The Trinity Options

[Kontroll]

All Christians agree on each of hte basic propositions that form the foundation for Trinitarianism, though Christians sometimes disagree on (1) how to explain the relationships between these basic statements and (2) what other biblical teachings might be added to the basic list to fill out the doctrine of the Trinity. This implies that all branches of the Church are unified in their basic confession of the Trinity so that whatever variations exist do not undermind the confession of trinitarian faith. It means that Christians are united in theirview of who God is. The Church is one. It also means that whoever does not afree with these basic biblical foundations for the trinitarian faith is, by definition, not a Christian.
---

Before starting these basic propositions, it is important to say a few words about the often-noted fact that the word Trinity is not found in the Bible. Christians ask or are askedwhy, if the word is not in the Bible, do they use it? The answer is simple and has nothing to do with some conspiracy to add something to the Bible that really is not there. The word Trinity is used for theological and practical convenience -- it is 'theologicalshorthand,' a single word that sums up a series of biblical teachings. Instead of repeating the whole series of every time we speak of God, we substitute a single word that summarizes the truth. What, then, are these basic biblical propositions? The basic truth, wich all Christians afree upon, can be expressed in five propositions.

1. There is one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Spirit is God.
5. The Father, Son, and Spirit are distinguishable persons in relationship with one another. They are not merely different names for the one God.

Analogy: Crystals of salt that appear on the beach after the tide has receded may be the most apparent proof that the sea is saltwater, but every bucket of water drawn from the ocean testifies clearly to the fact.

REFERENCES:
- - -
1. There is one God. (Deut. 6:4; I Sam. 2:2; 2Kgs. 19:15; Is. 37:16; 44:8; Mk. 12:28-24; I Cor. 8:4-6; I Tim. 2:5; Jas. 2:19). That the Bible teaches this proposition is not disputed.

2. The Father is God. (Rom. 1:7; I Cor. 1:3; 8:6 15:24; 2 Cor. 1:3; Eph. 4:6; Phil. 4:20). Again, this proposition is seldom disputed.
3. The Son is God. Because this proposition is frequently denied, I give a fuller statement of evidence, but still only scratches the surface.
a. The Son is called God. ( Jn. 1:1; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 1:8).
b. The Son is given divine names. (Jn. 1:1, 18; Acts 5:31; I Cor. 2:8; Jas. 2:1; Rev. 1:8, 21:6; 22:13).
c. The Son has divine attributes.
i. Eternity. (Jn. 1:2; 8:58; 17:5; Rev. 1:8, 17; 22:13).
ii. Immutability. (Heb. 1:11, 12; 13:8).
iii. Omnipresence. (Jn. 3:13; Mt. 18:20; 28:20).
iv. Omniscience. (Mt. 11:27; Jn. 2:23-25; 21:17; Rev. 2:23).
v. Omnipotence. (Jn. 5:17; Heb. 1:3; Rev. 1:8; 11:17).
d. The Son does divine works.
i. Creation. (Jn. 1:3, 10; Col. 1:16-17)
ii. Salvation. (Acts 4:12; 2 Tim. 1:10; Heb. 5:9).
iii. Judgment. (Jn. 5:22; 2 Cor. 5:10; Mt. 25:31-32).
e. The Son is worshipped as God. (Jn. 5:22-23; 20:28; I Cor. 1:2; Phil. 2:9-10; Heb. 1:6).
4. The Spirit is God. Those whose accept the biblical evidence for the deity of the Son seldom have trouble understanding the evidence for the deity of the Spirit.
a. The Spirit is called God. (Acts 5:3-4; 2 Cor. 3:17).
b. The Spirit is given divine names. (Mt. 12:28).
c. The Spirit has divine attributes. (I Cor. 2:13-14; Gal. 5:22; I Tim. 4:1; Heb. 3:7; 9:14; I Jn. 5:6-7).
d. The Spirit does divine works. (Jn. 6:33; 14:17, 26; 16:13; Acts 1:8; 2:17-18; 16:6; Rom. 8:26; 15:19; I Cor. 12:7-11).
e. The Spirit is worshipped as God. (Mt. 12:32).
5. The Father, Son and Spirit are distinguishable persons in relationship with one another. They are not merely different names for one God.
a. The Son prays to the Father. (Jn. 11:41-42; 17; Mt. 26:39 ff)
b. The Father speaks to the Son. (Jn. 12:27-28).
c. The Father, the Son, and the Spirit - all three - appear together, but are clearly distinct from one another. (Mt. 3:16-17).
d. The Father sends the Son and Spirit, and the Son sends the Spirit. (Jn. 3:17; 4:34; 5:30; 6:39; 14:26; 15:26; 16:7)
e. The Father and Son love one another. (Jn. 3:35; 5:20; 10:17; 14:31; 15:9-10; 17:24).

The Trinity and Logic
- - -
Though it is clearly the teaching of the Bible, cultic groups and atheists often complain that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is a contradiction. How can there be one God and at the same time three who are called God? Christians seem to be saying that 1+1+1=1. This is simply bad arithmetic, we are told, not profound theology. The fact is, however, that the doctrine of the Trinity neither involves nor implies a contradiction. How, then, does a Christian explain that God is both one and three at the same time? The answer, in part, is that He is not one in precisely the same way that He is three. Trinitarianism would be a contradiction if it affirmed that God is one and three in precisely the same sense, but no one in the history of the Church has ever taught such a view. All the same, this is only a partial
answer.

There is a very great difference between something being a demonstrated contradiction and something being incomprehensible.

All words besides biblical references from Trinity & Reality An Introduction to the Christian Faith by Ralph A. Smith.

Yes, Heath21. This is this book that I want you to pick up.

Into the discussion I will go deeper into thought and show you what the Trinity is comprised of, and show the logic behind it.

[sweetangel2128]

All Christians agree on each of hte basic propositions that form the foundation for Trinitarianism, though Christians sometimes disagree on (1) how to explain the relationships between these basic statements and (2) what other biblical teachings might be added to the basic list to fill out the doctrine of the Trinity. This implies that all branches of the Church are unified in their basic confession of the Trinity so that whatever variations exist do not undermind the confession of trinitarian faith. It means that Christians are united in theirview of who God is. The Church is one. It also means that whoever does not afree with these basic biblical foundations for the trinitarian faith is, by definition, not a Christian.
---

Before starting these basic propositions, it is important to say a few words about the often-noted fact that the word Trinity is not found in the Bible. Christians ask or are askedwhy, if the word is not in the Bible, do they use it? The answer is simple and has nothing to do with some conspiracy to add something to the Bible that really is not there. The word Trinity is used for theological and practical convenience -- it is 'theologicalshorthand,' a single word that sums up a series of biblical teachings. Instead of repeating the whole series of every time we speak of God, we substitute a single word that summarizes the truth. What, then, are these basic biblical propositions? The basic truth, wich all Christians afree upon, can be expressed in five propositions.

1. There is one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Spirit is God.
5. The Father, Son, and Spirit are distinguishable persons in relationship with one another. They are not merely different names for the one God.

Analogy: Crystals of salt that appear on the beach after the tide has receded may be the most apparent proof that the sea is saltwater, but every bucket of water drawn from the ocean testifies clearly to the fact.

REFERENCES:
- - -
1. There is one God. (Deut. 6:4; I Sam. 2:2; 2Kgs. 19:15; Is. 37:16; 44:8; Mk. 12:28-24; I Cor. 8:4-6; I Tim. 2:5; Jas. 2:19). That the Bible teaches this proposition is not disputed.

2. The Father is God. (Rom. 1:7; I Cor. 1:3; 8:6 15:24; 2 Cor. 1:3; Eph. 4:6; Phil. 4:20). Again, this proposition is seldom disputed.
3. The Son is God. Because this proposition is frequently denied, I give a fuller statement of evidence, but still only scratches the surface.
a. The Son is called God. ( Jn. 1:1; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 1:8).
b. The Son is given divine names. (Jn. 1:1, 18; Acts 5:31; I Cor. 2:8; Jas. 2:1; Rev. 1:8, 21:6; 22:13).
c. The Son has divine attributes.
i. Eternity. (Jn. 1:2; 8:58; 17:5; Rev. 1:8, 17; 22:13).
ii. Immutability. (Heb. 1:11, 12; 13:8).
iii. Omnipresence. (Jn. 3:13; Mt. 18:20; 28:20).
iv. Omniscience. (Mt. 11:27; Jn. 2:23-25; 21:17; Rev. 2:23).
v. Omnipotence. (Jn. 5:17; Heb. 1:3; Rev. 1:8; 11:17).
d. The Son does divine works.
i. Creation. (Jn. 1:3, 10; Col. 1:16-17)
ii. Salvation. (Acts 4:12; 2 Tim. 1:10; Heb. 5:9).
iii. Judgment. (Jn. 5:22; 2 Cor. 5:10; Mt. 25:31-32).
e. The Son is worshipped as God. (Jn. 5:22-23; 20:28; I Cor. 1:2; Phil. 2:9-10; Heb. 1:6).
4. The Spirit is God. Those whose accept the biblical evidence for the deity of the Son seldom have trouble understanding the evidence for the deity of the Spirit.
a. The Spirit is called God. (Acts 5:3-4; 2 Cor. 3:17).
b. The Spirit is given divine names. (Mt. 12:28).
c. The Spirit has divine attributes. (I Cor. 2:13-14; Gal. 5:22; I Tim. 4:1; Heb. 3:7; 9:14; I Jn. 5:6-7).
d. The Spirit does divine works. (Jn. 6:33; 14:17, 26; 16:13; Acts 1:8; 2:17-18; 16:6; Rom. 8:26; 15:19; I Cor. 12:7-11).
e. The Spirit is worshipped as God. (Mt. 12:32).
5. The Father, Son and Spirit are distinguishable persons in relationship with one another. They are not merely different names for one God.
a. The Son prays to the Father. (Jn. 11:41-42; 17; Mt. 26:39 ff)
b. The Father speaks to the Son. (Jn. 12:27-28).
c. The Father, the Son, and the Spirit - all three - appear together, but are clearly distinct from one another. (Mt. 3:16-17).
d. The Father sends the Son and Spirit, and the Son sends the Spirit. (Jn. 3:17; 4:34; 5:30; 6:39; 14:26; 15:26; 16:7)
e. The Father and Son love one another. (Jn. 3:35; 5:20; 10:17; 14:31; 15:9-10; 17:24).

The Trinity and Logic
- - -
Though it is clearly the teaching of the Bible, cultic groups and atheists often complain that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is a contradiction. How can there be one God and at the same time three who are called God? Christians seem to be saying that 1+1+1=1. This is simply bad arithmetic, we are told, not profound theology. The fact is, however, that the doctrine of the Trinity neither involves nor implies a contradiction. How, then, does a Christian explain that God is both one and three at the same time? The answer, in part, is that He is not one in precisely the same way that He is three. Trinitarianism would be a contradiction if it affirmed that God is one and three in precisely the same sense, but no one in the history of the Church has ever taught such a view. All the same, this is only a partial
answer.

There is a very great difference between something being a demonstrated contradiction and something being incomprehensible.

All words besides biblical references from Trinity & Reality An Introduction to the Christian Faith by Ralph A. Smith.

Yes, Heath21. This is this book that I want you to pick up.

Into the discussion I will go deeper into thought and show you what the Trinity is comprised of, and show the logic behind it.

Firstly, you didn't have to mention my name to the public.

I still don't believe in it, God is not 3 different persons

But I don't mind seeing others views on this.

[Kontroll]

Firstly, you didn't have to mention my name to the public.

I still don't believe in it, God is not 3 different persons

But I don't mind seeing others views on this.

You said you believe in God's word. Now I'm showing it to you, and you're openly denying it. Well, I guess there's no more as a Christian I can do for you.

[*.fire*]

I believe there are things beyond our knowledge that we cannot explain, only God can, but what I do know that God, Jesus and the Holy spirit are different and one in the same and in some weird way to know God you first must know Jesus, and to have a relationship we must have the Holy Spirit within us.

Eh, however relevant the above was to the topic.

[Kontroll]

I believe there are things beyond our knowledge that we cannot explain, only God can, but what I do know that God, Jesus and the Holy spirit are different and one in the same and in some weird way to know God you first must know Jesus, and to have a relationship we must have the Holy Spirit within us.

Eh, however relevant the above was to the topic.

Exactly. The Trinity is a mystery and incomprehensible.

[sweetangel2128]

You said you believe in God's word. Now I'm showing it to you, and you're openly denying it. Well, I guess there's no more as a Christian I can do for you.

Yes, I do believe in God's word but the Trinity is not in anyway God's word, it isn't even in the Bible, it is not biblical and it was man-made, not God-made which is why I do not believe in it. So, therefore, it is not God's word.

Jessica, wanted me to tell you this, she is sick and isn't able to come and post this so I am giving you her answer on the whole trinity thing:

"You are underestimating God by believing in the trinity because by believing in it you are saying that God can't be in two or three places at once, that because Jesus was on earth that he can't be God because God would have to be in heaven. You don't understand that we cannot even begin to think like God does, he is on higher thinking level and has powers we can't even begin to comprehend on earth, he is not of this world so we can't think of him as if he is an earthly being. You are saying he is not powerful enough to be on earth and in heaven at the same time. When Jesus prayed to the father, he was praying to the spirit of God which was in him, see Jesus was fully man and fully God, the flesh part of him was totally different then the spirit of him, which was the full God part of him. So his flesh flesh prayed to his spirit, and his flesh said "father why hast thou forsaken me" on the cross, that was his flesh crying out. That's why the bible tells us to fast and pray because fasting, going without food, weakens our flesh and strengthens our spirit, that's why Jesus fasted for 40 days in the desert, he was preparing himself for his death. People who believe in the trinity also believe in getting baptized in the name of the father, son, and holy ghost when the bible tells us after Jesus was ressurected and ascended up to heaven, to get baptized in the name of Jesus only, not in the name of the father son and holy ghost. Acts 2:38 and other scriptures tell us to do it in the name of Jesus, why? Because he is the Father, he is the son, and he is the holy ghost, he sums up all three. The trinitarians, lol, will argue with you about that because Jesus himself told us to get baptized in the name of the father, son, and holy ghost, but after his death and ressurection, we had to get baptized in the name of Jesus because Jesus wasn't going to tell us to get baptized in his name, he wanted us to belieive he was God so that we would eventually realize that we need to pray in his name, get baptized in his name and so on."

[*.fire*]

Proverbs 3:5
Trust in the Lord with all your heart;do not depend on your own understanding.

Wait, this is relevant, let me think why I posted this

[Kontroll]

Yes, I do believe in God's word but the Trinity is not in anyway God's word, it isn't even in the Bible, it is not biblical and it was man-made, not God-made which is why I do not believe in it. So, therefore, it is not God's word.

Jessica, wanted me to tell you this, she is sick and isn't able to come and post this so I am giving you her answer on the whole trinity thing:

"You are underestimating God by believing in the trinity because by believing in it you are saying that God can't be in two or three places at once, that because Jesus was on earth that he can't be God because God would have to be in heaven. You don't understand that we cannot even begin to think like God does, he is on higher thinking level and has powers we can't even begin to comprehend on earth, he is not of this world so we can't think of him as if he is an earthly being. You are saying he is not powerful enough to be on earth and in heaven at the same time. When Jesus prayed to the father, he was praying to the spirit of God which was in him, see Jesus was fully man and fully God, the flesh part of him was totally different then the spirit of him, which was the full God part of him. So his flesh flesh prayed to his spirit, and his flesh said "father why hast thou forsaken me" on the cross, that was his flesh crying out. That's why the bible tells us to fast and pray because fasting, going without food, weakens our flesh and strengthens our spirit, that's why Jesus fasted for 40 days in the desert, he was preparing himself for his death. People who believe in the trinity also believe in getting baptized in the name of the father, son, and holy ghost when the bible tells us after Jesus was ressurected and ascended up to heaven, to get baptized in the name of Jesus only, not in the name of the father son and holy ghost. Acts 2:38 and other scriptures tell us to do it in the name of Jesus, why? Because he is the Father, he is the son, and he is the holy ghost, he sums up all three. The trinitarians, lol, will argue with you about that because Jesus himself told us to get baptized in the name of the father, son, and holy ghost, but after his death and ressurection, we had to get baptized in the name of Jesus because Jesus wasn't going to tell us to get baptized in his name, he wanted us to belieive he was God so that we would eventually realize that we need to pray in his name, get baptized in his name and so on."

It's just theological shorthand to describe God. That's all. I know it's man made. That's all I'm trying to say.

- - -

Personhood and Harmony
- - -
The implications of the doctrine of the Trinity are far-reaching and deep. How could it be otherwise? God is the infinite, incomprehensible, transcendent Lord. He is also the Father, who is always near us. When we consider the implications of trinitarianism, we are meditating on who He is and how He reveals Himself to us. Because of His majesty and greatness, we are too confronted with mystery -- but the mystery is neither dark nor foggy. It is the radiant luster of God's light that overwhelms us. The Christian God is a mystery to us but not to Himself. The Persons of the Trinity have an absolute knowledge of one another. In the mind of God, truth is an entirely rational and perfect system, for God cannot contradict Himself (2 Tim. 2:13; Tit. 1:2; Jas. 1:13, 17).

A Personal God and a Personal World
- - -
Of all the gods in all the religions of the world, only the triune God of the Bible is truly and wholly personal. This point is often not recognized, so we will dwell on it briefly. First, consider the non-Christian theism embraced by Jews, and Muslims, the belief in a single god who rules the world. By itself, theism will not suffice to give us a truly personal god, for a god who is utterly and simply one -- a mere monad -- fails to have the qualities we know to be essential to personality. Although an absolute monad, like the god of Islam, is the most exalted non-Christian idea of deity, a monad is a being who is eternally alone -- with one other to love, no other with whom to communicate, and no other with whom to have fellowship. In the case of such a solitary god, love, fellowship, and communication cannot be essential to his being. Indeed, they are no part of the monad at all. But without these qualities it is difficult to imagine that the deity so understood is in any meaningful sense personal. To conceive of a god who does not know love, a god who has never shared, a god for whom a relationship with another is eternally irrelevant, is to conceive of an abstraction, an idea or a thing more than a person.

If, to make his god more personal, a believer in such a deity suggested that his god loved the world after he created it, the result would be a god who changes in time and who needs the world in order to grow into his self realization as a god of love -- a god who becomes personal only with the help of the creation. Suppose one asserted that the monad loved the world from eternity? Then the personality of this deity and his attributes of love would still depend for their existence on the world he created. Creation would be a necessary act of self-becoming. For, unless this deity created the world, he could not realize the love that had been eternally hidden in him, waiting for its time to shine forth.

- - -

This says that God cannot be one being(monad) because that would make him inconsistent and non loving. The fact that God is so uniquely a triune God makes the Christian faith make sense. Without the Trinity we are just another theistic group out there, such as Judaism and Islam.

- - -

All the text that I write here is from the book previously mentioned. I suggest anyone who is interested in the Trinity should pick it up and read it. It's truly a great Christian book, and I hate Christian books...besides the Bible.

[sweetangel2128]

Proverbs 3:5
Trust in the Lord with all your heart;do not depend on your own understanding.

Wait, this is relevant, let me think why I posted this

Exactly. Therefore, study whats in the Bible, do not listen to what is man-made and what others preach. God made his Word pretty darn clear.

[Kontroll]

Exactly. Therefore, study whats in the Bible, do not listen to what is man-made and what others preach. God made his Word pretty darn clear.

That's not what its saying at all. It means don't listen to your own reasonings. Its saying that God is more powerful than you and has perfect knowledge and understanding. We don't.

Read something besides the Bible. Reason with it. If it makes sense and lines up with what the Bible says than it can't be bad.

As I was saying in my last post, God is love. To have love you need some one to love. If God was one being how could He love?

God says that he created man in his own image. Correct? So, if God truly was one being(monad) than we would be created with out love and have no personal attachment to anybody else.

If Muslims and Jews applied their notions of god consistently to their worldview, man's personality, too, would be found to lack ultimate meaning. Things that we rightly regard as essential to man's personhood -- that man speaks, laughs, and loves -- could only be accidental truths at best. Nothing in the deity would correspond to social relations. This raises a question: What would it mean to say that we are created in the image of the lonely monad? If man is thought to be like such a god, what impact would that have, for example, on our notion of the ideal life in this world? Should it be one that lacks these personal qualities or transcends them? What about the idea of heaven? Should man look forward to an eternity of silent self-contemplation?

Think about it. To have a Triune God only makes sense.

If we never listened to anything besides the Bible, how would we know what is what? You obviously learned at least some bits of math, English, history, science... To say that we should only trust God's word is a superficial truth. You can't grasp His word if you have no knowledge of outside influences. That's why alot of Christians need to go through some sort of struggle to understand God's word. They will read something and not understand it. You won't find it in any text books, or anything, but it's something that you need to experience. If God made everything black and white, don't you think that the church would have one set rule of doctrines? The Bible isn't always clear. That's one thing that you need to learn. What else that you need to learn is that you can't be blind in your faith.

[sweetangel2128]

That's not what its saying at all. It means don't listen to your own reasonings. Its saying that God is more powerful than you and has perfect knowledge and understanding. We don't.

Read something besides the Bible. Reason with it. If it makes sense and lines up with what the Bible says than it can't be bad.

It's very clear in what it says, trust the lord - meaning read his word, do not depend upon your own understanding of what you "think" he means, he is very clear in his Word.

Don't assume. I do read other books other then the Bible, Christian books and I love them. But I am going to go off of God's word and God's word only which is the Bible, if a certain thing is not in there, I will not believe in it.

[Kontroll]

It's very clear in what it says, trust the lord - meaning read his word, do not depend upon your own understanding of what you "think" he means, he is very clear in his Word.

Don't assume. I do read other books other then the Bible, Christian books and I love them. But I am going to go off of God's word and God's word only which is the Bible, if a certain thing is not in there, I will not believe in it.

I have a question for you:

The Bible makes it clear that you shall not have sex outside of marriage. What technicality it doesn't imply is that you don't only have to have sex with your spouse. So, knowing that, would you say that the Bible is always clear?

There's a certain code that runs throughout the Bible. It's called the Heptetic code. Starting at a certain point you could a certain number of letters or characters. After you reach that one, you count the same amount again. I think it's every 49 letters or something like that. There is no where in the Bible that mentions God's word having such a unique code to show that God truly did inspire the Bible.

How do you feel about that? Such uncertainties.

This same kind of biblical ignorance is all too present around the topic of homosexuality. Often people who love and trust God's Word have never given careful and prayerful attention to what the Bible does or doesn't say about homosexuality.

For example, many Christians don't know that:

* Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior.
* The Jewish prophets are silent about homosexuality.
* Only six or seven of the Bible's one million verses refer to same-sex behavior in any way -- and none of these verses refer to homosexual orientation as it's understood today.

Most people who are certain they know what the Bible says about homosexuality don't know where the verses that reference same-sex behavior can be found. They haven't read them, let alone studied them carefully. They don't know the original meaning of the words in Hebrew or Greek. And they haven't tried to understand the historical context in which those words were written. Yet the assumption that the Bible condemns homosexuality is passed down from generation to generation with very little personal study or research. The consequences of this misinformation are disastrous, not only for God's gay and lesbian children, but for the entire church.

He's right.

[sweetangel2128]

I have a question for you:

The Bible makes it clear that you shall not have sex outside of marriage. What technicality it doesn't imply is that you don't only have to have sex with your spouse. So, knowing that, would you say that the Bible is always clear?

Yes that is in there and it is clear. It says not to fornicate which is sex before marriage but it also says not to committ adultry which is having sex with another man while being married or having sex with someone else's spouse.

Same sex behavior is mentioned in the Bible, heres the verse:

Leviticus 18:22
Do not lie with a man as one lies
with a woman; that is detestable.

Romans 1:26,27
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.
Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations
with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.
Men committed indecent acts with other men,
and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

1Corinthians 6:9-10
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Ps: This is only three, there are more.

[Kontroll]

Yes that is in there and it is clear. It says not to fornicate which is sex before marriage but it also says not to committ adultry which is having sex with another man while being married or having sex with someone else's spouse.

Same sex behavior is mentioned in the Bible, heres the verse:

Leviticus 18:22
Do not lie with a man as one lies
with a woman; that is detestable.

Romans 1:26,27
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts.
Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations
with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.
Men committed indecent acts with other men,
and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

1Corinthians 6:9-10
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Ps: This is only three, there are more.

I was using it as an example.

[sweetangel2128]

I was using it as an example.

I am making a point, you say that Christians don't understand that Jesus never mentions homosexuality in the Bible when he does, I doubt that was just an example by this line here:

"For example, many Christians don't know that:

* Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior."

[Kontroll]

I am making a point, you say that Christians don't understand that Jesus never mentions homosexuality in the Bible when he does, I doubt that was just an example by this line here:

"For example, many Christians don't know that:

* Jesus says nothing about same-sex behavior."

He doesn't. God talks about homosexuality. Not Jesus.

[sweetangel2128]

He doesn't. God talks about homosexuality. Not Jesus.

God is Jesus - read the Bible it clearly states it.

[Kontroll]

Jesus was a prophet. I gave you a thousand different references that says that Jesus is God's son and apart of the Trinity. It doesn't make sense that Jesus is 100% God. Why would Jesus pray to God in the garden of Gathseminae? However you spell it. Why would Jesus ask God, 'Why has Thou forsaken me?'

It only makes sense to say that Jesus is not 100% God. It's a Trinity. Do I really need to list those references again?

[sweetangel2128]

Jesus was a prophet. I gave you a thousand different references that says that Jesus is God's son and apart of the Trinity. It doesn't make sense that Jesus is 100% God. Why would Jesus pray to God in the garden of Gathseminae? However you spell it. Why would Jesus ask God, 'Why has Thou forsaken me?'

It only makes sense to say that Jesus is not 100% God. It's a Trinity. Do I really need to list those references again?

I also posted you a thing that Jessica said about that, about him praying in the Garden to God - her pastor explained why it is that way and he also explained why the trinity is wrong. Jesus was the messiah, he even claimed in the Bible as being the messiah. Like I said read the word of God, it tells you. I do not need your references to know what the Bible talks about. But thanks for offering

[Kontroll]

I also posted you a thing that Jessica said about that, about him praying in the Garden to God - her pastor explained why it is that way and he also explained why the trinity is wrong. Jesus was the messiah, he even claimed in the Bible as being the messiah. Like I said read the word of God, it tells you. I do not need your references to know what the Bible talks about. But thanks for offering

Oh, so the Bible is clear on all things except Jesus praying to God in the garden. Hmm. That's interesting how you contradict yourself.

[sweetangel2128]

Oh, so the Bible is clear on all things except Jesus praying to God in the garden. Hmm. That's interesting how you contradict yourself.

I never once contradicted myself. I think the whole praying to God thing makes total sense.

Ps: I have a Question for you. You claim that Jesus is not God, if that is so then what do you think this verse means:

John 1: 1-5.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

So, in that verse it's pretty clear they are saying that God created everything and that he is the Word.

Now, look at this verse:

John 1: 10-14.
He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

This last verse shows us that Jesus was in fact God, hence the part of the verse that says - "The Word became flesh" meaning Jesus. This is why the Trinity is false because the Trinity teaches that Jesus is the son of God and is not in fact God but a prophet and that they are all different persons. They are all the same and no different from eachother. As I said, read the Bible, it clearly states that Jesus is God.

[Kontroll]

Ps: I have a Question for you. You claim that Jesus is not God, if that is so then what do you think this verse means:

I never said that Jesus wasn't God. What I am saying is that they are two distinguishable persons in the Trinity. Read this. This might clear things up.

- - -

First, we will take time to consider the truth that what God does in history reaveals who He is in eternity. In part, this isa simple deduction from the fact that God cannot change. He is self-consistent.

In the creation of the world and through His leading in history, God is manifesting Himself.

Second, we will look into the implications of an ancient theological word -- perichoresis in Greek, circumincessio in Latin -- that points to an important aspect of the Trinity. The theological terms are technical, but the truth expressed is straightforward: each of the Persons of the Trinity dwells in the others. This comes to expression most frequently in the Godpel of John, where our Lord repeatedly says that He is 'in the Father' and the Father is 'in' Him.

The incomprehensible depth and transparent clarity of GOd's self-revelation are united in the revelation that He has given to us in His Son.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth...
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. (Jn. 1:14, 18)

Is there a biblical word that sums up God's self-revelation in history? No doubt there is more than one perspective from which to view the subject, but the most frequent employed biblical device for structuring history is the covenant. From the Garden of Eden to the end of the world, God establishes covenants that define His relationship with man, and He never relates to man apart from a covenant. This raises the question about God Himself: Do these covenants reveal God's nature? The answer to that question is given, in part, in the fact that the relationship between the Father and the Son embraces all the elements of the biblical idea of covenant and reveals most deeply its meaning.

The Elements of a Covenant
- - -
Though God reveals Himself in all of His works throughout history, it is appropriate to begin with His glorious manifestation of Himself in Christ, for only in the light of the knowledge of Christ can we grasp, for what it truly is, everything else God has done in history. Jesus is the center of our calendar because He is the center of all. In the Bible the centrality of Christ is seen in the fact that the entire Old Testament era is spent waiting for the coming of the Messiah, with the prophets declaring various aspects of His saving work and proclaiming the glories of His reign and the histories foreshadowing His person and work. From the fall of Adam onward, the whole of biblical revelation is focused on the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15).

Hierarchy
- - -
When we consider the gospel accounts, especially the Gospel of John, another aspect of God's self-revelation through the incarnation of Christ becomes clear. One of the most frequently repeated themes in the Gospels is that the Father sent the Son into the world (Mt. 10:40; 15:24; Mk. 9:37; Lk. 4:43; 9:48; 10:16; Jn. 3:17; 4:34; 5:23, 24, 30, 36, 37; 6:29, 38, 39, 40; 7:16, 18; and others). This fact has a number of significant implications, but one of the most simple and obvious is that there is a hierarchy within the Trinity. The Father sends the Son. The Son submits to the Father's will. In the words of Jesus, "And He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things that please Him" (Jn. 8:29). Of course, the very name Father and Son imply the hierarchical relationship, expressed so frequently in the Gospels as Jesus' obedience to the Father His seeking the Father's honor and glory. Though it is not emphasized, the same relationship can be seen between the Spirit and the Son, for the Son, together with the Father, sends the Spirit, and the Spirit glorifies the Son (Jn. 15:26; 16:7, 14).

Hierarchy in relationship means that the Father is greater than the Son in His office only, not in His being. The Father sends the Son, but the Son does not send the Father. The Father and the Son send the Spirit, but the Spirit does not send the Father and the Son. The official hierarchy of the Persons if their eternal relationship. It does not imply that the Son is less powerful or that He does not fully share the omniscience of the Father. On the contrary, the Son and the Holy Spirit possess all the attributes of GOd to the same infinite degree as the Father. The Persons of the Trinity are equal in their being but different in their personhood, existing in a hierarchy of Father, Son, and Spirit.

[sweetangel2128]

It's clear that you have stated that he isn't God, read what you have said....

He doesn't. God talks about homosexuality. Not Jesus.

If you don't say that Jesus isn't God, then what is this?

Jesus was a prophet. I gave you a thousand different references that says that Jesus is God's son and apart of the Trinity. It doesn't make sense that Jesus is 100% God.

????

[*Uronacid*]

Omg, Heath21.. I don't know what to tell you. The Trinity is a contradiction that no-one could ever possibly understand. Each member is individual and part of God at that same exact time. It's another contradiction in the Bible that clearly exists. You just have to have faith that God is powerful enough to make such a contradiction possible.

[sweetangel2128]

Omg.

That term is a sin against one of God's 10 commandments. Do NOT use the Lord's name in vain. Read the 10 commandments.

[Simba]

That term is a sin against one of God's 10 commandments. Do NOT use the Lord's name in vain. Read the 10 commandments.

"Omg" does not necessarily include God's name in vein, so don't jump on him for that...

[kimmytree]

That term is a sin against one of God's 10 commandments. Do NOT use the Lord's name in vain. Read the 10 commandments.

Are you serious?

[sweetangel2128]

"Omg" does not necessarily include God's name in vein, so don't jump on him for that...

Yes it is.

Are you serious?

Actually, yes I am.

[Simba]

Yes it is.

You know what, I would rather not debate on that.

[sweetangel2128]

You know what, I would rather not debate on that.

I'm just pointing out to a fellow Christian that that term is a use in God's name in a bad way. I am not saying I don't do it but I do regret it afterwards. Anytime you use it in that way or with a curse word it's taking his name in Vain.

[kimmytree]

^ Yeah, it might be bad for a Christian to say, but what about for someone who isnt a Christian?

Its just like being Hindu and not eating pork. But that doesnt mean a non - Hindu cant eat pork. Okay weird analogy. Sorry.

[sweetangel2128]

^ Yeah, it might be bad for a Christian to say, but what about for someone who isnt a Christian?

It's still bad to anyone who takes his name in vain and in the end you will be punished for it. When I said to a fellow Christian what I mean is it's even worse if you claim your Christian and commit deliberate sin.

[Simba]

So I suppose you're basically saying that although you may not know about something, it will still affect you.

[sweetangel2128]

So I suppose you're basically saying that although you may not know about something, it will still affect you.

Well, no I'm saying if you know something and still deliberately do it it will affect you. I am just making sure another person knows it so they don't repeat it deliberately especially if they are Christian, it can ruin there walk with God.

[Kontroll]

Omg, Heath21.. I don't know what to tell you. The Trinity is a contradiction that no-one could ever possibly understand. Each member is individual and part of God at that same exact time. It's another contradiction in the Bible that clearly exists. You just have to have faith that God is powerful enough to make such a contradiction possible.

It's not a contradiction. Did you not read what I put? God cannot contradict Himself.

The Trinity is not a contradiction, but rather incomprehensible.

[sweetangel2128]

It's not a contradiction. Did you not read what I put? God cannot contradict Himself.

The Trinity is not a contradiction, but rather incomprehensible.

Your right God can't contradict himself but you got to remember the Trinity isn't biblical as I have said many many many times. I do not mean this in a rude way but it's sad that so many people are taught the trinity is a good thing when it isn't even in the Bible.

[Kontroll]

The term Trinity is not in the Bible, and we have heard you the first time.

The term Trinity is only used to describe God's attributes. Instead of saying that:

1. There is one God.
2. The Father is God.
3. The Son is God.
4. The Spirit is God.
5. The Father, Son, and Spirit are distinguishable persons in relationship with one another. They are not merely different names for the one God.

That's all the Trinity means.

God is only different in His personhoods not His being. There are three personhoods. The Father, the Son, and the Spirit. They are distinguishable personhoods within one God. It's littered all over the New Testament. I've put over fifty references that prove this.

Now, what you have to determine is...

What defines a personhood? Is it a literal person, or an office? Well, considering we have a Triune God who is one, it could not possible mean that there are three people because that would mean that we would have a Polytheistic faith. Considering Christianity falls under a monotheistic faith, something must tell us that God is one.

We both agree that God is one being. True? What you don't believe is that God holds different offices within the Trinity.

Christianity, all of it, believes we have one God. But a monadic God is a wrong belief. Without the Trinity there would be no love, no covenants, no relationships...just solitude among the many.

[sweetangel2128]

The term Trinity is not in the Bible, and we have heard you the first time.

Here's why it is wrong:

The trinity is a MANMADE concept. Absolutely NO biblical basis.

It violates the following 3 verses.

Deuteronomy 4:2 (New International Version)

2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.

Deuteronomy 12:32 (New International Version)

32 See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.


Proverbs 30:6 (New International Version)

6 Do not add to his words,
or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

So, by the verses I have given you it is saying to not add to his bible (his word) or take things out of it or you'll be punished. By believing the trinity you are adding to his word because the trinity is not biblical.

[Kontroll]

Here's why it is wrong:

The trinity is a MANMADE concept. Absolutely NO biblical basis.

It violates the following 3 verses.

Deuteronomy 4:2 (New International Version)

2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.

Deuteronomy 12:32 (New International Version)

32 See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.
Proverbs 30:6 (New International Version)

6 Do not add to his words,
or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

So, by the verses I have given you it is saying to not add to his bible (his word) or take things out of it or you'll be punished. By believing the trinity you are adding to his word because the trinity is not biblical.

Ha ha. I'm not adding Trinity to the Bible. Like I said....It's BIBLICAL SHORTHAND! What about that don't you understand?!?!?!?!

You said not too long ago that you believe that God created the world and evolution took over after that creating new species. What about that is correct according to your logic that nothing should be added or taken from the Bible?

And when it states that nothing should be added or taken away, it's talking about chapters and books in whole. For instance, the Catholic Bible has extra books added to it.

And also, the New Internation Version is very unreliable. The King James version is the best because you can study it. Find literal translations in Hebrew and Greek from it, unlike the New Internation Version. I recommend you picking one up, or if you have one, start reading that. It's not that hard to understand.

John 11:41 - Jesus speaks to the Father.
Then they took away the stone [from the place] where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up [his] eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.

Matthew 3:16-17 - The Father, the Son, and the Spirit - all three - appear together, but are clearly distinct from one another.
The Father, the Son, and the Spirit - all three - appear together, but are clearly distinct from one another.

And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

So according to Matthew 3:17, if Jesus is God, then who is speaking from Heaven? Clearly not God if God is one person.

[sweetangel2128]

Ha ha. I'm not adding Trinity to the Bible. Like I said....It's BIBLICAL SHORTHAND! What about that don't you understand?!?!?!?!

You said not too long ago that you believe that God created the world and evolution took over after that creating new species. What about that is correct according to your logic that nothing should be added or taken from the Bible?

And when it states that nothing should be added or taken away, it's talking about chapters and books in whole. For instance, the Catholic Bible has extra books added to it.

And also, the New Internation Version is very unreliable. The King James version is the best because you can study it. Find literal translations in Hebrew and Greek from it, unlike the New Internation Version. I recommend you picking one up, or if you have one, start reading that. It's not that hard to understand.

John 11:41 - Jesus speaks to the Father.
Then they took away the stone [from the place] where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up [his] eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.

Matthew 3:16-17 - The Father, the Son, and the Spirit - all three - appear together, but are clearly distinct from one another.
The Father, the Son, and the Spirit - all three - appear together, but are clearly distinct from one another.

And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

So according to Matthew 3:17, if Jesus is God, then who is speaking from Heaven? Clearly not God if God is one person.

Yes, you ARE adding the Trinity to the Bible since it's not in the Bible therefore your adding to God's word. When he said that he didn't just mean "adding books" but "adding" anything in GENERAL. If it's not in the Bible and your adding it, it's adding to his word. I'm sorry you don't believe that, but it's true.

Evolution in the sense I was talking is the creation of species over generations (meaning over time), I don't know if it talks about that type of Evolution in the Bible but we know it's fact because it's all around us and has happend but the Trinity is totally different and you cannot compare the two.

As for the New International version, it is just as reliable as the King James Version, it is easier to understand because it is in our "terms" to help us better understand it. I have both the New International version and the King James version. I guess I'll have to repeat the verses I gave you only using the King James version, as you can see theres not much of a difference:

Deuteronomy 4:2 (King James version):
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32 (King James version):
What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Proverbs 30:6 (King James version):
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thu be found a liar.

So, as you can see the verses in both Bibles are VERY clear on what they trying to say.

Now, heres your verses you gave me coming from the King James version:

John 11:41 (King James version):
Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou has heard me.

"He was thanking his spirit for hearing him, afterall he is God in the flesh".

Matthew 3:16-17 (King James version):
The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up. From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

"God can be in 2 or 3 places at once, you cannot Question his powers because they are not of this world. In this verse he is telling HIS creation how to get to Heaven so that all can be saved."

As I have stated to you many times and even have given you verses proving it, Jesus is God, the Bible clearly states this. Let me give you those verses again only this time in the King James version of the Bible. Here ya go:

John 1:1-5 (King James version):
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

(As you can see the verse states that the Word is God and that he created everything. It also states that he was in fact Jesus by saying "In him was life; and the life was the light of men, Jesus was the light, the light is God").

John 1:10-14 (King James version):
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not, He came unto his own and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

(This verse tells us that the Word=God came to the world in the "flesh" as Jesus..meaning Jesus is God.)

Ps: It's VERY easy to understand. Just read both verses CAREFULLY. And the verses you have given me clearly state NOTHING absolutely NOTHING about the Trinity. I looked up the verses myself.

[Kontroll]

Yes, you ARE adding the Trinity to the Bible since it's not in the Bible therefore your adding to God's word. When he said that he didn't just mean "adding books" but "adding" anything in GENERAL. If it's not in the Bible and your adding it, it's adding to his word. I'm sorry you don't believe that, but it's true.

Evolution in the sense I was talking is the creation of species over generations (meaning over time), I don't know if it talks about that type of Evolution in the Bible but we know it's fact because it's all around us and has happend but the Trinity is totally different and you cannot compare the two.

As for the New International version, it is just as reliable as the King James Version, it is easier to understand because it is in our "terms" to help us better understand it. I have both the New International version and the King James version. I guess I'll have to repeat the verses I gave you only using the King James version, as you can see theres not much of a difference:

Deuteronomy 4:2 (King James version):
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32 (King James version):
What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Proverbs 30:6 (King James version):
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thu be found a liar.

So, as you can see the verses in both Bibles are VERY clear on what they trying to say.

Now, heres your verses you gave me coming from the King James version:

John 11:41 (King James version):
Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou has heard me.

"He was thanking his spirit for hearing him, afterall he is God in the flesh".

Matthew 3:16-17 (King James version):
The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up. From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

"God can be in 2 or 3 places at once, you cannot Question his powers because they are not of this world. In this verse he is telling HIS creation how to get to Heaven so that all can be saved."

As I have stated to you many times and even have given you verses proving it, Jesus is God, the Bible clearly states this. Let me give you those verses again only this time in the King James version of the Bible. Here ya go:

John 1:1-5 (King James version):
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

(As you can see the verse states that the Word is God and that he created everything. It also states that he was in fact Jesus by saying "In him was life; and the life was the light of men, Jesus was the light, the light is God").

John 1:10-14 (King James version):
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not, He came unto his own and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

(This verse tells us that the Word=God came to the world in the "flesh" as Jesus..meaning Jesus is God.)

Ps: It's VERY easy to understand. Just read both verses CAREFULLY. And the verses you have given me clearly state NOTHING absolutely NOTHING about the Trinity. I looked up the verses myself.

Oh, my God, you really aren't realizing that the term trinity is not substituted for anything in the Bible. It's just a word that theologians use to describe God's attributes. That's it.

I know what you meant earlier about not adding anything. But, did you even bother to read the passages I showed you?

You really are getting on my nerves because this is either completely going over your head, or you're just down right denying it.

Duet. 6:4 - One God
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD:

Rom. 1:7 - The Father is God
To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called [to be] saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Tit. 2:13 - Jesus is God
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

2 Cor. 3:17 - The Holy Spirit is God
Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty.

All three are God.

You can't argue with the Bible. There's no where in the Bible that says that God is one being.

[sweetangel2128]

Oh, my God, you really aren't realizing that the term trinity is not substituted for anything in the Bible. It's just a word that theologians use to describe God's attributes. That's it.

I know what you meant earlier about not adding anything. But, did you even bother to read the passages I showed you?

You really are getting on my nerves because this is either completely going over your head, or you're just down right denying it.

Duet. 6:4 - One God
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD:

Rom. 1:7 - The Father is God
To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called [to be] saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Tit. 2:13 - Jesus is God
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

2 Cor. 3:17 - The Holy Spirit is God
Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty.

All three are God.

You can't argue with the Bible. There's no where in the Bible that says that God is one being.

I read them quite well obviously since I listed the same verses you did from the King James version. Exactly my point...if it's not in the Bible and your preaching it as being true, your adding to it. If the trinity were in fact God's word, it would be in the Bible but it isn't. The things you listed yes are very true and I do not deny those but those are not the trinity. As I have said a million times...the trinity believes that God is three "persons" which is why it is false because God is one being and has clearly stated that in the Bible you are just not reading it right.

When the Bible describes God do they say "them" no they don't..they say "Him" therefore there is ONLY one being.

It's called denying it because it's not the word of God, you should be denying it too.

[Kontroll]

I read them quite well obviously since I listed the same verses you did from the King James version. Exactly my point...if it's not in the Bible and your preaching it as being true, your adding to it. If the trinity were in fact God's word, it would be in the Bible but it isn't. The things you listed yes are very true and I do not deny those but those are not the trinity. As I have said a million times...the trinity believes that God is three "persons" which is why it is false because God is one being and has clearly stated that in the Bible you are just not reading it right.

When the Bible describes God do they say "them" no they don't..they say "Him" therefore there is ONLY one being.

It's called denying it because it's not the word of God, you should be denying it too.

Again, you're wrong. I'm sorry, I just found the verse that disproves that the Bible only refers to God in the singular.

Gen 1:26 - And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Now, there's absolutely no way you can interpret that differently, because you said that the Bible is clear in its meaning. This verse alone proves that there is a distinct characteristic to our God. He is not only one being, but three personhoods in one.

[sweetangel2128]

Again, you're wrong. I'm sorry, I just found the verse that disproves that the Bible only refers to God in the singular.

Gen 1:26 - And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Now, there's absolutely no way you can interpret that differently, because you said that the Bible is clear in its meaning. This verse alone proves that there is a distinct characteristic to our God. He is not only one being, but three personhoods in one.

True. I'll have to answer that one tomorrow since I have to get up early and need sleep and can't think straight. But read verse 27 in that same chapter.

Gen 1:27.
So God created human beings in his own image.
In the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

It is claiming in that verse that there is one being.

[Kontroll]

True. I'll have to answer that one tomorrow since I have to get up early and need sleep and can't think straight. But read verse 27 in that same chapter.

Gen 1:27.
So God created human beings in [b]his own image.
In the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

It is claiming in that verse that there is one being.

So, then the Bible would have a contradiction. But, as you know the Bible doesn't contradict itself because it is the inspired word of God who is infallible.

How can you ignore what I just told you? The Bible clearly states that God said 'Let us make man in our image.' Seriously, if you're going to deny that, then I'm done. You're just too stubborn to even talk to. I'm giving you Biblical scripture that proves God's triune characteristic and you're just denying it. Biblical evidence, none the less. What kind of Christian does that make you if you're denying the Bible? It makes you inconsistent.

If God didn't feel that it was important it wouldn't be in the Bible.

So, it's just up to you to accept the truth.

2 Cor 13.14: May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. [Notice the source of blessing has 'expanded' to a trinitarian source!]

Rom 1.7 (and 2 Cor 1.2, 1 Cor 1.3, Eph 1.2, Phil 1.2): Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. (Notice the double source of grace/peace)

Eph 6.23: Peace to the brothers, and love with faith from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (Notice: dual source)

2 Cor 1.3-4: Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort (Note: single-source, the Father)

Gal 1.3: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. (Notice: dual-source)

The baptismal "formula"--Mt 28.19: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Notice: this is an explicit statement of three-in-one: it is ONE 'Name', but THREE agents! This linking of the Son with the divine names of God and Holy Spirit is quite a statement!)

Faithful saying -- Tit 3.4-7: But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. 8 This is a trustworthy saying. (Notice: this saying is VERY trinitarian--with all three agents playing separate roles in the redemptive process--with echoes of John 14-17! Notice also that 'God our Savior' and 'Jesus Christ our Savior' are in this passage together, and that the Holy Spirit is responsible for our renewal.)

Also, as to your argument... Gen. 1:27 is only referring to God in the singular tense. The Bible tends to vary on the plurality and singularity of God. But if it mentions that God a plural being then it must be so. Even if the Bible states that man was created in His image.

[sweetangel2128]

So, then the Bible would have a contradiction. But, as you know the Bible doesn't contradict itself because it is the inspired word of God who is infallible.

How can you ignore what I just told you? The Bible clearly states that God said 'Let us make man in our image.' Seriously, if you're going to deny that, then I'm done. You're just too stubborn to even talk to. I'm giving you Biblical scripture that proves God's triune characteristic and you're just denying it. Biblical evidence, none the less. What kind of Christian does that make you if you're denying the Bible? It makes you inconsistent.

If God didn't feel that it was important it wouldn't be in the Bible.

So, it's just up to you to accept the truth.

2 Cor 13.14: May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. [Notice the source of blessing has 'expanded' to a trinitarian source!]

Rom 1.7 (and 2 Cor 1.2, 1 Cor 1.3, Eph 1.2, Phil 1.2): Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. (Notice the double source of grace/peace)

Eph 6.23: Peace to the brothers, and love with faith from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (Notice: dual source)

2 Cor 1.3-4: Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort (Note: single-source, the Father)

Gal 1.3: Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, 5 to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. (Notice: dual-source)

The baptismal "formula"--Mt 28.19: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Notice: this is an explicit statement of three-in-one: it is ONE 'Name', but THREE agents! This linking of the Son with the divine names of God and Holy Spirit is quite a statement!)

Faithful saying -- Tit 3.4-7: But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. 8 This is a trustworthy saying. (Notice: this saying is VERY trinitarian--with all three agents playing separate roles in the redemptive process--with echoes of John 14-17! Notice also that 'God our Savior' and 'Jesus Christ our Savior' are in this passage together, and that the Holy Spirit is responsible for our renewal.)

Also, as to your argument... Gen. 1:27 is only referring to God in the singular tense. The Bible tends to vary on the plurality and singularity of God. But if it mentions that God a plural being then it must be so. Even if the Bible states that man was created in His image.

I get what your saying and I believe that God is all of those things but all them are part of "him". As I have repeated over & over the Trinity teaches that all 3 are different persons which I do not believe. You are not going to go up to Heaven and see 3 persons on the throne, you will see Jesus and only Jesus. What you believe in IS NOT the trinity if your calling those 3 things Characteristics because the Trinity clearly states 3 PERSONS.

You can bad mouth me all you want, call me stubborn or whatever but in the end you will find out the truth.

This is what I believe:

God is all of those (father, son & holy spirit) but they are NOT persons, God is an entity, he is our father, son is him in the flesh and the holy spirit is his presence.

[Kontroll]

I get what your saying and I believe that God is all of those things but all them are part of "him". As I have repeated over & over the Trinity teaches that all 3 are different persons which I do not believe. You are not going to go up to Heaven and see 3 persons on the throne, you will see Jesus and only Jesus. What you believe in IS NOT the trinity if your calling those 3 things Characteristics because the Trinity clearly states 3 PERSONS.

You can bad mouth me all you want, call me stubborn or whatever but in the end you will find out the truth.

This is what I believe:

God is all of those (father, son & holy spirit) but they are NOT persons, God is an entity, he is our father, son is him in the flesh and the holy spirit is his presence.

If you said that when I go up to Heaven all I will see is Jesus. Why wouldn't I see the other two?

First of all... the Trinity is incomprehensibly three personhoods in one God. That's why you see different names all over the Bible. If it was a monad, that wouldn't be so. But considering God's 'multi-personality' is so unique, we have a Trinity.

I'm really not trying to bad mouth you. I'm sorry, I just get excited.

But, we you have evidence for something and some one doesn't believe it, you have to wonder...are you just not believing it because they don't understand, or because they are openly denying it?

I know that if you knew the truth you wouldn't deny it. You don't seem like that kind of person.

So, I agree with you that there is one God. But God can't only be one sided or else we wouldn't have love or relationships, because it would make God inconsistence. His creation would have to sustain Him and that would make Him all less than perfect. So, by having a three sided God who throughout eternity has had a relationship within His three sides it makes creation logical.

Does that make more sense? I believe God is one. But the Trinity is such a mystery that we'll never be able to define it 100 percent correctly.

[sweetangel2128]

If you said that when I go up to Heaven all I will see is Jesus. Why wouldn't I see the other two?

First of all... the Trinity is incomprehensibly three personhoods in one God. That's why you see different names all over the Bible. If it was a monad, that wouldn't be so. But considering God's 'multi-personality' is so unique, we have a Trinity.

I'm really not trying to bad mouth you. I'm sorry, I just get excited.

But, we you have evidence for something and some one doesn't believe it, you have to wonder...are you just not believing it because they don't understand, or because they are openly denying it?

I know that if you knew the truth you wouldn't deny it. You don't seem like that kind of person.

So, I agree with you that there is one God. But God can't only be one sided or else we wouldn't have love or relationships, because it would make God inconsistence. His creation would have to sustain Him and that would make Him all less than perfect. So, by having a three sided God who throughout eternity has had a relationship within His three sides it makes creation logical.

Does that make more sense? I believe God is one. But the Trinity is such a mystery that we'll never be able to define it 100 percent correctly.

You are not going to see those because they are not visible to see, they are more like personalities of God. Kinda like me and you we have certain personalities that make us up right? Well so does he, he's the father the creator of all things, Jesus is him in the flesh (but in fact him) and the holy spirit is his presence or spirit/soul. So, why would you see those 2 other things if they are not human but describing a certain part of him? That's why I don't believe in the Trinity, they teach that there are 3 persons that make him and that when you die you will see 3 persons in Heaven which is false. You will only see one Jesus who is in fact God.

No, you see different names all over the Bible because it's describing different parts of "him". the Father is mentioned because he is "our" Father, he created us, The Holy Spirit/Ghost are mentioned because in order to REALLY feel God and to allow him to speak through you you must get the Holy Ghost which is his Spirit. It is not mentioning them as being seperate persons.

I understand your not, I was just tired and getting frustrated because I was trying to explain something to you that was I thought very simple and you weren't understanding me lol.

You see, now don't get me wrong I am not claiming to be a know it all but I do know the Truth and many maybe not on these boards but many other people who are Christian would agree with me on the Trinity and why it's so wrong. If God is 3 different persons, how come most of the time it says: "him" or "he" and not "them"....or when Jesus came down from Heaven...how come not all 3 or at least one of the others come down as persons? Or how come the Bible doesn't specificially talk about them being "persons"?

How is him not having 3 different persons meaning we can't love in relationships? That makes absolutely no sense. We know love cause God is love and since he's all-powerful he can be anywhere he wants to be and be in two or more places at once. God has different Characteristics to him but he isn't 3 different persons as the Trinity teaches. If you look on the internet you will find EVERY site basically say that the Trinity consists of three persons not three Characteristics.

As for the verse you had found last night and this is just a guess but when he said "our" I believe he wasn't talking to 3 persons but himself...the reason he used "our" is because he was talking to his spirit and himself in general and the father which is in him. Because if there are 3 persons I don't think the other verses would say "him" or "he" all over it, it would be "them".

[kimmytree]

Evolution in the sense I was talking is the creation of species over generations (meaning over time), I don't know if it talks about that type of Evolution in the Bible

That's the same thing as adding to the Bible. The Bible says nothing about a creation of species over time, or anything close to that... at least in Genesis it doesnt. If it does, I'd love to see a verse.

but we know it's fact because it's all around us and has happend but the Trinity is totally different and you cannot compare the two.

So you believe the creation of species over time is a fact? Even though its not in the Bible? That IS adding to God's word. So you believe one thing scientists have come up with / discovered, but you dont believe the other half?

[Kontroll]

You are not going to see those because they are not visible to see, they are more like personalities of God. Kinda like me and you we have certain personalities that make us up right? Well so does he, he's the father the creator of all things, Jesus is him in the flesh (but in fact him) and the holy spirit is his presence or spirit/soul. So, why would you see those 2 other things if they are not human but describing a certain part of him? That's why I don't believe in the Trinity, they teach that there are 3 persons that make him and that when you die you will see 3 persons in Heaven which is false. You will only see one Jesus who is in fact God.

No, you see different names all over the Bible because it's describing different parts of "him". the Father is mentioned because he is "our" Father, he created us, The Holy Spirit/Ghost are mentioned because in order to REALLY feel God and to allow him to speak through you you must get the Holy Ghost which is his Spirit. It is not mentioning them as being seperate persons.

I understand your not, I was just tired and getting frustrated because I was trying to explain something to you that was I thought very simple and you weren't understanding me lol.

You see, now don't get me wrong I am not claiming to be a know it all but I do know the Truth and many maybe not on these boards but many other people who are Christian would agree with me on the Trinity and why it's so wrong. If God is 3 different persons, how come most of the time it says: "him" or "he" and not "them"....or when Jesus came down from Heaven...how come not all 3 or at least one of the others come down as persons? Or how come the Bible doesn't specificially talk about them being "persons"?

How is him not having 3 different persons meaning we can't love in relationships? That makes absolutely no sense. We know love cause God is love and since he's all-powerful he can be anywhere he wants to be and be in two or more places at once. God has different Characteristics to him but he isn't 3 different persons as the Trinity teaches. If you look on the internet you will find EVERY site basically say that the Trinity consists of three persons not three Characteristics.

As for the verse you had found last night and this is just a guess but when he said "our" I believe he wasn't talking to 3 persons but himself...the reason he used "our" is because he was talking to his spirit and himself in general and the father which is in him. Because if there are 3 persons I don't think the other verses would say "him" or "he" all over it, it would be "them".

EXACTLY. God is one being, but has three personhoods. It's sort of an enigma. You're right about the personalities. Exactly right. That's really what I've been trying to say. Personhoods refers to Him being called Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. That's what the Trinity speaks of.

A man made word [Trinity] refers to exactly that. God's attributes.

Like I've said.

1. God is one being.
2. The Father is God.
3. Jesus is God.
4. The Spirit is God.
5. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinguishable persons [Personalities] but all apart of the same being.

If the Bible mentions the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit it must be true to a Christian.

I really can't tell you why God is referenced in the Bible mostly as He or Him, probably because he is one being with three different personhoods.

But, the fact that God mentions to us firstly that He is plural must be true that there is more than one absolute personality than just The Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit.

As for God speaking to two different people when referencing Gen. 1:26, I don't think that is right, because if God was speaking to angels, which would probably be the case if that were true, we would not be made in the image of God. We would be made in the image of angels.

There's a distinction between angels and humans. Angels don't have free will and humans do. Angels are singular beings and God is triune in the sense that He possesses three different offices and personhoods [personalities].

That's really what I'm trying to say.

One God...three different personhoods [Personalities]. If it was more than one god, then our religion would be categorized wrongly. Christianity is a monotheistic religion.

[sweetangel2128]

That's the same thing as adding to the Bible. The Bible says nothing about a creation of species over time, or anything close to that... at least in Genesis it doesnt. If it does, I'd love to see a verse.

So you believe the creation of species over time is a fact? Even though its not in the Bible? That IS adding to God's word. So you believe one thing scientists have come up with / discovered, but you dont believe the other half?

No, it's not. Adding to God's Word is taking and putting something into it trying to say that God says it's true. What I am saying is that we know Evolution in that sense is true because we see it happening. Look around you, we have evolved just not in the sense most people think. There is more than one type of evolution.

For one Scientists have not discovered the Bible to be false so you can't really use that as your defense. I believe that evolution over time is possible because you can see it happening all around you...and I dont mean evolution as in creation of the planet or the fact that 2 animals mate and come out with something totally different from eachother but evolution meaning our height has changed over years, ummm there are certain species within the same specie but somewhat different from the original...evolution in that sence. We have evolved in general.

The Trinity is not all around us and is false teachings. Which is why it's adding to God's Word.

EXACTLY. God is one being, but has three personhoods. It's sort of an enigma. You're right about the personalities. Exactly right. That's really what I've been trying to say. Personhoods refers to Him being called Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. That's what the Trinity speaks of.

A man made word [Trinity] refers to exactly that. God's attributes.

Like I've said.

1. God is one being.
2. The Father is God.
3. Jesus is God.
4. The Spirit is God.
5. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are distinguishable persons [Personalities] but all apart of the same being.

If the Bible mentions the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit it must be true to a Christian.

I really can't tell you why God is referenced in the Bible mostly as He or Him, probably because he is one being with three different personhoods.

But, the fact that God mentions to us firstly that He is plural must be true that there is more than one absolute personality than just The Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit.

As for God speaking to two different people when referencing Gen. 1:26, I don't think that is right, because if God was speaking to angels, which would probably be the case if that were true, we would not be made in the image of God. We would be made in the image of angels.

There's a distinction between angels and humans. Angels don't have free will and humans do. Angels are singular beings and God is triune in the sense that He possesses three different offices and personhoods [personalities].

That's really what I'm trying to say.

One God...three different personhoods [Personalities]. If it was more than one god, then our religion would be categorized wrongly. Christianity is a monotheistic religion.

Yeah it sounds like we believe in the same thing. But what I am trying to point out to you that what your telling me you believe, based off of that, it's not the Trinity, the Trinity is something totally different. If you want me to I can email my old pastor and then send you what he says about the Trinity.

[kimmytree]

For one Scientists have not discovered the Bible to be false so you can't really use that as your defense. I believe that evolution over time is possible because you can see it happening all around you...and I dont mean evolution as in creation of the planet or the fact that 2 animals mate and come out with something totally different from eachother but evolution meaning our height has changed over years, ummm there are certain species within the same specie but somewhat different from the original...evolution in that sence. We have evolved in general.

That doesnt really seem like evolution at all. Isnt that more of variation within a kind?

No, it's not. Adding to God's Word is taking and putting something into it trying to say that God says it's true. What I am saying is that we know Evolution in that sense is true because we see it happening. Look around you, we have evolved just not in the sense most people think. There is more than one type of evolution.

But still, how is someone believing in the Trinity any different than partially believing in Evolution?

Yeah it sounds like we believe in the same thing. But what I am trying to point out to you that what your telling me you believe, based off of that, it's not the Trinity, the Trinity is something totally different. If you want me to I can email my old pastor and then send you what he says about the Trinity.

Just because your Pastor says one thing doesnt mean its true. Every Pastor is going to say something different.

[Kontroll]

The Trinity: In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity states that God is one being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three persons: the Father, the Son (incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth), and the Holy Spirit.

If you believe in evolution you are contradicting yourself Heath. Evolution is not something that is observable. Therefore just a theory.

Evolution actually doesn't make sense because it violates natural laws. One for instance is the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which states that everything is heading towards entropy [disorder within a system].

But evolution states that everything gradual increases.

But to say that I believe in something like the Trinity, according to your words is no better than believing evolution.

Your logic: Others beliefs in man made terms is wrong, but yours is correct.

JakeKKing believes in the Trinity = wrong / Heath21 believes the word is evolving = correct.

Like you said, if God thought it was important and wanted us to know it, then it would be in the Bible. Why isn't evolution in the Bible?

Yeah, seriously. I would love to see what your pastor has to say on this subject.

[Luciadus]

I hate religion for a few simple reasons. First off it's all bullshit from a logical point of view but unfortunately people need to feel some kind of connection to a higher power be it gods or aliens and secondly it creates tension and conflict that becomes inevitably pointless in the long run. People do not need to fight over their religious beliefs because neither are right or wrong and I'm sick of religious people completely oblivious to their superiority complexes, always denouncing other faiths and then getting angry and violent when others denounce theirs. That's why I hate religion. I remember speaking to the religious mother of a friend and I asked her "Well, what about people who practice other faiths and are just as devoted as you are to christ?" Her answer to me was "They are wrong." I stare her blankly in the face and ask "What? How can you say that they're wrong and you're not. How can you be so sure?" She says, "Because of my faith in Christ and I can only hope that some day they can see the light." These sounded like the ravings of a crazy person to me. It's people like this who are so closed off to reality. I know some people who don't even realize they are closed off. It's sad. Anyways, Im an Atheist, blah blah, gotta go.

[Kontroll]

Well, when people denounce religions and faiths it's to open their eyes. It's called apologetics. Standing up for your faith.

Organized religion can sometimes screw things up, but Christianity is not about having an organized religion. The main premise of Christianity is having a relationship with God. You don't need to go to church or read the Bible to be a Christian.

The church in essence is the classroom and the Bible is the textbook. It's just a place to learn.

[Luciadus]

Thats the gayest shit I ever heard. j/k
But seriously, anyone can just say they are religious. I can say I'm a follower of the Gods on top Olympus but then I would look like a crazy person
What makes them so much less believeable than an all knowing all seeing higher deity that controls everything and is supremely infallible? Hmm? Or an elephant god that grants wishes? Or a blue humanoid deity with 6 arms? If in fact there is a higher power, isn't it more likely that "it" has pronounced itself to all societies and civilizations simultaneously? So if in fact that was the case and all civilizations are essentially worshipping the same deity, then why the fighting and the killing and the conflicts? Ive read the different religionic[ree-li-gee-on-ick] guidebooks and they all have pretty much the same outline, "do unto others, don't kill unless for a holy cause, a penny saved is a thousand words," Its all the same shit. Stop the fighting, its senseless. Lets all combine under one flag, one god(or gods), lets stop the stupidity. For every debate that is created under religious pretenses, 8 people are executed for believing in what others have deemed non-spiritualistic. f**kin vampires and warlocks, witches and Italians, I hate religion for all these reasons and more. I am sick of other people forcing their beliefs down my throat wherever I go. f**k it. I ain't leaving my apartment anymore. Im gonna smoke up and watch Joan of Arcadia. Bye byes.

[Kontroll]

Thats the gayest shit I ever heard. j/k
But seriously, anyone can just say they are religious. I can say I'm a follower of the Gods on top Olympus but then I would look like a crazy person
What makes them so much less believeable than an all knowing all seeing higher deity that controls everything and is supremely infallible? Hmm? Or an elephant god that grants wishes? Or a blue humanoid deity with 6 arms? If in fact there is a higher power, isn't it more likely that "it" has pronounced itself to all societies and civilizations simultaneously? So if in fact that was the case and all civilizations are essentially worshipping the same deity, then why the fighting and the killing and the conflicts? Ive read the different religionic[ree-li-gee-on-ick] guidebooks and they all have pretty much the same outline, "do unto others, don't kill unless for a holy cause, a penny saved is a thousand words," Its all the same shit. Stop the fighting, its senseless. Lets all combine under one flag, one god(or gods), lets stop the stupidity. For every debate that is created under religious pretenses, 8 people are executed for believing in what others have deemed non-spiritualistic. f**kin vampires and warlocks, witches and Italians, I hate religion for all these reasons and more. I am sick of other people forcing their beliefs down my throat wherever I go. f**k it. I ain't leaving my apartment anymore. Im gonna smoke up and watch Joan of Arcadia. Bye byes.

You're right. Anyone can say they are religious and most people do. But the fact is that faith is in the heart. It's not something that you should boast about because that is wrong.

You can believe anything you want Luciadus. I'm not here to force my perfect beliefs onto you. HAHAHAHA.

That being said, I bid you goodbye.

[Luciadus]

You're right. Anyone can say they are religious and most people do. But the fact is that faith is in the heart. It's not something that you should boast about because that is wrong.

You can believe anything you want Luciadus. I'm not here to force my perfect beliefs onto you. HAHAHAHA.

That being said, I bid you goodbye.

Though I do not agree with your content, I appreciate your candor. I would however request that you withdraw from your beliefs and henceforth pursue possibilities you once would not have ventured towards. Free yourself from your spiritual bonds, discover alternative lifestyles and save what soul you have left in you. Get laid. Peace.

[Kontroll]

Though I do not agree with your content, I appreciate your candor. I would however request that you withdraw from your beliefs and henceforth pursue possibilities you once would not have ventured towards. Free yourself from your spiritual bonds, discover alternative lifestyles and save what soul you have left in you. Get laid. Peace.

Haha, it's not like I live the perfect Christian life. But I'd still choose this one over any other.

[sweetangel2128]

That doesnt really seem like evolution at all. Isnt that more of variation within a kind?
But still, how is someone believing in the Trinity any different than partially believing in Evolution?
Just because your Pastor says one thing doesnt mean its true. Every Pastor is going to say something different.

It is Evolution, as I have said we have "evolved". There is more than one type of Evolution. If you look up Evolution on dictionary.com it will say it's the creation of species over different generations.

As for how is it different. I have already answered that Question and have explained it to you. Re-read my post.

I am not saying he's right but he has been studying the Bible for 45 years and can pick a verse out without looking the exact area of the Bible depending on your problem your going through.

The Trinity: In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity states that God is one being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three persons: the Father, the Son (incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth), and the Holy Spirit.

If you believe in evolution you are contradicting yourself Heath. Evolution is not something that is observable. Therefore just a theory.

Evolution actually doesn't make sense because it violates natural laws. One for instance is the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which states that everything is heading towards entropy [disorder within a system].

But evolution states that everything gradual increases.

But to say that I believe in something like the Trinity, according to your words is no better than believing evolution.

Your logic: Others beliefs in man made terms is wrong, but yours is correct.

JakeKKing believes in the Trinity = wrong / Heath21 believes the word is evolving = correct.

Like you said, if God thought it was important and wanted us to know it, then it would be in the Bible. Why isn't evolution in the Bible?

Yeah, seriously. I would love to see what your pastor has to say on this subject.

Yes, Evolution is VISIBLE. We have evolved as humans and animals and in no way is it contradicting the Bible. Now, if I said I believed that Evolution created the planet and other things at the beginning, it would be contradicting.

[Jessica C.]

Again, you're wrong. I'm sorry, I just found the verse that disproves that the Bible only refers to God in the singular.

Gen 1:26 - And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Now, there's absolutely no way you can interpret that differently, because you said that the Bible is clear in its meaning. This verse alone proves that there is a distinct characteristic to our God. He is not only one being, but three personhoods in one.

I can interpret that differently, easily. In that scripture when God says "us" and "our" he is using plural wording to denote(symbolize) majesty. Many kings have used that type of plural wording when speaking of themselves. God is majestic, he is the king of kings, he thinks higher than we do, so he will speak higher than we do, he doesnt speak like we do.
You keep saying that the trinity is describing Gods characteristics, when you just said he is three Personhoods, which is the same as saying "three persons", the trinity is not saying "three characteristics" its saying "three persons", that is why Heath21 and I are not agreeing with you. Maybe you have gotten confused yourself about the whole trinity theory, because every time someone has attempted to describe it to me, they find themselves getting confused and then they contradict themselves. Three characteristics, and three persons are two different things, God is either three characteristics: Father, son, and Holy Ghost, or he is three persons: Father, son, and Holy Ghost, which is it to you? You are underestimating Gods power by saying he cant be in two or more places at once. When people get filled with the Holy Ghost, which is Gods spirit, then how can his spirit be in many people at once? if his spirit can be in many people at once, then he can be in more than one place at once. And even Trinitarians say that the Holy Ghost is God, and the Father is God, so if why not say theres two persons: the Father/Holy Ghost, and Jesus the son? See the flaws in this trinity theory? God doesnt have to have 3 persons do his will, all it takes is One God, he is powerful, he can do ANYTHING, so why would he need three entities to consist of in order to do all that he has and will do?

Yes its true, many churches teach the trinity, and in this world most of the time "majority rules" but if everyone suddenly decided to follow the devil, would you? I wouldnt. Sometimes the majority is wrong. I understand why you believe in the trinity, but you didnt start believing it until someone convinced you to right? cus when we're children we dont understand God or the bible until someone explains it to us, so whoever first explained the trinity to you, explained it so convincingly that you have closed your mind to the truth that God is one being, not three, he has three characteristics, but not three persons. He doesnt need a team, he is powerful enough to do everything himself.
In the old testament, it was prophesied that Jesus would come, but the scriptures say he would be named Emanuel, which means: God with us, how do you explain that if Jesus isnt God but one of the "personhoods" that he consists of?

I could give you hundreds of scriptures that show that God is one, referring to him as "him", "he", and "his" IM sure you can come up with all the scriptures that describe the Father, son, and Holy Ghost and say that thats proof that there are three personhoods, but those scriptures only convince me that God has three characteristics, he is our Father, he was the SON when he was on earth as Jesus who was "fully man and fully God", thats biblical, and his spirit is refferred to as the "Holy Spirit/Ghost".

I wanted to suggest that if you feel yourself getting upset or frustrated on here as ive seen you get, i suggest to take a deep breath and pray that Jesus help you be at peace and be confident with what your saying. In all my experience in talking to people and debating with them, ive found that when someone is not confident with what they are saying they will get upset and defensive and frustrated and even sometimes rude. Ill pray that you have more enjoyable and educational debates

God Bless You All

Jessica C.

[sweetangel2128]

I can interpret that differently, easily. In that scripture when God says "us" and "our" he is using plural wording to denote(symbolize) majesty. Many kings have used that type of plural wording when speaking of themselves. God is majestic, he is the king of kings, he thinks higher than we do, so he will speak higher than we do, he doesnt speak like we do.
You keep saying that the trinity is describing Gods characteristics, when you just said he is three Personhoods, which is the same as saying "three persons", the trinity is not saying "three characteristics" its saying "three persons", that is why Heath21 and I are not agreeing with you. Maybe you have gotten confused yourself about the whole trinity theory, because every time someone has attempted to describe it to me, they find themselves getting confused and then they contradict themselves. Three characteristics, and three persons are two different things, God is either three characteristics: Father, son, and Holy Ghost, or he is three persons: Father, son, and Holy Ghost, which is it to you? You are underestimating Gods power by saying he cant be in two or more places at once. When people get filled with the Holy Ghost, which is Gods spirit, then how can his spirit be in many people at once? if his spirit can be in many people at once, then he can be in more than one place at once. And even Trinitarians say that the Holy Ghost is God, and the Father is God, so if why not say theres two persons: the Father/Holy Ghost, and Jesus the son? See the flaws in this trinity theory? God doesnt have to have 3 persons do his will, all it takes is One God, he is powerful, he can do ANYTHING, so why would he need three entities to consist of in order to do all that he has and will do?

Yes its true, many churches teach the trinity, and in this world most of the time "majority rules" but if everyone suddenly decided to follow the devil, would you? I wouldnt. Sometimes the majority is wrong. I understand why you believe in the trinity, but you didnt start believing it until someone convinced you to right? cus when we're children we dont understand God or the bible until someone explains it to us, so whoever first explained the trinity to you, explained it so convincingly that you have closed your mind to the truth that God is one being, not three, he has three characteristics, but not three persons. He doesnt need a team, he is powerful enough to do everything himself.
In the old testament, it was prophesied that Jesus would come, but the scriptures say he would be named Emanuel, which means: God with us, how do you explain that if Jesus isnt God but one of the "personhoods" that he consists of?

I could give you hundreds of scriptures that show that God is one, referring to him as "him", "he", and "his" IM sure you can come up with all the scriptures that describe the Father, son, and Holy Ghost and say that thats proof that there are three personhoods, but those scriptures only convince me that God has three characteristics, he is our Father, he was the SON when he was on earth as Jesus who was "fully man and fully God", thats biblical, and his spirit is refferred to as the "Holy Spirit/Ghost".

I wanted to suggest that if you feel yourself getting upset or frustrated on here as ive seen you get, i suggest to take a deep breath and pray that Jesus help you be at peace and be confident with what your saying. In all my experience in talking to people and debating with them, ive found that when someone is not confident with what they are saying they will get upset and defensive and frustrated and even sometimes rude. Ill pray that you have more enjoyable and educational debates

God Bless You All

Jessica C.

*Claps* Very very nicely put Jess. See, Jake this is what I've been trying to explain to you the whole time. If you can't see what she's saying and understand it, I have no clue what will open your eyes except maybe the fact dying, going to Heaven and only seeing one God lol. But, I hope that this (what Jessica said) will open your eyes to the truth. To be honest I have NEVER believed in the Trinity not even before I became a Christian. Do NOT fall into false teachings, read the Bible, it is truth, anything not mentioned is not of God.

[Kontroll]

*Claps* Very very nicely put Jess. See, Jake this is what I've been trying to explain to you the whole time. If you can't see what she's saying and understand it, I have no clue what will open your eyes except maybe the fact dying, going to Heaven and only seeing one God lol. But, I hope that this (what Jessica said) will open your eyes to the truth. To be honest I have NEVER believed in the Trinity not even before I became a Christian. Do NOT fall into false teachings, read the Bible, it is truth, anything not mentioned is not of God.

But you believe evolution.

I'll post more in a while.

[sweetangel2128]

But you believe evolution.

I'll post more in a while.

No response to Jessica's response? Why not? Ran out of explanations? Sorry, just had to ask. Not being rude :)

As I have said over and over, there is more than one type of Evolution, one is not okay to agree with because of the Bible and goes against Christianity while the other doesn't go against it and is okay to believe. The evolution I believe in as been proven because it is all around us. As I have explained a million times.

[Kontroll]

No response to Jessica's response? Why not? Ran out of explanations? Sorry, just had to ask. Not being rude :)

As I have said over and over, there is more than one type of Evolution, one is not okay to agree with because of the Bible and goes against Christianity while the other doesn't go against it and is okay to believe. The evolution I believe in as been proven because it is all around us. As I have explained a million times.

Evolution is the same across the board. There are just different branches dealing with different topics. Why aren't we discussing this in the Evolution topic?

As for what Jessica said, no I didn't run of explanations. I just had to do something quick, but I'm back.

Who came first? God or kings? Considering God's word was around in the time of kings, I'm sure a selection of them were knowledged in the Bible. True, that verse may be used to symbolize God's majesty, but to mimic is the highest form of flattery. Whose to say that kings didn't use themselves in the pluralistic tense to show that they were great, as God is?

What's wrong with your interpretation is that symbolism often uses words for example: As, or like. Such as John used to describe his dreams in the book of Revelation. He desribed a swarm of locust with the breast plates of a horse and was led by their king.

Gen. 1:26 states And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Let's break this down piece by piece, shall we?

"And God said": This is used as a declaration. A verbal announcement. There is nothing symoblic about this.

"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness": Firstly, this is used in the present tense and shows that God is preparing to create.

Secondly, it tells us that He is verbalizing to some other being, or beings. A declaration. Who at this point was created? Animals, the earth, but no living thing that could comprehend the words of the Lord. Not to mention, if God we talking to anything but His personhoods, we would not be in God's likeness, now would we?

"and let them have dominion over the fish and the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

This one is pretty self explanitory. Firstly, to Heath, it shows that we are more than just mammals. We are keepers and watchers over everything on this earth. God gave the earth to us to praise God and witness His glory. He is giving us control. We are more than animals and like I said in the evolution debate, we cannot change because God would therefore have to change.

Does that clear it up?

[sweetangel2128]

Evolution is the same across the board. There are just different branches dealing with different topics. Why aren't we discussing this in the Evolution topic?

As for what Jessica said, no I didn't run of explanations. I just had to do something quick, but I'm back.

Who came first? God or kings? Considering God's word was around in the time of kings, I'm sure a selection of them were knowledged in the Bible. True, that verse may be used to symbolize God's majesty, but to mimic is the highest form of flattery. Whose to say that kings didn't use themselves in the pluralistic tense to show that they were great, as God is?

What's wrong with your interpretation is that symbolism often uses words for example: As, or like. Such as John used to describe his dreams in the book of Revelation. He desribed a swarm of locust with the breast plates of a horse and was led by their king.

Gen. 1:26 states And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Let's break this down piece by piece, shall we?

"And God said": This is used as a declaration. A verbal announcement. There is nothing symoblic about this.

"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness": Firstly, this is used in the present tense and shows that God is preparing to create.

Secondly, it tells us that He is verbalizing to some other being, or beings. A declaration. Who at this point was created? Animals, the earth, but no living thing that could comprehend the words of the Lord. Not to mention, if God we talking to anything but His personhoods, we would not be in God's likeness, now would we?

"and let them have dominion over the fish and the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

This one is pretty self explanitory. Firstly, to Heath, it shows that we are more than just mammals. We are keepers and watchers over everything on this earth. God gave the earth to us to praise God and witness His glory. He is giving us control. We are more than animals and like I said in the evolution debate, we cannot change because God would therefore have to change.

Does that clear it up?

First of all, you said that since we were created in his image that we would have to be like him right? And that we can't evolve (sorry this in this topic btw). But anyways you said that we can't evolve because that would mean that God would have to change right? Well, heres a good Question for you. God is perfect, right? He has no flaws, right? We were created in God's image, right? So, knowing these things wouldn't we have to be perfect as well?

She wasn't saying that "And God said" was a symbol but the word "our" is. He is talking about one of the Characteristics of himself.

No, it doesn't clear it up because it makes no sense. I'll let Jessica respond to the rest of it.

[Kontroll]

First of all, you said that since we were created in his image that we would have to be like him right? And that we can't evolve (sorry this in this topic btw). But anyways you said that we can't evolve because that would mean that God would have to change right? Well, heres a good Question for you. God is perfect, right? He has no flaws, right? We were created in God's image, right? So, knowing these things wouldn't we have to be perfect as well?

She wasn't saying that "And God said" was a symbol but the word "our" is. He is talking about one of the Characteristics of himself.

No, it doesn't clear it up because it makes no sense. I'll let Jessica respond to the rest of it.

Haha. We were perfect creatures until sin entered the world.

Secondly, I know she didn't say 'And God said' was a symbol, but I was just breaking the verse down to show you that that verse is literal and not symbolical. I cant do that with out breaking the whole verse down.

Please, I would love her to.

[sweetangel2128]

Haha. We were perfect creatures until sin entered the world.

No, "we" were never perfect creatures EVER...Adam and Eve were supposedly the first humans so "we" could of never been perfect to begin with. But since God created Adam and Eve in his image and he's perfect would they also be perfect. God made us in his image but not in the perfect sense or the "evolution sense" but as in his image meaning people. If God is perfect and we were made in his image in the sense of being perfect, we would all have no flaws because being perfect, Adam and Eve wouldn't of sinned and brought sin into the world.

[Kontroll]

No, "we" were never perfect creatures EVER...Adam and Eve were supposedly the first humans so "we" could of never been perfect to begin with. But since God created Adam and Eve in his image and he's perfect would they also be perfect. God made us in his image but not in the perfect sense or the "evolution sense" but as in his image meaning people. If God is perfect and we were made in his image in the sense of being perfect, we would all have no flaws because being perfect, Adam and Eve wouldn't of sinned and brought sin into the world.

Sin corrupted this world and Adam and Eve none the less. You have to look at what sin does to people.

When God visted different people throughout the Bible, they were incapable of looking at Him because of their sin.

When God created Adam, He would walk with Adam in the garden. That means that they were next to eachother, side by side most likely. When we are without sin we are perfect. That's why man is unperfect.

God gave us a free will and it was evident with the Tree of Knowledge. God said don't eat of this and we did. Free will. God doesn't want us to be forced to love Him. He wants us to want to love Him.

Image means more than just appearance. It's characteristics, idiosyncricies, and also how we look. God made us with His characteristics. He made us capable of love, righteousness, compassionate, sacrificial, long suffering, and so forth.

[sweetangel2128]

Sin corrupted this world and Adam and Eve none the less. You have to look at what sin does to people.

When God visted different people throughout the Bible, they were incapable of looking at Him because of their sin.

When God created Adam, He would walk with Adam in the garden. That means that they were next to eachother, side by side most likely. When we are without sin we are perfect. That's why man is unperfect.

God gave us a free will and it was evident with the Tree of Knowledge. God said don't eat of this and we did. Free will. God doesn't want us to be forced to love Him. He wants us to want to love Him.

Image means more than just appearance. It's characteristics, idiosyncricies, and also how we look. God made us with His characteristics. He made us capable of love, righteousness, compassionate, sacrificial, long suffering, and so forth.

Yeah but if we were created in his image then we'd also be perfect because God is perfect, As I said if that was the case, sin would of never happend because we "are" perfect. I believe when they said - "in his IMAGE" they meant visibly not like characterstics.

[Kontroll]

Yeah but if we were created in his image then we'd also be perfect because God is perfect, As I said if that was the case, sin would of never happend because we "are" perfect. I believe when they said - "in his IMAGE" they meant visibly not like characterstics.

Well, then image is a relative term and can't be agreed upon making this discussion a waste of both of our times.

If we were just created in God's image, as in appearance, than we wouldn't be capable of love, or anything else I mentioned before.

[sweetangel2128]

Well, then image is a relative term and can't be agreed upon making this discussion a waste of both of our times.

If we were just created in God's image, as in appearance, than we wouldn't be capable of love, or anything else I mentioned before.

A lot of people aren't capable of loving, believe me, I know But yeah I get what your saying.

Waiste of time, to be honest I think this Trinity is a waiste of time, we both think were right and not really getting anywhere on proving eachother wrong lmao. But I care about fellow Christians so I'm not going to give up on someone unless they positively want me too. Anyways it's my bedtime, have an interview tomorrow...I'll reply to other posts tomorrow.

[Kontroll]

A lot of people aren't capable of loving, believe me, I know But yeah I get what your saying.

Waiste of time, to be honest I think this Trinity is a waiste of time, we both think were right and not really getting anywhere on proving eachother wrong lmao. But I care about fellow Christians so I'm not going to give up on someone unless they positively want me too. Anyways it's my bedtime, have an interview tomorrow...I'll reply to other posts tomorrow.

Well, I know some people might not be able to love, but humans in general are capable of it.

Well, I don't think it's a waste of time because if no one challenges your faith, then what do you really believe in? You know?

I think the problem is that the Trinity is just an incomprehensible thing. We can't always let our faith get in the way of logic.

[kimmytree]

There is more than one type of Evolution. If you look up Evolution on dictionary.com it will say it's the creation of species over different generations.

"The creation of species over different generations" is the creation of NEW species. A cat and a dog are both different SPECIES, but a toy poodle and a dalmation are different BREEDS.

So, do you still believe in "thecreation of species over different generations?" If not, then you dont believe in Evolution.

Ok nevermind. I'm a retard.

[Luciadus]

Well, I know some people might not be able to love, but humans in general are capable of it.

Well, I don't think it's a waste of time because if no one challenges your faith, then what do you really believe in? You know?

I think the problem is that the Trinity is just an incomprehensible thing. We can't always let our faith get in the way of logic.

Dude, animals can love and are very capable of it. A dog loves a good owner and is sad when not with them. If you've ever seen 101 Dalmations, you'd remember that the two dogs also marry eachother when their respective owners marry. And they loved eachother throughout the entire movie, through thick and thin. Same as The Lady and the Tramp. These were animals showing unrequited love for one another and were unable to scourge their passions. Why is it that Jesus freaks are so limited in their thinking processes. They can be the stupidest people in the world and the smartest people in the world.
Secondly, if you need to be challenged in something in order to be sure in your belief, then your belief is stupid. Take love. We're all brought up believing that in order to be truly sure that we love something, we need to be tested, or challenged. Just what is the point in that? What happens when you fail? You could still love the person, just not have any strength of will. Tests and challenges, faith and love. Why all the pressure? What do we need to test ourselves for? Believe in your beliefs, don't question. Ignore the people who challenge your beliefs, whats the point in debating and fighting. Political, religious, and societal debates are pointless because nobody wins because nobody admits defeat.
Thirdly, the trinity is also dumb. In some faiths, it wasn't god who became Jesus but the Archangel Micheal, and that they are in fact the same being. Other faiths preach that Michael was in fact Adam, not Jesus. And some faiths preach that Satan is Jesus and God is Pegasus and Medusa gave birth to Job who killed his pet centaurs. I don't know. I forgot what the hell I was talking about. Anyways religious debates are pointless, so stop making them Jake. haha.

[Kontroll]

Dude, animals can love and are very capable of it. A dog loves a good owner and is sad when not with them. If you've ever seen 101 Dalmations, you'd remember that the two dogs also marry eachother when their respective owners marry. And they loved eachother throughout the entire movie, through thick and thin. Same as The Lady and the Tramp. These were animals showing unrequited love for one another and were unable to scourge their passions. Why is it that Jesus freaks are so limited in their thinking processes. They can be the stupidest people in the world and the smartest people in the world.
Secondly, if you need to be challenged in something in order to be sure in your belief, then your belief is stupid. Take love. We're all brought up believing that in order to be truly sure that we love something, we need to be tested, or challenged. Just what is the point in that? What happens when you fail? You could still love the person, just not have any strength of will. Tests and challenges, faith and love. Why all the pressure? What do we need to test ourselves for? Believe in your beliefs, don't question. Ignore the people who challenge your beliefs, whats the point in debating and fighting. Political, religious, and societal debates are pointless because nobody wins because nobody admits defeat.
Thirdly, the trinity is also dumb. In some faiths, it wasn't god who became Jesus but the Archangel Micheal, and that they are in fact the same being. Other faiths preach that Michael was in fact Adam, not Jesus. And some faiths preach that Satan is Jesus and God is Pegasus and Medusa gave birth to Job who killed his pet centaurs. I don't know. I forgot what the hell I was talking about. Anyways religious debates are pointless, so stop making them Jake. haha.

Dogs don't love. They try to please their master no matter what. A dog's memory is too short for a dog to love. When a dog does something, it remembers up until it does something else.

So, lets say you discipline a dog for biting some one after they have bitten the person. The dog doesn't know why you're punishing it so it won't work. You have to get him in the act of doing it.

And it's not unrequited. Unrequited mean that one person loves another person but it's not the same the other way.

[sweetangel2128]

Dogs don't love. They try to please their master no matter what. A dog's memory is too short for a dog to love. When a dog does something, it remembers up until it does something else.

So, lets say you discipline a dog for biting some one after they have bitten the person. The dog doesn't know why you're punishing it so it won't work. You have to get him in the act of doing it.

And it's not unrequited. Unrequited mean that one person loves another person but it's not the same the other way.

Incorrect, dogs DO love and so do cats.

Dude, animals can love and are very capable of it. A dog loves a good owner and is sad when not with them. If you've ever seen 101 Dalmations, you'd remember that the two dogs also marry eachother when their respective owners marry. And they loved eachother throughout the entire movie, through thick and thin. Same as The Lady and the Tramp. These were animals showing unrequited love for one another and were unable to scourge their passions. Why is it that Jesus freaks are so limited in their thinking processes. They can be the stupidest people in the world and the smartest people in the world.
Secondly, if you need to be challenged in something in order to be sure in your belief, then your belief is stupid. Take love. We're all brought up believing that in order to be truly sure that we love something, we need to be tested, or challenged. Just what is the point in that? What happens when you fail? You could still love the person, just not have any strength of will. Tests and challenges, faith and love. Why all the pressure? What do we need to test ourselves for? Believe in your beliefs, don't question. Ignore the people who challenge your beliefs, whats the point in debating and fighting. Political, religious, and societal debates are pointless because nobody wins because nobody admits defeat.
Thirdly, the trinity is also dumb. In some faiths, it wasn't god who became Jesus but the Archangel Micheal, and that they are in fact the same being. Other faiths preach that Michael was in fact Adam, not Jesus. And some faiths preach that Satan is Jesus and God is Pegasus and Medusa gave birth to Job who killed his pet centaurs. I don't know. I forgot what the hell I was talking about. Anyways religious debates are pointless, so stop making them Jake. haha.

Well, the examples you brought up are from movies and movies are made up but I do believe you. Everyone including animals are incapable of loving. My cat loves on me all the time..licks my face, nudges my face...ect..

[Jessica C.]

Evolution is the same across the board. There are just different branches dealing with different topics. Why aren't we discussing this in the Evolution topic?

As for what Jessica said, no I didn't run of explanations. I just had to do something quick, but I'm back.

Who came first? God or kings? Considering God's word was around in the time of kings, I'm sure a selection of them were knowledged in the Bible. True, that verse may be used to symbolize God's majesty, but to mimic is the highest form of flattery. Whose to say that kings didn't use themselves in the pluralistic tense to show that they were great, as God is?

What's wrong with your interpretation is that symbolism often uses words for example: As, or like. Such as John used to describe his dreams in the book of Revelation. He desribed a swarm of locust with the breast plates of a horse and was led by their king.

Gen. 1:26 states And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Let's break this down piece by piece, shall we?

"And God said": This is used as a declaration. A verbal announcement. There is nothing symoblic about this.

"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness": Firstly, this is used in the present tense and shows that God is preparing to create.

Secondly, it tells us that He is verbalizing to some other being, or beings. A declaration. Who at this point was created? Animals, the earth, but no living thing that could comprehend the words of the Lord. Not to mention, if God we talking to anything but His personhoods, we would not be in God's likeness, now would we?

"and let them have dominion over the fish and the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

This one is pretty self explanitory. Firstly, to Heath, it shows that we are more than just mammals. We are keepers and watchers over everything on this earth. God gave the earth to us to praise God and witness His glory. He is giving us control. We are more than animals and like I said in the evolution debate, we cannot change because God would therefore have to change.

Does that clear it up?

Both, God is the king of Kings, he came first, therefore they both came first.
Kings did use that form of plural wording because Kings wanted all to know they were powerful, so they probably looked at Genesis and saw how the Almighty king spoke, and wanted to speak like him. That is not a far off probability.

symbolism can be used in many different ways, God chose to use it by using the words "us" and "our". Like i said, God thinks on a higher level then we do, therefore how he speaks is differently then we may speak, you have to think of it in heavenly terms, not earthly terms.

First God didnt say "And God said", that is an anouncement by the author to show us who said what. Thats a given, commone sense.

Second, you are only describing the second part of that verse as you have been before, and your only describing it that way because you believe in the trinity, so therefore i could just repeat the same thing ive been saying, that its plural wording, but do we really need to repeat ourselves? I dont think we should have to.

We would be in God's likeness still because God didnt make us to look like him, he made us to be reflections of his glory, you might want to study up on why the bible says he made us in his likeness, it in no way means physical likeness, God is a spirit, not a man or a women. He came to earth as Jesus because he needed flesh, Blood to die on the cross.

Yes, hes saying we have dominion over the things of the air and earth. We were given responsibility over the earth. Thats why the earth is falling apart, because it was our responsibility to take care of it, and we didnt, we are destroying it because most are not following Gods will.

And just to add something about evolution, there are two types of evolution, macro and micro, macro, i believe describes that we started out as a simple organism or species, and we evolved all the way up to humans, that evolution is wrong. Micro, i believe, describes that cats evolved from cats, dogs from dogs, apes from apes, humans from humans, and so on. We as humans look differently then we did 6,000 years ago, therefore we have evolved physically. But it is impossible to form into a different species. Cross breeding with some animals is possible, but if we as humans tried to mate with a monkey, we're not gonna have a half ape, half human baby, lol.

Maybe ill add that to the evolution debate. :o)

But as for the trinity, that will be argued about till Jesus comes back. You will bring out the scriptures that are clear to you as proof for the trinity, and i will bring out scriptures that prove against the trinity. So we really will be in a viscious circle. I prayed about this and still, Jesus revealed to me that he is one and does not need more than one of himself to do his will, he is more powerful than that. And i will never underestimate his power or his oneness.

[Luciadus]

Incorrect, dogs DO love and so do cats.
Well, the examples you brought up are from movies and movies are made up but I do believe you. Everyone including animals are incapable of loving. My cat loves on me all the time..licks my face, nudges my face...ect..

My cat used to love my shoes. Always loving on my shoes. Actually, she was pretty much loving on everything that was on the floor. Maybe too much loving.
But yes, dogs can love. I dont know about cats, but dogs are very emotional and they can love. And its humans that dogs love, not gods. If anything, dogs are smarter than us. They dont fill their lives with immense devotion to a fictional character telling us not to lie. They live in the here and the now.

[sweetangel2128]

My cat used to love my shoes. Always loving on my shoes. Actually, she was pretty much loving on everything that was on the floor. Maybe too much loving.
But yes, dogs can love. I dont know about cats, but dogs are very emotional and they can love. And its humans that dogs love, not gods. If anything, dogs are smarter than us. They dont fill their lives with immense devotion to a fictional character telling us not to lie. They live in the here and the now.

I say anything that has a beating heart is capable of loving, including humans and all animals. Yes, I know, animals don't necessarily love Gods but truly we do not know that, we do not understand cats or dogs langauage or thought process. It would be cool if we did though. But yeah I get what your saying.

Both, God is the king of Kings, he came first, therefore they both came first.
Kings did use that form of plural wording because Kings wanted all to know they were powerful, so they probably looked at Genesis and saw how the Almighty king spoke, and wanted to speak like him. That is not a far off probability.

True, I mean how can a King go off of someone else's term yet God created everything, it doesn't make sense seriously. Jake, no offence, in no way am I being rude but to me it sounds like we have proven you wrong because every one of your responses now really do not defend yourself or make sense. It's like your trying to protect your beliefs on the Trinity by saying "random" stuff that really doesn't prove anything. As I said again, this is not to mean rude, it's just my thoughts and opinions.

[Kontroll]

I say anything that has a beating heart is capable of loving, including humans and all animals. Yes, I know, animals don't necessarily love Gods but truly we do not know that, we do not understand cats or dogs langauage or thought process. It would be cool if we did though. But yeah I get what your saying.
True, I mean how can a King go off of someone else's term yet God created everything, it doesn't make sense seriously. Jake, no offence, in no way am I being rude but to me it sounds like we have proven you wrong because every one of your responses now really do not defend yourself or make sense. It's like your trying to protect your beliefs on the Trinity by saying "random" stuff that really doesn't prove anything. As I said again, this is not to mean rude, it's just my thoughts and opinions.

Firstly, to Jessica about the Trinity. You're right. We'll never know. It's a mystery. Incomprehensible. I believe He is one being too. Like I said, we are apart of a mono theistic faith. So, that must tell us that we follow one God. But there is some unique attribute to Him that makes Him Triune in a sense. Maybe not three different beings, but personalities.

And about that part in the verse of Gen. 1:26...And God said. Firstly, the author wrote it, yes. Secondly, he was beginning a quote. And God said... well, God said something, so I was just breaking it down.

Secondly, when you talk about cats evolve from cats and dogs from dogs, are you talking about new variations of a cat, or dogs? Because if that's so, that's not evolution. That's just variation within a kind. You can take two of any type of cat and breed them. They will come up with a new variation of cat, but that's not evolution.

As for us not looking like we did 6000 years ago...How do you know? We were probably taller and healthier, but how is that evolution. I fail to see your logic. If you believe the Bible, you contradict yourself when you say you believe in evolution. The Bible makes no references about it, so why do you believe in it? DOn't tell me that you can see it around you, because you can't. It's impossible. It's not an observable pseudo-science.

And I don't think that cats and dogs can love. I think their actions towards their offspring and masters are purely instinctual. THink about it. Would a wolf love the alpha male? That's basically what we are to our pets. We are their leader. They do as we tell them.

Here's another example that will make this a little clearer. Dogs don't have the thinking capacity that humans do. They think around two words at once. So, if you throw a ball the most likely outcome of thought process for a dog would be...'Get ball, get ball, get ball.'

They think along the lines of an infant. Are infants capable of love? No. Not at all. They don't even understand the word, let alone most of their parents language. Their brains haven't developed enough to understand pretty much anything besides how a dog thinks. Want food. want food. I poop. I poop. Haha. That's the basic though process of infants and dogs.

So, a dog can't love. It might show affection...because it's selfish. It wants you to pet it and play with it.

That's all. They don't have enough gray matter to understand as well as we do.

[sweetangel2128]

Firstly, to Jessica about the Trinity. You're right. We'll never know. It's a mystery. Incomprehensible. I believe He is one being too. Like I said, we are apart of a mono theistic faith. So, that must tell us that we follow one God. But there is some unique attribute to Him that makes Him Triune in a sense. Maybe not three different beings, but personalities.

And about that part in the verse of Gen. 1:26...And God said. Firstly, the author wrote it, yes. Secondly, he was beginning a quote. And God said... well, God said something, so I was just breaking it down.

Secondly, when you talk about cats evolve from cats and dogs from dogs, are you talking about new variations of a cat, or dogs? Because if that's so, that's not evolution. That's just variation within a kind. You can take two of any type of cat and breed them. They will come up with a new variation of cat, but that's not evolution.

As for us not looking like we did 6000 years ago...How do you know? We were probably taller and healthier, but how is that evolution. I fail to see your logic. If you believe the Bible, you contradict yourself when you say you believe in evolution. The Bible makes no references about it, so why do you believe in it? DOn't tell me that you can see it around you, because you can't. It's impossible. It's not an observable pseudo-science.

And I don't think that cats and dogs can love. I think their actions towards their offspring and masters are purely instinctual. THink about it. Would a wolf love the alpha male? That's basically what we are to our pets. We are their leader. They do as we tell them.

Here's another example that will make this a little clearer. Dogs don't have the thinking capacity that humans do. They think around two words at once. So, if you throw a ball the most likely outcome of thought process for a dog would be...'Get ball, get ball, get ball.'

They think along the lines of an infant. Are infants capable of love? No. Not at all. They don't even understand the word, let alone most of their parents language. Their brains haven't developed enough to understand pretty much anything besides how a dog thinks. Want food. want food. I poop. I poop. Haha. That's the basic though process of infants and dogs.

So, a dog can't love. It might show affection...because it's selfish. It wants you to pet it and play with it.

That's all. They don't have enough gray matter to understand as well as we do.

Firstly, that's what Jessica is basically saying. But she is also trying to explain that you can't believe in the Trinity because the Trinity believes that God is three persons not three characteristics or personalities, so basically what your claiming you believe in isn't the Trinity but what you should believe God to be. I do believe God has 3 different personalities but they are all him and they all make up him, just like I explained about "humans" you are not 3 different persons but you do have personalities that make you, you.

As Jess stated there is more than one type of Evolution and cats coming from cats and dogs from dogs is a type of Evolution because they are evolving into new things. We have all evolved in some way or another. One of the Evolutions talks of the creation of planets which is what we don't believe in. But not too long ago my boyfriend pointed out that they found a new dino fossil that proves that evolution did exist because they had found a dino that was like a rapture but had feathers, don't worry it isn't just talk, I found the picture online...it's weird looking lol...but yeah, so evolution in the sense that were talking does exist. The fossil proves it. If you want a website, I will try to find you one to show you!

How do we know how we looked 6,000 or so years ago...history. We have pictures showing how we looked LONG ago..theres been studies. In consists of height and other things. But I also believe our thinking process and brain capacity has also improved over time. If you mean evolution in the creation of the planet of course you don't see that but other evolution you do...as I stated before recently like yesterday on the news that had found a new species of leopard...thats evolving ;)

Animals ARE capable of loving. I actually watched a video on this, a mother cat was taking care of her young kittens but she also started taking care of baby squirrels so you can't say animals aren't capable of love. As for wolfes, they are capable of love also, they love there babies don't they? Nurture them and so on. If they didn't..do you honestly think they'd be taking care of them instead of just letting them defend themselves from the time they were born...no. As for humans..it's called protection. I don't think a wild animal is going to attack you unless they are: 1. defending there young, 2. hungry and think your food or 3. thinking your a threat to them. I had a cougar, yes a cougar in the mountains run right past me without stopping.

How do you know what dogs think?

Babies are capable of love, love is born into you, it's kinda like common sense in a way. They might not be able to understand it or know how to say it but that doesn't mean they aren't capable.

[Kontroll]

Firstly, that's what Jessica is basically saying. But she is also trying to explain that you can't believe in the Trinity because the Trinity believes that God is three persons not three characteristics or personalities, so basically what your claiming you believe in isn't the Trinity but what you should believe God to be. I do believe God has 3 different personalities but they are all him and they all make up him, just like I explained about "humans" you are not 3 different persons but you do have personalities that make you, you.

As Jess stated there is more than one type of Evolution and cats coming from cats and dogs from dogs is a type of Evolution because they are evolving into new things. We have all evolved in some way or another. One of the Evolutions talks of the creation of planets which is what we don't believe in. But not too long ago my boyfriend pointed out that they found a new dino fossil that proves that evolution did exist because they had found a dino that was like a rapture but had feathers, don't worry it isn't just talk, I found the picture online...it's weird looking lol...but yeah, so evolution in the sense that were talking does exist. The fossil proves it. If you want a website, I will try to find you one to show you!

How do we know how we looked 6,000 or so years ago...history. We have pictures showing how we looked LONG ago..theres been studies. In consists of height and other things. But I also believe our thinking process and brain capacity has also improved over time. If you mean evolution in the creation of the planet of course you don't see that but other evolution you do...as I stated before recently like yesterday on the news that had found a new species of leopard...thats evolving ;)

Animals ARE capable of loving. I actually watched a video on this, a mother cat was taking care of her young kittens but she also started taking care of baby squirrels so you can't say animals aren't capable of love. As for wolfes, they are capable of love also, they love there babies don't they? Nurture them and so on. If they didn't..do you honestly think they'd be taking care of them instead of just letting them defend themselves from the time they were born...no. As for humans..it's called protection. I don't think a wild animal is going to attack you unless they are: 1. defending there young, 2. hungry and think your food or 3. thinking your a threat to them. I had a cougar, yes a cougar in the mountains run right past me without stopping.

How do you know what dogs think?

Babies are capable of love, love is born into you, it's kinda like common sense in a way. They might not be able to understand it or know how to say it but that doesn't mean they aren't capable.

Listen, I believe in the Trinity. I just think it's such a unique concept that it's impossible to explain as humans. What I believe might not be exactly what comes out on the computer. But I do believe that God is triune in His being.

I read an article on that leopard. Interesting stuff. Well, this is what they had to say.

Until now it had been thought they belonged to the species that is found on mainland southeast Asia.

Scientists now believe the two species diverged more than one million years ago, and have evolved separately since.

So, according to that, you would have to believe that the Biblical account of how the world was created is wrong. If you trace back to all the genealogies of people in the Bible, it comes out to roughly five to six thousand years. So, if you believe this leopard is one million years old as scientists claim, don't bother believing in the Bible anymore.

As for how we looked six thousand years ago...I think that was around the time of the creation of the earth, so I don't know how I feel about that. I haven't done enough research to give a conclusive answer. But I don't feel that our thinking capacity has changed at all.

First of all the environment was different. Air was denser and things grew larger. How do you think we got the dinosaurs? They are just over sized lizards. Lizards never stop growing until they die. So, it makes sense that we have enormous lizards due to the green house effect mentioned some what in the Bible. You can see the dinosaurs in the book of Job. They are called Laviathan and Bohemoth. I don't know about that spelling though.

So, knowing that...man must have been significantly larger too. With larger size comes a larger brain. I don't think it's that they had less thinking capacity as us, it's just they didn't know as much as we do now. I mean, going by what you're saying, people a hundred years ago must of been evolutionary steps behind us. But evolution takes more than a hundred years for any change to occur.

And tell me....How can we get positive results from evolution? What are the steps in between...for instance, how do we get from one kind to another kind? I'm interested. Since you believe in it, you should be able to shed a little light on me.

As for love among animals. It's all instinctual. Animals don't go around and say *British accent* 'Well, dear...I think I love you. Shall we make a night of it?' Seriously. Animals have the thought process of eat, sleep, mate, affection, eat, sleep, affection, eat, sleep, mate, affection.

What animals do in appearance of love is selfishness. They want affection, which is not love.

[sweetangel2128]

Listen, I believe in the Trinity. I just think it's such a unique concept that it's impossible to explain as humans. What I believe might not be exactly what comes out on the computer. But I do believe that God is triune in His being.

I read an article on that leopard. Interesting stuff. Well, this is what they had to say.

Until now it had been thought they belonged to the species that is found on mainland southeast Asia.

Scientists now believe the two species diverged more than one million years ago, and have evolved separately since.

So, according to that, you would have to believe that the Biblical account of how the world was created is wrong. If you trace back to all the genealogies of people in the Bible, it comes out to roughly five to six thousand years. So, if you believe this leopard is one million years old as scientists claim, don't bother believing in the Bible anymore.

As for how we looked six thousand years ago...I think that was around the time of the creation of the earth, so I don't know how I feel about that. I haven't done enough research to give a conclusive answer. But I don't feel that our thinking capacity has changed at all.

First of all the environment was different. Air was denser and things grew larger. How do you think we got the dinosaurs? They are just over sized lizards. Lizards never stop growing until they die. So, it makes sense that we have enormous lizards due to the green house effect mentioned some what in the Bible. You can see the dinosaurs in the book of Job. They are called Laviathan and Bohemoth. I don't know about that spelling though.

So, knowing that...man must have been significantly larger too. With larger size comes a larger brain. I don't think it's that they had less thinking capacity as us, it's just they didn't know as much as we do now. I mean, going by what you're saying, people a hundred years ago must of been evolutionary steps behind us. But evolution takes more than a hundred years for any change to occur.

And tell me....How can we get positive results from evolution? What are the steps in between...for instance, how do we get from one kind to another kind? I'm interested. Since you believe in it, you should be able to shed a little light on me.

As for love among animals. It's all instinctual. Animals don't go around and say *British accent* 'Well, dear...I think I love you. Shall we make a night of it?' Seriously. Animals have the thought process of eat, sleep, mate, affection, eat, sleep, affection, eat, sleep, mate, affection.

What animals do in appearance of love is selfishness. They want affection, which is not love.

Why would have to stop believing in the Bible because of that leopard thing, explain that to me?

How do we get from one kind to another. Genes, genetics. If one animal has certain genetics in it it can mate with another animal making something a little bit different but as I said I don't believe in the ape theory and I don't believe that a bird can mate with a dog...and so on...

[Kontroll]

Why would have to stop believing in the Bible because of that leopard thing, explain that to me?

How do we get from one kind to another. Genes, genetics. If one animal has certain genetics in it it can mate with another animal making something a little bit different but as I said I don't believe in the ape theory and I don't believe that a bird can mate with a dog...and so on...

First...The leopard was thought to have split roughly a million years ago. The Bible only teaches that the earth was created about roughly six thousand years ago.

Okay... You should really pay attention in chemistry and biology. The only reason genes change when mating with two variations is because the two mix.

For instance, a bob cat, with brown eyes mates with a mountain lion that has green eyes.

What will the probable outcome be? It has to do with genetics only in the sense of traits. No, new function is coming about when two cats mate. Only the eyes, or fur, or whatever is changing.

They are still 100% cat. That would only be creating a new variation within a kind. A MILLION TIMES I'VE SAID THIS. This isn't evolution.

When genes mutate, which is the only way a new trait can come about, it causes problems. No positive outcomes has come from mutations. It's as simple as that.

[sweetangel2128]

First...The leopard was thought to have split roughly a million years ago. The Bible only teaches that the earth was created about roughly six thousand years ago.

Okay... You should really pay attention in chemistry and biology. The only reason genes change when mating with two variations is because the two mix.

For instance, a bob cat, with brown eyes mates with a mountain lion that has green eyes.

What will the probable outcome be? It has to do with genetics only in the sense of traits. No, new function is coming about when two cats mate. Only the eyes, or fur, or whatever is changing.

They are still 100% cat. That would only be creating a new variation within a kind. A MILLION TIMES I'VE SAID THIS. This isn't evolution.

When genes mutate, which is the only way a new trait can come about, it causes problems. No positive outcomes has come from mutations. It's as simple as that.

Well, first of all, one I'm not in school, I graduated high school in June 2002 and haven't had the chance or money to go back to college stuff like that plus it's not required for certain degrees and is extremely expensive for classes.

Secondly, when I was in high school I was never required to take chemistry or biology so I never took it therefore I can't really pay attention in the class being that I've never had it or even had the option of taking it.

[Kontroll]

Well, first of all, one I'm not in school, I graduated high school in June 2002 and haven't had the chance or money to go back to college stuff like that plus it's not required for certain degrees and is extremely expensive for classes.

Secondly, when I was in high school I was never required to take chemistry or biology so I never took it therefore I can't really pay attention in the class being that I've never had it or even had the option of taking it.

Why don't you reply to the other part of the post instead of telling me your life story?

We're talking about animals not your glory in high school.

[Luciadus]

Well Jake, Id like you to explain these little things to me. Firstly, the beginning people of the human race as it is said in the bible lived to about 700 years each, yet the earliest human fossils we've found have shown that the earliest humans to science only lived to about 40. Secondly, the bible states that after Cane killed Able, god scarred him so that all others who come upon him will know he is a murderer and he will be an outcast. But if his parents and brother were in fact the only people in existence at the time, who is this scar supposed to warn? Plus in the book of Genesis, it is never actually stated that it was the devil who tempted Adam and Eve, just the serpent. Sure you can translate and insinuate, but there is no real proof that it ever happened so there is no way to prove that it was in fact the devil. I'm sure it says elsewhere in the bible that it was the devil, but again that can be someones misguided interpretation. Thats what the bible is, a big misguided interpretation. What if there was once a segment that just flat out stated that the old testament was not fact, just stories that were concocted to guide us humans through life in a sophisticated manner. But it was interpreted wrong and now we have the story of David and Goliath. There are so many fantastical stories in the old testament, some of them more outlandish than the stories of ancient Greece. Daniel in the Lions Den, Noah and the Ark, Jonah and the Whale, Moses and the Ten Commandments(along with the earliest miracles), Joseph and the robe, these are all great bedtime stories and they do teach us valuable life lessons, but they are no more believeable than the story of Athena spawning from the head of Zeus after he split his head open from a headache. I am waiting for a new religion to appear. Who knows. In 600 years there could the NEW New Testament, with such fantastical stories of giant twin towers falling after an attack by metal birds and a city surrounded by water being swallowed whole and stories of giant waves crashing and killing thousands and stories of Hitler, Mussolini, Saddam, and Oprah. Who will be the savior of that time? They've pretty much proved that Jesus was a mortal man of flesh and blood and schizophrenia without any devine powers, only a talented slight of hand. Maybe in this new age all people will be united, maybe my dreams will come true, or maybe the Mayans had it right and we're all gonna die Dec. 12, 2012, the second ice age. It could very well be coming, the signs are prevalent. Nobody knows what the future will bring, but there are some like myself who are still hoping for a united people who don't put forth an opposing effort on such trivial subjects like religion and politics because they've learned it is pointless, instead live in the present and worry about how to make this life better than fearing repercussions in the next. ugh...I need to learn how to write shorter statements. Well, I'm done.

[kimmytree]

^ Very well said. Couldnt have said it better.

instead live in the present and worry about how to make this life better than fearing repercussions in the next

I think that's exactly what we as a nation, or even as an individual should live by. Except, we should also strive for a better future... without basing things on religion. Because whose to say there are even any reprecussions after we die? Without believing in a specific religion, there isnt a set of rules.. IE, worrying about saving people, ect.

[sweetangel2128]

Why don't you reply to the other part of the post instead of telling me your life story?

We're talking about animals not your glory in high school.

I am not discussing my glory in high school but you told me to pay attention in biology and chemistry, just thought I'd explain to you that I have never taken it and never had the option to take it.

Well Jake, Id like you to explain these little things to me. Firstly, the beginning people of the human race as it is said in the bible lived to about 700 years each, yet the earliest human fossils we've found have shown that the earliest humans to science only lived to about 40. Secondly, the bible states that after Cane killed Able, god scarred him so that all others who come upon him will know he is a murderer and he will be an outcast. But if his parents and brother were in fact the only people in existence at the time, who is this scar supposed to warn? Plus in the book of Genesis, it is never actually stated that it was the devil who tempted Adam and Eve, just the serpent. Sure you can translate and insinuate, but there is no real proof that it ever happened so there is no way to prove that it was in fact the devil. I'm sure it says elsewhere in the bible that it was the devil, but again that can be someones misguided interpretation. Thats what the bible is, a big misguided interpretation. What if there was once a segment that just flat out stated that the old testament was not fact, just stories that were concocted to guide us humans through life in a sophisticated manner. But it was interpreted wrong and now we have the story of David and Goliath. There are so many fantastical stories in the old testament, some of them more outlandish than the stories of ancient Greece. Daniel in the Lions Den, Noah and the Ark, Jonah and the Whale, Moses and the Ten Commandments(along with the earliest miracles), Joseph and the robe, these are all great bedtime stories and they do teach us valuable life lessons, but they are no more believeable than the story of Athena spawning from the head of Zeus after he split his head open from a headache. I am waiting for a new religion to appear. Who knows. In 600 years there could the NEW New Testament, with such fantastical stories of giant twin towers falling after an attack by metal birds and a city surrounded by water being swallowed whole and stories of giant waves crashing and killing thousands and stories of Hitler, Mussolini, Saddam, and Oprah. Who will be the savior of that time? They've pretty much proved that Jesus was a mortal man of flesh and blood and schizophrenia without any devine powers, only a talented slight of hand. Maybe in this new age all people will be united, maybe my dreams will come true, or maybe the Mayans had it right and we're all gonna die Dec. 12, 2012, the second ice age. It could very well be coming, the signs are prevalent. Nobody knows what the future will bring, but there are some like myself who are still hoping for a united people who don't put forth an opposing effort on such trivial subjects like religion and politics because they've learned it is pointless, instead live in the present and worry about how to make this life better than fearing repercussions in the next. ugh...I need to learn how to write shorter statements. Well, I'm done.

First of all, the serpent is the Devil but in serpent form. He can take many different forms, even human form.

Yes Cain bear a mark, they called it a curse. They weren't the only ones on earth around this time.

Because whose to say there are even any reprecussions after we die?

Who's to say their aren't?

I would rather live a good life with God in it and have eternal life after I die rather then live a happy life without God in it only to find that I didn't have eternal life but damnation in Hell. The Bible describes Hell as being "suffering"...grinding of teeth all over your body..ect...

Now, this may sound like I'm only a Christian because of fear, but it's not true, yes I do want to go to Heaven and I'd prefer not to have my soul suffer but I'm a Christian out of love also.

But when you think of others saying "Oh, your going to God out of fear of Hell, that's pathetic"...would you seriously want your soul suffering that much in Hell? Believe me, you may think you wont feel it, but you will.

[sweetangel2128]

First...The leopard was thought to have split roughly a million years ago. The Bible only teaches that the earth was created about roughly six thousand years ago.

That's what scientists say but look at this: http://www.livescience.com/othernews/ap_05...ion_museum.html

PS: sorry this double posted guys.

[Jessica C.]

I thought id add that we have to be careful when using the word "evolution". Evolve means "to change over time" so yes in a sense, each species individually did evolve over time, which would be called micro evolution. But most people do not understand the differences between the two types of evolution. The problem with it most is that both types of evolution believe that the world is billions of years old, which is complete nonsense. I cant blame anyone who believes that though because it is what we are all taught in school as fact, our biology books tell us that the world is billions of years old, so its hard to jump from believing that to believing that the world is only 6,000 years old like the bible tells us. God showed us how old the earth is by telling us about each generation, how long they lived, etc. He also included jubilees, which are every 50 years i believe. There are many things in the bible that show us how old the earth is. We know by the bible that from Adam and Eve to Jesus dieing on the cross it was 4,000 years. It has been 2,000 years since Jesus died on the cross, therefore the earth is 6,000 years old.

What most people do not understand is why others are going around saying that certain animals date back millions of years ago, and they say the earth is billions of years old. Those people DO NOT believe in God or his word, because if they did they would believe the earth is 6,000 years old. I struggled with this transformation when i first became a Christian, because all my life i had been brainwashed into thinking the World to be billions of years old, because it said that it was in books and by scientists and others. I decided to put my faith in my God Jesus Christ and believe his word to be 100% true, and take it LITERALLY not metaphorically. If we believe in God 100% then we need to believe his word 100%, otherwise we are hypocrites.

There are also many things that we can see on earth today that prove the earth to be no older than 6,000 years old. the oldest tree is 4500 years old, it is petrified, which petrified things can last ages, so why arent there any older petrified trees found? According to how the worlds population has been growing in the recorded 6,000 years, there would be approximatly 250,000 people per square foot if the world were billions of years old, that would be a little too crowded. There is much more evidence out there to disprove evolution, and prove the word of God true. Keep in mind that scientists have not been able to prove the bible wrong, but scientists theorys about evolution have been proven wrong. Sorry to talk so much about evolution in the trinity debate, but i just wanted to clear a few things up. I will no longer use the word evolution when i speak of how species changed overtime, because some people dont have the intelligence to comprehend what exactly i am talking about when i say there are two types of evolution. I dont want anyone to assume that i believe in the evolution theory that says that this world was created with the big bang and then we all evolved from one single organism. Heres a saying i like: The Big Bang Theory: God said it, and BANG it happened :o)

[Jessica C.]

Why don't you reply to the other part of the post instead of telling me your life story?

We're talking about animals not your glory in high school.

Well, i can definately say that animals show a lot more love then you do

I know very very much about animals, ive studied them all my life in hopes of being a veterinarian. I know and have experienced that animals are capable of love. I have had cats especially all my life, they are very loving animals. When i was high school, i was having a very rough time in life, and i used to cry on my bed, and my cats, all 6 of them, would surround me, and one or two of them would cry at me, and paw at my shoulder and then id face them and they would lick the tears off my face!!! If thats not love, what is? in fact, why dont you tell me what you think Love is, not the websters dictionairy version, but what do you think personally love is? I dont see you expressing love to anyone here, so does that make you a loveless animal? My point is, just because someone or something doesnt seem to be showing you what you think love is, does not mean that that thing or person is without love. There are so many types of love, can we really just define it as one thing and say that all of the animals that our loving God created are incapable of love? NO We dont know an animals thoughts, we can only judge them by thier actions, which is what humans have to do to each other, we have to show love so that others no we love them.

Animals have shown me more love then most humans have. Humans cause heartbreak, humans have evil hearts, the bible says that men love darkness, the men's hearts are evil. I have recieved more love from animals then i have from humans total. My cats were my family when i didnt have a supportive family, my cats were my friends when i didnt have friends, my cats were my comfort and company, when i was so lonely i wanted to die. They stuck by me, and people did not give a damn about me.

I still want to know, what do you think LOVE is? Use your heart to answer that, not your mind or a book, but the heart full of love that God originally gave you.

Im not sure if ill get an immature response, or an ignorant response to this, i might get both, but either way, at least i know what love is, and know that the people of this world could have a hell of a lot more of it.

[sweetangel2128]

Well, i can definately say that animals show a lot more love then you do

I know very very much about animals, ive studied them all my life in hopes of being a veterinarian. I know and have experienced that animals are capable of love. I have had cats especially all my life, they are very loving animals. When i was high school, i was having a very rough time in life, and i used to cry on my bed, and my cats, all 6 of them, would surround me, and one or two of them would cry at me, and paw at my shoulder and then id face them and they would lick the tears off my face!!! If thats not love, what is? in fact, why dont you tell me what you think Love is, not the websters dictionairy version, but what do you think personally love is? I dont see you expressing love to anyone here, so does that make you a loveless animal? My point is, just because someone or something doesnt seem to be showing you what you think love is, does not mean that that thing or person is without love. There are so many types of love, can we really just define it as one thing and say that all of the animals that our loving God created are incapable of love? NO We dont know an animals thoughts, we can only judge them by thier actions, which is what humans have to do to each other, we have to show love so that others no we love them.

Animals have shown me more love then most humans have. Humans cause heartbreak, humans have evil hearts, the bible says that men love darkness, the men's hearts are evil. I have recieved more love from animals then i have from humans total. My cats were my family when i didnt have a supportive family, my cats were my friends when i didnt have friends, my cats were my comfort and company, when i was so lonely i wanted to die. They stuck by me, and people did not give a damn about me.

I still want to know, what do you think LOVE is? Use your heart to answer that, not your mind or a book, but the heart full of love that God originally gave you.

Im not sure if ill get an immature response, or an ignorant response to this, i might get both, but either way, at least i know what love is, and know that the people of this world could have a hell of a lot more of it.

Very nicely put :]] I enjoyed reading it. You do have a point though. Animals are VERY loving. Me and my boyfriends cat is always wanting love lol.

[Kontroll]

That's what scientists say but look at this: http://www.livescience.com/othernews/ap_05...ion_museum.html

PS: sorry this double posted guys.

What about it? It's just talking about a creation museum created by Ken Ham.

I'm just curious, what is the purpose of this post?

Well, i can definately say that animals show a lot more love then you do

I know very very much about animals, ive studied them all my life in hopes of being a veterinarian. I know and have experienced that animals are capable of love. I have had cats especially all my life, they are very loving animals. When i was high school, i was having a very rough time in life, and i used to cry on my bed, and my cats, all 6 of them, would surround me, and one or two of them would cry at me, and paw at my shoulder and then id face them and they would lick the tears off my face!!! If thats not love, what is? in fact, why dont you tell me what you think Love is, not the websters dictionairy version, but what do you think personally love is? I dont see you expressing love to anyone here, so does that make you a loveless animal? My point is, just because someone or something doesnt seem to be showing you what you think love is, does not mean that that thing or person is without love. There are so many types of love, can we really just define it as one thing and say that all of the animals that our loving God created are incapable of love? NO We dont know an animals thoughts, we can only judge them by thier actions, which is what humans have to do to each other, we have to show love so that others no we love them.

Animals have shown me more love then most humans have. Humans cause heartbreak, humans have evil hearts, the bible says that men love darkness, the men's hearts are evil. I have recieved more love from animals then i have from humans total. My cats were my family when i didnt have a supportive family, my cats were my friends when i didnt have friends, my cats were my comfort and company, when i was so lonely i wanted to die. They stuck by me, and people did not give a damn about me.

I still want to know, what do you think LOVE is? Use your heart to answer that, not your mind or a book, but the heart full of love that God originally gave you.

Im not sure if ill get an immature response, or an ignorant response to this, i might get both, but either way, at least i know what love is, and know that the people of this world could have a hell of a lot more of it.

haha. That's not love.

Love is long suffering. It's sacrifice. Trust. And more. That's what it says in the Bible at least. Love is long suffering.

I feel that if you love some one enough you would give your life for them in the appropriate time.

I really don't think that animals would do that. THey show affection and nothing more.

If you're going to claim that animals love, at least break it down logically or scientifically. Please.

[sweetangel2128]

I feel that if you love some one enough you would give your life for them in the appropriate time.

I posted it because it's a museum devoted to creationism. A museum is a place that has actual findings of things devoted to a particular subject. Actually, have you heard of Dr. Kent Hovind? You should watch some of his videos. He's a Scientist who believes in Creationism and believes that the world is only 6,000 years old. And Jessica brought to my attention that that cat isn't that old, at the most it would be 6,000 years old because the world is that old. Why does she deny the testing? Because the people that tested the cat were evolutionist that are trying to prove a theory correct and she also brought to my attention that carbon dating is inaccurate it is always 2-4 thousand years off or more. And that when they study something they add years to it and say it's really old when in fact it isn't and that she has studied this.

Some animals would give there lives to protect their owners out of love.

[Kontroll]

I believe the world is only six thousand years old, but when I showed you the comment made about that, I was just making a point. They say the cat is over a million years old, but it contradicts what I view.

[sweetangel2128]

I believe the world is only six thousand years old, but when I showed you the comment made about that, I was just making a point. They say the cat is over a million years old, but it contradicts what I view.

Yeah, I found an article by Kent Hovind on Carbon Dating, it was VERY interesting. Heres the article I found:

http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=73

Let me know your views?

[Kontroll]

Yeah, I found an article by Kent Hovind on Carbon Dating, it was VERY interesting. Heres the article I found:

http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=73

Let me know your views?

I really don't need to read it. I find it to be inaccurate. When people test, they are looking for certain numbers. When they don't find those numbers they throw them out and don't record them.

So, if we are to date by that method, we would need unbiased scientists who record all dates. Date it at least three or four times to get an average date, if the dates do average closely.

[sweetangel2128]

I really don't need to read it. I find it to be inaccurate. When people test, they are looking for certain numbers. When they don't find those numbers they throw them out and don't record them.

So, if we are to date by that method, we would need unbiased scientists who record all dates. Date it at least three or four times to get an average date, if the dates do average closely.

It's not innaccurate but accurate. It explains what carbon dating is and why they believe it's not accurate. Actually read it before you assume. How can you say something is innaccurate when you haven't even read it?