots back that you are "attacking him personally" and ensures that you understand that he has taken offense.

IMO @marks has very subtle ways.

Jesus my Lord and Savior is the Lord around here - the only Lord around here. He is The Way, The Truth, and The Life, and He alone knows the hearts AND MINDS (thoughts) of each person. No one - @marks or anyone else, has the right to ask you, me, or anyone else questions in such a way as to imply that you do not believe the scriptures just because you disagree with his interpretations (and then still add to his posts claims that "he loves the truth", and "he hears the voice of Christ" (so therefore you don't), and that's why you are wrong. etc etc

I asked him long ago - pages back - for us to agree to disagree, but he took offense to that too, which is why I felt obliged to continue with discussing the subject with him.

Thank goodness, he has now decided he's taken offense again and won't continue. What a relief.

Zao, I will go and read and tell you what I think as I have not read this entire thread. I will say this- if that's what happened then that was provocation and very uncalled for.
Having said that tho, as believers we are not to be easily provoked. Right? I know how hard it can be on here. Believe me. I have to take a minute or 20 or even a day or two- often and reconnect with the Lord before I reply sometimes. Sometimes, I decide not to reply at all. It's that war with in us. We all need to take breathers. The internet can be a monster.
Can you imagine Paul on the internet? lol
We will be accountable for our words and I am trying to remember that, myself. I'm trying to master walking in the Spirit at all times- I gage it by my fruits- but when my heart comes away from the cross- other things come out of my mouth. It's not easy is it?

I will read where you are referring to and get back with you. I was not pointing at anyone but just all 3 of you lol it just got to me..
This forum is full of constant bickering. No matter what anyone says- someone has something nasty to say or how to correct it with their superior intelligence blah blah blah. Maybe I need a board where we just exhort one another...

 

[PS95]

Because it's a knee jerk reaction to try to explain away truine dogma rather than dealing with a certain reality about Yahweh's Logos!

No. I think it's because they do not believe it. You don't either. You lied when you said yes.

Correct this is basis of the Gospel - Romans 1:1-3 - a person held under deaths dominion and in a corruptible nature cannot be the Word made Flesh - I think you must get that on some level.

Some level? You're a real charmer, aren't you? Something in apparently in that Aussie water.
You mean seed of David ACCORDING TO THE FLESH? lol- that supports my beliefs and certainly not yours. Don't you see that Paul is denoting the 2 natures of Jesus there? It is exactly how we speak.

John is speaking to the whole the Jesus' life, death and resurrection - i.e he understands the New Creation which encompasses all of the Lords life not just his sufferings in the flesh.

This reminds me of the JWs and the "other sheep " doctrine. It's basic common scriptural sense to know that Gentile are the other sheep. Yet, they've twisted it to fit their doctrines of man. No matter what we say or show them, they reject it since they are right and we are always wrong. In my years of trying I have come to see that it's hopeless. We have to truly desire truth like a brand new sponge before going to God, and allow Him to supply the living water that we drink in.
Or we can go to man and allow man to fill us with toxins and as result disregard the scriptures as written.

Zao is licking his wounds after being corrected on 1 Tim 6 - I expect he will either get harder or eventually come around and admit his error.

I don't think you know Zao very well if you think he licks his wounds. I was not paying attention to your dialogue.

Thanks, its the certified nuts who seem to have been revealed God's hidden things.

No actually, It's those who ask with a humble heart and a crushed spirit.

Welcome to join His Lot any time!

Cute.

 

[Hiddenthings]

No. I think it's because they do not believe it. You don't either. You lied when you said yes.

Interesting accusation. Rather aggressive considering your recent thoughts on unity etc.

It's your failure for not asking how?

Some level? You're a real charmer, aren't you? Something in apparently in that Aussie water.

Do I take this as a compliment? Water is good here... not so where you live?

You mean seed of David ACCORDING TO THE FLESH? lol- that supports my beliefs and certainly not yours. Don't you see that Paul is denoting the 2 natures of Jesus there? It is exactly how we speak.

This made me smile. it’s one nature becoming another (firstfruits!). I’ve long hoped a Trinitarian would clearly explain and prove hypostasis, but it’s disheartening to watch the struggle, the twisting, and the effort to defend a doctrine that simply isn’t found in Scripture. Please don't try PS - it's pathetic to watch.

This reminds me of the JWs and the "other sheep " doctrine.

Yeah, thats a terrible doctrine that one!

It's basic common scriptural sense to know that Gentile are the other sheep. Yet, they've twisted it to fit their doctrines of man.

Agree!

No matter what we say or show them, they reject it since they are right and we are always wrong.

I've tried many times without success

In my years of trying I have come to see that it's hopeless.

Agreed. It’s clear from the Apostolic teaching that Christ was fully flesh and blood. Paul even says he was like us “in every respect.” Yet, the later councils introduced the idea of dual natures based on a flawed premise. In truth only a relatively small number can fully grasp the truth about Christ’s nature.

We have to truly desire truth like a brand new sponge before going to God, and allow Him to supply the living water that we drink in.
Or we can go to man and allow man to fill us with toxins and as result disregard the scriptures as written.

Unfortunately if you hold to duality you will be confronted with another reality when the Lord comes. But something tells me unlike Zao you are open minded enough to receive this truth. Well, you haven't placed me on ignore after two replies lol

I don't think you know Zao very well if you think he licks his wounds. I was not paying attention to your dialogue.

You know, when even Trinitarian theologians consistently attribute the giving of life to the Father, and then someone like Zao tries to pull a move like that, you can’t just let it slide. You’ve got to call it out clearly and firmly, and make sure it doesn’t go unchallenged.

You know, there was a lot more going on in his post that I could have corrected, but that fruit was so low-hanging I stepped on it.

No actually, It's those who ask with a humble heart and a crushed spirit.

Cute.

So you desire not the hidden things of God? Maybe you don't believe His Wisdom is hidden? Reminds me of the mystery (secret) spoken in Romans 11 which so few know about or understand. It's His Secret things which provide the prophetic visions - they build faith and grow confidence in things not yet seen.

I'm sure you do you're just being protective...I get it

 

[PS95]

Interesting accusation. Rather aggressive considering your recent thoughts on unity etc.

It's your failure for not asking how?



Do I take this as a compliment? Water is good here... not so where you live?



This made me smile. it’s one nature becoming another (firstfruits!). I’ve long hoped a Trinitarian would clearly explain and prove hypostasis, but it’s disheartening to watch the struggle, the twisting, and the effort to defend a doctrine that simply isn’t found in Scripture. Please don't try PS - it's pathetic to watch.


Yeah, thats a terrible doctrine that one!

Agree!

I've tried many times without success

Agreed. It’s clear from the Apostolic teaching that Christ was fully flesh and blood. Paul even says he was like us “in every respect.” Yet, the later councils introduced the idea of dual natures based on a flawed premise. In truth only a relatively small number can fully grasp the truth about Christ’s nature.

Unfortunately if you hold to duality you will be confronted with another reality when the Lord comes. But something tells me unlike Zao you are open minded enough to receive this truth. Well, you haven't placed me on ignore after two replies lol

You know, when even Trinitarian theologians consistently attribute the giving of life to the Father, and then someone like Zao tries to pull a move like that, you can’t just let it slide. You’ve got to call it out clearly and firmly, and make sure it doesn’t go unchallenged.

You know, there was a lot more going on in his post that I could have corrected, but that fruit was so low-hanging I stepped on it.


So you desire not the hidden things of God? Maybe you don't believe His Wisdom is hidden? Reminds me of the mystery (secret) spoken in Romans 11 which so few know about or understand. It's His Secret things which provide the prophetic visions - they build faith and grow confidence in things not yet seen.

I'm sure you do you're just being protective...I get it

Ok that does it. Lunatic fringe troll alert..

Thanks for noticing this one first @Zao is life

 

[Hiddenthings]

Ok that does it. Lunatic fringe troll alert..

Thanks for noticing this one first @Zao is life

Wow, two overly sensitive CB members—are there more?

I guess we will see!