Slade Henson wrote:
I hope you all don't mind, but I have renamed this
thread more appropriately
DAVEH: Good idea, Slade. Wish I had thought of it before.
I think understand the following:
DAVEH's position: I
believe Jesus existed as a spirit being in the OT. His spirit
Oh? and what happens when one does not
attempt to apprehend the Trinity . . .
I don't know. Will you tell me? I never said I never tried and I think
anyone who says that "understand" the nature of God is a liar. How can the
finite wrap their minds around the infinite?
. . .
Never mind. J
DAVEH: I'm not sure why you say that, Slade. I think I
corrected Perry (I believe it was Perry who said a similar thing about LDS
theology) in a post a week or so ago when he suggested my belief did not allow
Jesus to be God in the pre-mortal existence.
School
and family take much of my
I hate to butt in, but I think the Angel of the Lord
was Jesus, dont you? Izzy
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Slade Henson
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 3:55
AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk] Divine
Nature
Oh? and what
Chris, since you don't accept the 1+1+1=1 view of the Trinity, will you
refresh me on your view of the relationship between the Father, the Son and
the Holy Spirit? Is there a common term used to describe your view?
Thanks
Perry
From: Chris Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
\o/ !HALALU YAH! \o/GreetingsPerry in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
The only
life that was in YahShua was The Father (Isaiah 9:6/John 14:7-10 just for
starters), although the Father was not limited to that bodily form any more than
He was/is limited to heaven, nor wasYahShualimited as to
Chris:I don't believe that a genuine conversation
is even possible between 'oneness' and, an orthodox Trinitarian understanding of
God (One Being, Three Persons). Do You?
Lance
- Original Message -
From:
Chris Barr
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: July 02, 2004 09:35
Thanks, Chris, that was very clear. However, I sometimes read verses in the
Bible that appear to give the Father, the Son, and the holy Spirit some
degree of separateness, like when Jesus prays to the Father, or while Jesus
was on earth refers to His Father in heaven, and when the father says
Lance: Well, when you put it that way --
orthodox Trinitarian is an oxymoron -- then you have placed down a disingenuine
starting point. However, " three-headed siamese triplet freak" may be
looked upon in a similar fashion (tee-hee). I know that a genuine
conversation is possible between a
Chris:I don't believe that speaking of God as One
Being, Three Persons (Trinity) is a doctrine. I believe that this is Who God in
fact Is.
I believe thatthe underlying question is the
starting point: Are both positions acceptable to God? What is heresy to us and,
to God?
- Original
\o/ !HALALU YAH! \o/Greetingsagain Perry in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Perry Locke"
Sent: 07/02/2004 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Divine
Nature
Thanks, Chris, that was very
clear.
You're welcome and thanks,
Perry.
However, I
\o/ !HALALU YAH!
\o/Greetings in the
Matchless Name of YahShua!
"And I will pray The Father, and He shall give you
another
Comforter [Greek 'paraklete']
that He may abide with you for
ever;
even [italicized
by KJV 'cause it taint actually there in the
Greek]
The Spirit of TRUTH;
Chris/Perry:This conversation, as structured, is a
dead end. As Monty Python said: 'This Parrot is dead'. My advice to all is NOT
to engage Chris in this conversation. This is NOT the same conversation
generated by John's initial post on Kruger.
For Chris, this isn't a 'conversation'. This
\o/
!HALALU YAH! \o/Greetings in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
Robert Brent Graves set forth almost three
decades ago to assail and derail monotheism that teaches a singularly ONE Deity
rather than a compound unity that is triune. He held a B.A. in New
Testament Greek, and an M.A. in
\o/ !HALALU YAH! \o/GreetingsLance in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
- Original Message -
From: Lance Muir
Sent: 07/02/2004 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Divine
Nature
Chris: ... I believe
thatthe underlying question is the starting point: Are both positions
acceptable to
\o/ !HALALU YAH! \o/Greetingsagain in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
- Original Message -
From: Lance Muir
Sent: 07/02/2004 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Divine
Nature
Chris/Perry:This conversation, as structured, is a
dead end. As Monty Python said: 'This Parrot is dead'. My
Chris Barr wrote:
\o/ !HALALU YAH! \o/
GreetingsPerry in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
The only life that was in YahShua was
The Father (Isaiah 9:6/John 14:7-10 just for starters), although the
Father was not limited to that bodily form any more than He was/is
Chris:Others may; I may not.
Lance
- Original Message -
From:
Chris Barr
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: July 02, 2004 12:33
Subject: Lance II: Re: [TruthTalk] Divine
Nature
\o/ !HALALU YAH!
\o/Greetingsagain in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
-
In a message dated 7/2/2004 7:01:20 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris:I don't believe that a genuine conversation is even possible between 'oneness' and, an orthodox Trinitarian understanding of God (One Being, Three Persons). Do You?
Lance
Personal experience would
In a message dated 7/2/2004 9:15:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris: ... I believe that the underlying question is the starting point: Are both positions acceptable to God? What is heresy to us and, to God?
In accordance with the example of The Saviour ... I'll await
\o/ !HALALU YAH! \o/GreetingsTerry in the Matchless Name of YahShua!
- Original Message -
From: Terry
Clifton
Sent: 07/02/2004 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Divine
Nature
\o/ !HALALU YAH! \o/Greetingsin the Matchless Name of YahShua!
Straw men are certainly in abundance 'round
here!
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/02/2004 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: LANCE: Re: [TruthTalk] Divine
Nature
All should have noted by now that Chris does
LET US MAKE MAN
Despite the testimony of Jewish scholarship, despite
the consistent record from the Bible itself that "God is One: there is not
other", some have stepped forward to offer a challenge. And they have turned to
the first chapter of Genesis for the basis of that challenge:
Butt
in at any time, my friend!!!
I know
many people think that the "Angel of the Lord" is Yeshua. Others hold that it is
the Spirit of the Holy One. Since there is nothing concrete to go on, I have
adopted the perspective that it's not necessarily Yeshua. There is one
"character" in the
In a message dated 7/2/2004 6:21:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Whether thinking or saying to myself (or you to yourself), "Should I do this or should I do that?", it is thinking or talking to myself (or yourself) just as surely as The Saviour similarly did in the garden
In a message dated 7/2/2004 6:30:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Personal experience would have me agree, Lance.
I have much personal experience to the contrary. Shall we rely upon personal experience or The Word and The Ruach?
Folk on our side of the aisle are more
In a message dated 7/2/2004 6:38:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All should have noted by now that Chris does not answer questions that force him to admit his exclusiveness as a "saint."
OBJECTION ... No foundation, facts not in evidence i.e. yet another straw man -- I'm
In a message dated 7/2/2004 8:28:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The ABC's rendition of "literary plural" is a similar argument to the "majestic Plural" (a one hundred year-old argument according to my sources to combat the Deity of Yeshua) of the Orthodox Rabbis.
28 matches
Mail list logo
