The Anointed
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 18 Dec, 2021 06:08 am
@bulmabriefs144,
Quote:
First, you're blaming the Romans for some supposed false teaching. Actually, it is entirely your hangup that you are non-Trinitarian and have rejected the Gospel, distorting it to say something it is not.


And which Gospel was that young fellow? Surely you are not referring to the four gospels that prove conclusively that Jesus was not born of some miraculous virgin birth, as you have been deceived into believing by your spiritual mother who sits on the seven hills of Rome?

And where have I ever said that I am a non-Trinitarian?

Quote:
The Romans actively worked with the Jews to suppress the teaching of the resurrection and divine nature of Jesus. If anything, the Bible was toned down to get it to fit better with the culture of the time.


Toned down??? The Roman church, less than 100 years after Jesus, was preaching that the man Jesus was not a human being, but a spirit, who could appear and disappear at will.

In the days of the Apostle Paul, the people were already beginning to fall away from the truth, and following another gospel that was not taught by the word of God or the apostles.

In his 2nd letter to the Corinthians 11: 4; Paul says, “You gladly tolerate anyone who comes to you and preaches a different Jesus, not the one we preached; and you accept a spirit and a gospel completely different from the spirit and the gospel you received from us.”

So, what was that other gospel that was leading the people away from the truth and away from the Jesus as preached by the Apostles, to another false Jesus?

That gospel was the word of the anti-christ, that refused to acknowledge that Jesus had come as a human being, and instead, they believed that he was a spirit, whose humanlike body was able to pass through Mary’s Hymen without breaking it, and who, like some Hologram, would appear and disappear at will.

Even in the days of John the beloved disciple, ‘Docetism,’ the concept that Jesus had existed as a spirit rather than a human being, and could appear and disappear like some hologram, had begun to rear its ugly head.

That’s why it is written in 1 John 4: 1-3; My dear friends, do not believe all who claim to have the Spirit, but test them to find out if the spirit they have comes from God. For many false prophets have gone out everywhere. This is how you will be able to know whether it is God's Spirit: anyone who acknowledges that Jesus Christ came as a human being has the Spirit who comes from God. But anyone who denies this about Jesus does not have the Spirit from God. The spirit that he has is from the Enemy of Christ; you heard that it would come, and now it is here in the world already.

2nd letter of John verses 7-10; “Many deceivers have gone out all over the world, people who do not acknowledge that Jesus came as a human being. Such a person is a deceiver and an enemy of Christ.”

Where would one expect to find the teaching that Jesus was not a true human being, “Born of the seed of Adam” which teaching has been spread ALL OVER THE WORLD?

By the second century, ‘Docetism,’ the concept that Jesus had existed as a spirit rather than a human being, had all but theoretically been stamped out. Yet there still persisted the belief that their Jesus, although seen as a sort of human being, did not have our normal bodily needs, such as eating, drinking and excretion, and Clement the bishop of Alexandria, wrote: “It would be ridiculous to imagine that the redeemer, in order to exist, had the usual needs of man. He only took food and ate it in order that we should not teach about him in a Docetic fashion.” Even though the scriptures state that it was because Jesus was hungry, that Satan tried to tempt him into turning the stones into bread.

Their Jesus was not the Jesus as taught by the apostles, but that other Jesus, taught by the Anti-Christ, who unlike we mere HUMAN BEINGS, did not need to eat, drink, or go to the toilet, as was taught by one of the great False teachers that the authorities of Emperor Constantine’s universal church, used as one of their authorities when trying to defend their false doctrines.

Saint Clement of Alexandria, who was a saint in the Martyrology of the Roman universal church, in support of the great lie, speaks of the time that some imaginary midwife, who was supposed to be at the birth of Jesus, (Non-biblical) told some woman by the name Salome, that the mother was still a virgin after the birth and that her hymen was still intact, and that this supposed Salome, stuck her finger into the mother’s vagina to check, and her hand immediately withered up, but the baby Jesus reached out and touched her hand and healed it. (All non biblical).

Down to the 17th century, Clement was venerated as a saint. His name was to be found in the Martyrologies, and his feast fell on December 4. But when the Roman Martyrology was revised by Clement VIII (Pope from 1592 to 1605), his name was dropped from the calendar on the advice of his confessor, Cardinal Baronius. Pope Benedict XIV in 1748 maintained his predecessor's decision on the grounds that Clement’s life was little-known; that he had never obtained public cultus in the Church; and that some of his doctrines were, if not erroneous, at least highly ‘suspect.

"ERRONEOUS? HIGHLY SUSPECT?" they certainly got that right, but by then the false teaching of the so-called virgin birth had become firmly established in the minds of the Gullible.

TONED DOWN you say? You're brain is so mixed up by the false teachings of your spiritual mother who sits on the seven hills of Rome, it has now set as hard as concrete, and one would need a sledge hammer to crack it open and let the light of God's truths shine in.

bulmabriefs144
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 18 Dec, 2021 08:08 am
@The Anointed,
Quote:
And which Gospel was that young fellow? Surely you are not referring to the four gospels that prove conclusively that Jesus was not born of some miraculous virgin birth, as you have been deceived into believing by your spiritual mother who sits on the seven hills of Rome?


Ummm you'll have to share this "proof" with me. Because I see at least two Gospels have an angel say to Mary that she'll have a child.

What I do not accept is the divinity of Mary. Mary was a vessel for God, nothing more. She was not the Mother of God (because she was Mother of the Christ, the Son of God), a term that I loathe because it suggests superiority to God. She is not the Bride of Heaven. She is simply, "Woman, what are you to me?" Mary is on record trying to cash in during the wedding of Canaan. She is trying to hijack Jesus's ministry at another point ( " Your mother and brothers are here"). Jesus tells us that his ministry will not be compromised by Mary. All Catholics everywhere woeship a false god. I'll say it again if you want.

But Jesus was the Son of God. This does not change regardless of what gender we use.

When I talked about the Holy Spirit, you behaved strangely. And you do not accept the Bible (any of 30 or 40) that says that Mary in fact did bear Jesus while yet a virgin. Nor John 1, which you dismiss entirely.

The Romans indeed spread a number of false teachings about Jesus. Including adoptionism, which is the very notion you hold. Their primary aim was to downplay the divinity of Christ or to spread such myths as to render the Gospel lost. Rome saw Christians as a threat, first persecuting it, and then developing the Catholic church under Constantine. I am Protestant. I still believe in the virgin birth because Jesus was, is, and will always be the Son of God.

Toned down I say. They actively attacked several aspect s of Jesus, including aspects of his birth, death, and resurrection. The Romans spread heresy.



The Anointed
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 27 Dec, 2021 09:41 pm
@bulmabriefs144,
Quote:
Ummm you'll have to share this "proof" with me. Because I see at least two Gospels have an angel say to Mary that she'll have a child.


Would you be referring to Matthew, who said that the birth of Jesus happened in order to make come true what the Lord had said through his prophet (Isaiah) "An 'almah' (UNMARRIED WONAN) who is pregnant will bear a son and he will be called Immanuel, which means God is with us.

And the Lord God our saviour who filled the man Jesus with his spirit on the day that he was BAPTISED, was certainly with us, as he revealed himself to the world through the words he spoke and the miracles he worked through his obedient servant Jesus.

And could the other gospel be that of Luke, where the messenger of God told Mary that she would later become pregnant and give birth to a son, who God would make a King, as was his genetic ancestor David, who, like her son, was born of the seed of Adam, and like all humans had to pay the blood price for his inherited sin and any mistakes that he had made in his life.

But because he believed the words of the Lord God our saviour as spoken through him, even though he had to die, he had total faith that he would he live again, and therefore DEATH (The Ruler of this World) had no power over him. And he became the first fruits to be harvested from the body of mankind.

And of course you could not use the gospels of Mark and John in your futile attempt to support the false teaching of some supposed virgin birth, the great lie of your mother who sits on the seven hills of Rome.

The author of the gospel of Mark, is believed to be Mark the son of Peter, and gospel of John, which was written from the memoirs of John, make no mention whatsoever of the physical birth of Jesus, which according to your mother body, was the greatest of all miracles, but was seen by Mark and John the beloved disciple, as unimportant and totally irrelevant to the story of the salvation of mankind, and begin their account of that promised salvation, with the baptism of the man Jesus, when the spirit of the lord descended upon him in the form of a dove, as the heavenly voice was heard to say; "You are my son, 'THIS DAY' I have begotten thee".

Fulfilling the prophecy of the Lord which he spoke to Moses in Deuteronomy 18: 18-19; "“I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren; and I will put MY WORDS in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And whoever will not give heed to MY WORDS which he shall speak in MY NAME, I myself will surely punish.”
0 Replies
 
The Anointed
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 27 Dec, 2021 11:47 pm
@bulmabriefs144,
Quote:
What I do not accept is the divinity of Mary. Mary was a vessel for God, nothing more. She was not the Mother of God (because she was Mother of the Christ, the Son of God), a term that I loathe because it suggests superiority to God. She is not the Bride of Heaven.


She might not be the bride of heaven, because the grave site where her body was buried in the town of Ephesus, can still be visited today. But according to you, she was either HIS earthly wife, or just one of HIS many earthly concubines as there are many sons of God from many cultures who are supposed to have been born of human females.

RSV, Genesis 6: 1-2; When men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair; and they took to wife such of them as they chose.

If the Sons of God abandoned their heavenly habitat and defiled themselves with the daughters of man, why should those Sons of God be punished for doing exactly what, (According to you) their Father has also done?

Quote:
But Jesus was the Son of God. This does not change regardless of what gender we use.


Jesus was indeed born SON of God, not by blood nor by the will of the flesh nor by the will of man, but by the spirit of our Lord God and saviour, which descended upon HIM in the form of a dove on the day HE was baptised, as the heavenly voice was heard to say; “You are my SON, ‘THIS DAY’ I have begotten thee”. And the fact that ‘HE’ was born ‘SON’ of God does not change regardless of the bible twisting, mentally unstable biblical ignoramus’s who Claim that God’s ‘SON’ was in fact, a daughter.

Quote:
And you do not accept the Bible (any of 30 or 40) that says that Mary in fact did bear Jesus while yet a virgin.


Reveal just ‘ONE’ of your supposed 30 or 40 passages, which are supposed to refer to Mary as being pregnant while still a virgin. Just ONE passage, which cannot be proven to have been a false interpretation, or an erroneous translation of the original passage.

Quote:
Nor John 1, which you dismiss entirely.


Never have I dismissed John 1, which speaks of the Logos God who is made manifest as the creation itself, in which His Son, the Most High in the creation had developed. Nowhere in John 1; is there any mention of the Man Jesus who was filled with the spirit of the Most High in the creation, and was sent out to the people to speak “HIS WORDS” in “HIS NAME”.

Quote:
The Romans indeed spread a number of false teachings about Jesus. Including adoptionism, which is the very notion you hold.


Your mother who sits on the seven hills of Rome, did indeed spread a number of false teachings about Jesus. But not adoptionism, which is the very notion that I hold, as any and every human, male or female who are to inherit everlasting life, are adopted as God's SONS.

No! the Mother body who sits on the seven hills of Rome, whose false teachings you hold so dear, believes and teaches that the man Jesus was a heavenly God who existed before the creation of the cosmos, who in fact, according to her, was the co-creator of this boundless cosmos.

And you hold so dear, to her teaching that some two thousand years ago, the non-human spirit, which would later be named Jesus, entered the womb of some earthly ever virgin, in whose womb 'HE" created for 'HIMSELF' a humanlike body, which was not of the seed of Adam as are all human beings, in which body HE could walk the earth disguised as a human being.

And that new born body miraculously passed through that supposed virgin’s hymen without breaking it, later on ‘HE” took that body to the cross and had it killed, but ‘HIS” heavenly father raised it back to life, after which ‘HIS IMMORTAL SON’ who could never die, returned to ‘HIS’ heavenly home. What a pity that your God has never been able to raise a human being from the dead to everlasting life.

Quote:
They actively attacked several aspect s of Jesus, including aspects of his birth, death, and resurrection. The Romans spread heresy.


Which heretical teachings you hold so dear. Catch ya later mate.
bulmabriefs144
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 5 Jan, 2022 05:17 pm
@The Anointed,
(Sorry for slow response, been visiting family)

You tell me in great depth how you reject the virgin birth on the grounds that it is a Roman invention. But you seem to have missed the main objection.

The main objection is that Mary was somehow divine herself (as the Roman Catholics propose), that she is equal to God, or even superior.
The objection is not that Jesus is the Son of God.

Any real Christian will tell you this is (literally) Gospel truth.

So why is the first part problematic and the second okay? Well, it's because Jesus represents God purpose for us. Jesus died on a cross for our sins. On the other hand, Mary is a distraction. A supplanter. In fact, if we look back at Mary through religious history, we find that the only reason she is venerated is that Jesus has some similarities the Tammuz of Babylon, and Mary is like Ishtar. Ishtar is the canonical mother of Tammuz. So this is a literal false Babylonian cult. Btw, Tammuz never died on the cross for anyone's sins. So this is a clear attempt for the whore of Babylon to pave over real Christianity. And it nearly did until Protestantism reclaimed at least some of Christian teachings and displaced Mary. Today, Catholicism is a state power in Rome, one of the major globalist forces.
The Anointed
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 5 Jan, 2022 09:56 pm
@bulmabriefs144,
Quote:
The main objection is that Mary was somehow divine herself (as the Roman Catholics propose), that she is equal to God, or even superior. The objection is not that Jesus is the Son of God.


Let me here repeat your own words..... "They actively attacked several aspects of Jesus, including aspects of his birth, death, and resurrection. The Romans spread heresy".

Quote:
Any real Christian will tell you this is (literally) Gospel truth.


You are referring of course, to the members of the Roman church of Emperor Constantine, their mother body, who sits on the Seven hills of Rome, of which you have accused of actively attacking several aspects of Jesus, including aspects of his birth, death, and resurrection. And her daughter denominational bodies, who were spawned from the false spirit=teaching of their mother body, before breaking away from her to establish families of their own.

Quote:
So why is the first part problematic and the second okay? Well, it's because Jesus represents God purpose for us. Jesus died on a cross for our sins. On the other hand, Mary is a distraction. A supplanter.


Jesus, the son of Mary and her half brother Joseph, who were both sired by Alexander Helios III, but by different mothers, like all humans who are born of the seed of Adam, had to pay the blood price for his inherited sin as we all must.

It was not the man Jesus who died for the sins of those who accepted him, but the Lord God our saviour, who filled the man Jesus with 'HIS' spirit on the day of his baptism, in order to reveal himself to the world, through HIS words as spoken by his obedient servant Jesus, and the miracles that he performed through Jesus, and the awesome sacrifice he makes for all those who believe in him as seen in the death of his earthly 'IMAGE' Jesus, on the cross.

Jesus, the earthly 'IMAGE' of the Lord, who was lifted up upon a pole, in the same manner that Moses lifted up the bronze 'IMAGE" of the serpent in order that all who are dying only have to turn to his 'IMAGE' in order to be saved.

While on the cross, the spirit of the Lord with which Jesus had been filled, on the day of his baptism, departed from Him as he cried out; "MY GOD, my God why have you abandoned me?"

It was then, that our Lord God and saviour who can never actually die, instead, ceased to be an individual entity, by releasing all the spirits of the righteous who had in death, been gathered to him, and at that very moment, the graves of those saints were opened, but it was not until three days later that they came out of their Graves, with Jesus, the chosen heir and successor to our Lord, and entered the Holy City and revealed themselves as the risen body of Christ our saviour, with Jesus as their head.

Quote:
On the other hand, Mary is a distraction. A supplanter. In fact, if we look back at Mary through religious history, we find that the only reason she is venerated is that Jesus has some similarities the Tammuz of Babylon, and Mary is like Ishtar.


Asherah – the Queen of Heaven, who is Astarte and Ishtar. “Asherah”, is known across the ancient Near East by various other names, She is the wife of God and the mother of 70 sons, of who Baal the son of God, was one of them.

The worship of Asherah, the wife of the most high God and mother of his son Baal, evolved over the centuries, and was seen in Roman times as Isis, sister wife to the most high god Osiris, and mother of their god son 'Horus".

The Romans, not wishing to abandon their old Pagan beliefs, simply corrupted the gospels in their attempt to support their old pagan beliefs.

Isis is commonly depicted with Horus the child (Harpocrates) on her lap, and today, it is impossible for the average punter to distinguish between the late pagan and early Christian figures of the mother and child, it’s almost as though the old Pagan Queen was stripped of her old garments and clothed with the new covering of Christianity.

Elijah, who was carried up to stand by Enoch’s side
Stood by the brook at Kishon where the priests of Baal all died
It was He, who gave the order and the waters all ran red
As fifty and eight hundred more, false prophets all fell dead.
Will you fight the war ‘gainst ignorance, the war that will be won
By those who wield the S-word of God, the sharp two edge-ed tongue…. The Anointed.


bulmabriefs144
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 8 Jan, 2022 09:10 am
@The Anointed,
Yes, the Romans spread heresy. They spent nearlty three hundred years trying to put down Christianity and they themselves were faling apart. (One of these Roman heresies is adoptionism) The Romans finally latched on to Constantine and his (clearly false) conversion. The Early Church was alive and functioning, where people were hidden throughout the Roman Empire. The Catholic Church on the other hand was a bit like telling everyone they have the right to bear arms (after trying to take their weapons), but having everyone register their weapons to a location and keeping them locked up. It was very neat, ordered, and tidy.

But you see, you've made a mistake here. The virgin birth isn't a Roman invention. All Christians who are Christian accept Jesus as God's kid. This means a direct line of inheritance (not an adoption) from God to Jesus. What Catholicism did was introduce "Hail Mary full of grace, blessed art thou among women," bowing during the Nicene Creed when they mention Jesus being born of Mary, claiming Mary is perfect, that she immaculately conceived Jesus, and that she had no children after Jesus ( she did, several sons and even some daughters). This Mary thing is not supported by the Bible. The Bible tells us that it was a virgin birth, but says nothing about Mary forgiving sins, being Mother of God, or being without sin herself. In fact, Jesus has to push her aside several times because her goals are typical of a Jewish mother and his are his ministry. He foresaw that she would be a problem and this is restated throughout the Gospel.

The enemies of Christ didn't just invent Catholicism and other heresies though. We also have the false history of a man named Muhammad. You see, there wasn't even a Mecca at the time Muhammad was supposedly around. And there wasn't even a Muhammad until he showed up on coins centuries later. In fact, Muhammad is a title not a name. Yes that's right, the enemies of Christianity didn't just try to corrupt the basic teachings by introducing saint worship, Mary worship, and the idea of purgatory and sales of indulgence. They also helped make a militant invasion army. In fact, when we trace this backward, we find that the eneies of Yahweh are the Babylonians not the Romans (though the Romans are in the same line of kings and the same religious lineage). That Mystery Babylon has always been against Christ and God. In Jesus's time the Temple had become too fixated on tradition and not on worship of God. Corrupted, so they didn't see the personal nature of God (Jesus) but only the festivals, the sacrifices, and the building. In times before, they had defiled the temple, sent Jews into exile, or even made war against them. And here too we see that this invasion army hails not from Mecca but to its north in Mesopotamia. Babylon. Now, flash-forward to 2020 and mask mandates. You'll see that this is the same playbook as Muslim women are expected to wear. Veils of submission to keep them safe.

This Mary worship is heresy. This mask wearing idea that meshes Christian-sounding ideas with what is actually Islam is heresy. Adoptionism is heresy, Jesus is God's child.

Accepting Jesus as God's child is not heresy. Not even if I believe Jesus is black, white, Jewish, Roman, male, female, intersex. Jesus is fully human and fully divine, this is what the Church teaches. In Christ there is no free or slave, no male or female. All of us are one in Christ. So deciding how Christ looks is heresy and idolatry. The resurrection stories explicitly state that the disciples did not recognize Jesus. That is, we do not know what Jesus looked like before death. But we know after Jesus's death that he could appear however he wanted. And we know that before Jesus's birth there is a story of Lady Wisdom inviting those who knock inside which is repeated in Revelation when Jesus stands at the gate and knocks. Jesus in turn tells his disciples to go from town to town knocking on doors. Same pattern, same person. Jesus is Lady Wisdom. But there is also Mistress Folly. What the Jews call the demon Astaroth and Christian historians call Ishtar or sometimes Venus. The goddess of "luv" rather than the God who is Love itself. Who loves us so much that he willingly put his own life aside, and died on a cross. Jesus could have lived quietly as a carpenter. Instead, he went around preaching to everyone and hung on a "tree".
0 Replies
 
Child of Monica
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 16 Jan, 2022 06:56 am
@Arella Mae,
The Trinity is
234 The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them. It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the "hierarchy of the truths of faith".56 The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, reveals himself to men "and reconciles and unites with himself those who turn away from sin".57
.

237 The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the "mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God".58 To be sure, God has left traces of his Trinitarian being in his work of creation and in his Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel's faith before the Incarnation of God's Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.

I
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Jan, 2022 11:27 am
@Child of Monica,
Quote:
But his inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel's faith before the Incarnation of God's Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.

That has always been my approach to the ‘trinity', but the rest of your words leave me in doubt about your willingness to accept any other answer than the one you are currently advocating.

You don’t indicate that you think there IS any mystery about it.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

A Scriptural Discussion of the Trinity - Question by TruthMatters
Trinitarian Evidence All False - Discussion by Squeakybro
John 1-1 - Discussion by Squeakybro
Deity - Discussion by Squeakybro
Is This What God Purposed? - Question by BroRando
Who actually wrote the Bible? - Question by BroRando
The He's and Him's - Discussion by Squeakybro
The Are One Delusion - Discussion by Squeakybro
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Oneness vs. Trinity
  3. » Page 27
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/22/2022 at 04:50:19