True cristhianity

[Saga of Gemini]

Originally posted by Archer 007
1) While the Jehovah's Witnesses believe there is only one true God, they deny the biblical concept of the Trinity which teaches that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God. One God: Isa. 43:10; 44:6-8; 45:5-6, 18, 22; 1 Cor. 8:4. Father is God: 2 Peter 1:17; Phil. 2:11. Son is God: John 1:1; John 8:58; Rom. 9:5; Phil. 2:6-9; Heb. 1:8. Holy Spirit is God: Acts 5:3-4.

2) Contrary to Watchtower theology, Jesus is not a created being or an angel, but rather is the Creator. John 1:2-3; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:6; Rev. 22:8-9.

3) The Holy Spirit is not only God but also clearly has personality according to the Bible. John 16:13-14; Acts 8:29, 13:2.

4) A person does not gain favor with God by being a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses and going door-to-door. Rather, salvation is dependent upon one's relationship with Jesus Christ. John 3:3, 16-20; Acts 4:12; Rom. 3:24-26; 1 John 1:7-10.

5) The Bible is clear that everyone will exist eternally , either in a place known as heaven or in a place of eternal torment. Heaven: John 14:1-3; Rev. 6:9. Hell: Matt. 23:33, 25:41, 45; Rev. 20:14.


Feel enlightened?

1) Im not in home rigth now, but biblically theres no trinity since like I said Im not in my house, I dnt have the means to explaine it correctly but Ill try..lets see:

A PROTESTANT publication states: "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible . . . It did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century." (The Illustrated Bible Dictionary) And a Catholic authority says that the Trinity "is not . . . directly and immediately [the] word of God."—New Catholic Encyclopedia.

The Catholic Encyclopedia also comments: "In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word [tri'as] (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A. D. 180. . . . Shortly afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian."

However, this is no proof in itself that Tertullian taught the Trinity. The Catholic work Trinitas—A Theological Encyclopedia of the Holy Trinity, for example, notes that some of Tertullian's words were later used by others to describe the Trinity. Then it cautions: "But hasty conclusions cannot be drawn from usage, for he does not apply the words to Trinitarian theology."

The Encyclopedia of Religion admits: "Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity." And the New Catholic Encyclopedia also says: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the O[ld] T[estament]."

Similarly, in his book The Triune God, Jesuit Edmund Fortman admits: "The Old Testament . . . tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. . . . There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead. . . . Even to see in [the "Old Testament"] suggestions or foreshadowings or 'veiled signs' of the trinity of persons, is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers."—Italics ours.

WELL, then, do the Christian Greek Scriptures ("New Testament") speak clearly of a Trinity?

The Encyclopedia of Religion says: "Theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity."

The New Encyclopædia Britannica observes: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament."

Yale University professor E. Washburn Hopkins affirmed: "To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the trinity was apparently unknown; . . . they say nothing about it."—Origin and Evolution of Religion.

"Primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds."—The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

"The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the [Trinity] idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognised the . . . Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in One."—The Paganism in Our Christianity.

"At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian . . . It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the N[ew] T[estament] and other early Christian writings."—Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics.

The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. . . . Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."—New Catholic Encyclopedia.

"There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead."—The Triune God

Thus, the testimony of the Bible and of history makes clear that the Trinity was unknown throughout Biblical times and for several centuries thereafter

WHY, for thousands of years, did none of God's prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the "central doctrine" of faith?

Are Christians to believe that centuries after Christ and after having inspired the writing of the Bible, God would back the formulation of a doctrine that was unknown to his servants for thousands of years, one that is an "inscrutable mystery" "beyond the grasp of human reason," one that admittedly had a pagan background and was "largely a matter of church politics"?

THE Bible teaching that God is one is called monotheism. And L. L. Paine, professor of ecclesiastical history, indicates that monotheism in its purest form does not allow for a Trinity: "The Old Testament is strictly monotheistic. God is a single personal being. The idea that a trinity is to be found there . . . is utterly without foundation."

Was there any change from monotheism after Jesus came to the earth? Paine answers: "On this point there is no break between the Old Testament and the New. The monotheistic tradition is continued. Jesus was a Jew, trained by Jewish parents in the Old Testament scriptures. His teaching was Jewish to the core; a new gospel indeed, but not a new theology. . . . And he accepted as his own belief the great text of Jewish monotheism: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God.'"

Those words are found at Deuteronomy 6:4. The Catholic New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) here reads: "Listen, Israel: Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh."* In the grammar of that verse, the word "one" has no plural modifiers to suggest that it means anything but one individual.

The Christian apostle Paul did not indicate any change in the nature of God either, even after Jesus came to the earth. He wrote: "God is only one."—Galatians 3:20; see also 1 Corinthians 8:4-6.

Thousands of times throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person. When he speaks, it is as one undivided individual. The Bible could not be any clearer on this. As God states: "I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my own glory." (Isaiah 42:8) "I am Yahweh your God . . . You shall have no gods except me." (Italics ours.)—Exodus 20:2, 3, JB.

Why would all the God-inspired Bible writers speak of God as one person if he were actually three persons? What purpose would that serve, except to mislead people? Surely, if God were composed of three persons, he would have had his Bible writers make it abundantly clear so that there could be no doubt about it. At least the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures who had personal contact with God's own Son would have done so. But they did not.

Instead, what the Bible writers did make abundantly clear is that God is one Person—a unique, unpartitioned Being who has no equal: "I am Jehovah, and there is no one else. With the exception of me there is no God." (Isaiah 45:5) "You, whose name is Jehovah, you alone are the Most High over all the earth."—Psalm 83:18.

JESUS called God "the only true God." (John 17:3) Never did he refer to God as a deity of plural persons. That is why nowhere in the Bible is anyone but Jehovah called Almighty. Otherwise, it voids the meaning of the word "almighty." Neither Jesus nor the holy spirit is ever called that, for Jehovah alone is supreme. At Genesis 17:1 he declares: "I am God Almighty." And Exodus 18:11 says: "Jehovah is greater than all the other gods."

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the word ´eloh'ah (god) has two plural forms, namely, ´elo·him' (gods) and ´elo·heh' (gods of). These plural forms generally refer to Jehovah, in which case they are translated in the singular as "God." Do these plural forms indicate a Trinity? No, they do not. In A Dictionary of the Bible, William Smith says: "The fanciful idea that [´elo·him'] referred to the trinity of persons in the Godhead hardly finds now a supporter among scholars. It is either what grammarians call the plural of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God."

The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures says of ´elo·him': "It is almost invariably construed with a singular verbal predicate, and takes a singular adjectival attribute." To illustrate this, the title ´elo·him' appears 35 times by itself in the account of creation, and every time the verb describing what God said and did is singular. (Genesis 1:1-2:4) Thus, that publication concludes: "[´Elo·him'] must rather be explained as an intensive plural, denoting greatness and majesty."

WHILE on earth, Jesus was a human, although a perfect one because it was God who transferred the life-force of Jesus to the womb of Mary. (Matthew 1:18-25) But that is not how he began. He himself declared that he had "descended from heaven." (John 3:13) So it was only natural that he would later say to his followers: "What if you should see the Son of man [Jesus] ascend to where he was before?"—John 6:62, NJB.

Thus, Jesus had an existence in heaven before coming to the earth. But was it as one of the persons in an almighty, eternal triune Godhead? No, for the Bible plainly states that in his prehuman existence, Jesus was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God. Neither the angels nor Jesus had existed before their creation.

Having been created by God, Jesus is in a secondary position in time, power, and knowledge

Jesus, in his prehuman existence, was "the first-born of all creation." (Colossians 1:15, NJB) He was "the beginning of God's creation." (Revelation 3:14, RS, Catholic edition). "Beginning" [Greek, ar·khe'] cannot rightly be interpreted to mean that Jesus was the 'beginner' of God's creation. In his Bible writings, John uses various forms of the Greek word ar·khe' more than 20 times, and these always have the common meaning of "beginning." Yes, Jesus was created by God as the beginning of God's invisible creations.

Notice how closely those references to the origin of Jesus correlate with expressions uttered by the figurative "Wisdom" in the Bible book of Proverbs: "Yahweh created me, first-fruits of his fashioning, before the oldest of his works. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, I came to birth; before he had made the earth, the countryside, and the first elements of the world." (Proverbs 8:12, 22, 25, 26, NJB) While the term "Wisdom" is used to personify the one whom God created, most scholars agree that it is actually a figure of speech for Jesus as a spirit creature prior to his human existence.

As "Wisdom" in his prehuman existence, Jesus goes on to say that he was "by his [God's] side, a master craftsman." (Proverbs 8:30, JB) In harmony with this role as master craftsman, Colossians 1:16 says of Jesus that "through him God created everything in heaven and on earth."—Today's English Version (TEV).

So it was by means of this master worker, his junior partner, as it were, that Almighty God created all other things. The Bible summarizes the matter this way: "For us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things . . . and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things." (Italics ours.)—1 Corinthians 8:6, RS, Catholic edition.

It no doubt was to this master craftsman that God said: "Let us make man in our image." (Genesis 1:26) Some have claimed that the "us" and "our" in this expression indicate a Trinity. But if you were to say, 'Let us make something for ourselves,' no one would normally understand this to imply that several persons are combined as one inside of you. You simply mean that two or more individuals will work together on something. So, too, when God used "us" and "our," he was simply addressing another individual, his first spirit creation, the master craftsman, the prehuman Jesus
(this also clears point 2)

AT MATTHEW 4:1, Jesus is spoken of as being "tempted by the Devil." After showing Jesus "all the kingdoms of the world and their glory," Satan said: "All these things I will give you if you fall down and do an act of worship to me." (Matthew 4:8, 9) Satan was trying to cause Jesus to be disloyal to God.

But what test of loyalty would that be if Jesus were God? Could God rebel against himself? No, but angels and humans could rebel against God and did. The temptation of Jesus would make sense only if he was, not God, but a separate individual who had his own free will, one who could have been disloyal had he chosen to be, such as an angel or a human.

On the other hand, it is unimaginable that God could sin and be disloyal to himself. "Perfect is his activity . . . A God of faithfulness, . . . righteous and upright is he." (Deuteronomy 32:4) So if Jesus had been God, he could not have been tempted.—James 1:13.

Not being God, Jesus could have been disloyal. But he remained faithful, saying: "Go away, Satan! For it is written, 'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.'"—Matthew 4:10.

Continued..

 

[Saga of Gemini]

ONE of the main reasons why Jesus came to earth also has a direct bearing on the Trinity. The Bible states: "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all."—1 Timothy 2:5, 6.

Jesus, no more and no less than a perfect human, became a ransom that compensated exactly for what Adam lost—the right to perfect human life on earth. So Jesus could rightly be called "the last Adam" by the apostle Paul, who said in the same context: "Just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive." (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45) The perfect human life of Jesus was the "corresponding ransom" required by divine justice—no more, no less. A basic principle even of human justice is that the price paid should fit the wrong committed.


If Jesus, however, were part of a Godhead, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher than what God's own Law required. (Exodus 21:23-25; Leviticus 24:19-21) It was only a perfect human, Adam, who sinned in Eden, not God. So the ransom, to be truly in line with God's justice, had to be strictly an equivalent—a perfect human, "the last Adam." Thus, when God sent Jesus to earth as the ransom, he made Jesus to be what would satisfy justice, not an incarnation, not a god-man, but a perfect man, "lower than angels." (Hebrews 2:9; compare Psalm 8:5, 6.) How could any part of an almighty Godhead—Father, Son, or holy spirit—ever be lower than angels?


THE Bible calls Jesus the "only-begotten Son" of God. (John 1:14; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9) Trinitarians say that since God is eternal, so the Son of God is eternal. But how can a person be a son and at the same time be as old as his father?

Trinitarians claim that in the case of Jesus, "only-begotten" is not the same as the dictionary definition of "begetting," which is "to procreate as the father." (Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary) They say that in Jesus' case it means "the sense of unoriginated relationship," a sort of only son relationship without the begetting. (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words) Does that sound logical to you? Can a man father a son without begetting him?

Furthermore, why does the Bible use the very same Greek word for "only-begotten" (as Vine admits without any explanation) to describe the relationship of Isaac to Abraham? Hebrews 11:17 speaks of Isaac as Abraham's "only-begotten son." There can be no question that in Isaac's case, he was only-begotten in the normal sense, not equal in time or position to his father.

The basic Greek word for "only-begotten" used for Jesus and Isaac is mo·no·ge·nes', from mo'nos, meaning "only," and gi'no·mai, a root word meaning "to generate," "to become (come into being)," states Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. Hence, mo·no·ge·nes' is defined as: "Only born, only begotten, i.e. an only child."—A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament, by E. Robinson.

The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel, says: "[Mo·no·ge·nes'] means 'of sole descent,' i.e., without brothers or sisters." This book also states that at John 1:18; 3:16, 18; and 1 John 4:9, "the relation of Jesus is not just compared to that of an only child to its father. It is the relation of the only-begotten to the Father."

So Jesus, the only-begotten Son, had a beginning to his life. And Almighty God can rightly be called his Begetter, or Father, in the same sense that an earthly father, like Abraham, begets a son. (Hebrews 11:17) Hence, when the Bible speaks of God as the "Father" of Jesus, it means what it says—that they are two separate individuals. God is the senior. Jesus is the junior—in time, position, power, and knowledge.

When one considers that Jesus was not the only spirit son of God created in heaven, it becomes evident why the term "only-begotten Son" was used in his case. Countless other created spirit beings, angels, are also called "sons of God," in the same sense that Adam was, because their life-force originated with Jehovah God, the Fountain, or Source, of life. (Job 38:7; Psalm 36:9; Luke 3:38) But these were all created through the "only-begotten Son," who was the only one directly begotten by God.—Colossians 1:15-17.


WHILE Jesus is often called the Son of God in the Bible, nobody in the first century ever thought of him as being God the Son. Even the demons, who "believe there is one God," knew from their experience in the spirit realm that Jesus was not God. So, correctly, they addressed Jesus as the separate "Son of God." (James 2:19; Matthew 8:29) And when Jesus died, the pagan Roman soldiers standing by knew enough to say that what they had heard from his followers must be right, not that Jesus was God, but that "certainly this was God's Son."—Matthew 27:54.

Hence, the phrase "Son of God" refers to Jesus as a separate created being, not as part of a Trinity. As the Son of God, he could not be God himself, for John 1:18 says: "No one has ever seen God."—RS, Catholic edition.

The disciples viewed Jesus as the "one mediator between God and men," not as God himself. (1 Timothy 2:5) Since by definition a mediator is someone separate from those who need mediation, it would be a contradiction for Jesus to be one entity with either of the parties he is trying to reconcile. That would be a pretending to be something he is not.

The Bible is clear and consistent about the relationship of God to Jesus. Jehovah God alone is Almighty. He created the prehuman Jesus directly. Thus, Jesus had a beginning and could never be coequal with God in power or eternity.


JESUS never claimed to be God. Everything he said about himself indicates that he did not consider himself equal to God in any way—not in power, not in knowledge, not in age.

In every period of his existence, whether in heaven or on earth, his speech and conduct reflect subordination to God. God is always the superior, Jesus the lesser one who

Jesus showed that he was a creature separate from God and that he, Jesus, had a God above him, a God whom he worshiped, a God whom he called "Father." In prayer to God, that is, the Father, Jesus said, "You, the only true God." (John 17:3) At John 20:17 he said to Mary Magdalene: "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." (RS, Catholic edition) At 2 Corinthians 1:3 the apostle Paul confirms this relationship: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." Since Jesus had a God, his Father, he could not at the same time be that God.

The apostle Paul had no reservations about speaking of Jesus and God as distinctly separate: "For us there is one God, the Father, . . . and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ." (1 Corinthians 8:6, JB) The apostle shows the distinction when he mentions "the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels." (1 Timothy 5:21, RS Common Bible) Just as Paul speaks of Jesus and the angels as being distinct from one another in heaven, so too are Jesus and God.


Jesus' words at John 8:17, 18 are also significant. He states: "In your own Law it is written, 'The witness of two men is true.' I am one that bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me." Here Jesus shows that he and the Father, that is, Almighty God, must be two distinct entities, for how else could there truly be two witnesses?

Jesus further showed that he was a separate being from God by saying: "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone." (Mark 10:18, JB) So Jesus was saying that no one is as good as God is, not even Jesus himself. God is good in a way that separates him from Jesus.

Well thats about all I got, but it clears it all up.

 

[Saga of Gemini]

Well clear the other points later g2g now.

 

[Saga of Gemini]

3)( wich is related to the trinity doctrine)
ACCORDING to the Trinity doctrine, the holy spirit is the third person of a Godhead, equal to the Father and to the Son. As the book Our Orthodox Christian Faith says: "The Holy Spirit is totally God."

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the word most frequently used for "spirit" is ru'ach, meaning "breath; wind; spirit." In the Greek Scriptures, the word is pneu'ma, having a similar meaning. Do these words indicate that the holy spirit is part of a Trinity?

Bible's use of "holy spirit" indicates that it is a controlled force that Jehovah God uses to accomplish a variety of his purposes. To a certain extent, it can be likened to electricity, a force that can be adapted to perform a great variety of operations.

At Genesis 1:2 the Bible states that "God's active force ["spirit" (Hebrew, ru'ach)] was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters." Here, God's spirit was his active force working to shape the earth.

God uses his spirit to enlighten those who serve him. David prayed: "Teach me to do your will, for you are my God. Your spirit [ru'ach] is good; may it lead me in the land of uprightness." (Psalm 143:10) When 70 capable men were appointed to help Moses, God said to him: "I shall have to take away some of the spirit [ru'ach] that is upon you and place it upon them."—Numbers 11:17.

Bible prophecy was recorded when men of God were "borne along by holy spirit [Greek, from pneu'ma]." (2 Peter 1:20, 21) In this way the Bible was "inspired of God," the Greek word for which is The·o'pneu·stos, meaning "God-breathed." (2 Timothy 3:16) And holy spirit guided certain people to see visions or to have prophetic dreams.—2 Samuel 23:2; Joel 2:28, 29; Luke 1:67; Acts 1:16; 2:32, 33.

The holy spirit impelled Jesus to go into the wilderness after his baptism. (Mark 1:12) The spirit was like a fire within God's servants, causing them to be energized by that force. And it enabled them to speak out boldly and courageously.—Micah 3:8; Acts 7:55-60; 18:25; Romans 12:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:19.

By his spirit, God carries out his judgments on men and nations. (Isaiah 30:27, 28; 59:18, 19) And God's spirit can reach everywhere, acting for people or against them.—Psalm 139:7-12

ARE there not, however, Bible verses that speak of the holy spirit in personal terms? Yes, but note what Catholic theologian Edmund Fortman says about this in The Triune God: "Although this spirit is often described in personal terms, it seems quite clear that the sacred writers [of the Hebrew Scriptures] never conceived or presented this spirit as a distinct person."



On one occasion the holy spirit appeared as a dove. On another occasion it appeared as tongues of fire—never as a person


In the Scriptures it is not unusual for something to be personified. Wisdom is said to have children. (Luke 7:35) Sin and death are called kings. (Romans 5:14, 21) At Genesis 4:7 The New English Bible (NE) says: "Sin is a demon crouching at the door," personifying sin as a wicked spirit crouching at Cain's door. But, of course, sin is not a spirit person; nor does personifying the holy spirit make it a spirit person.

Similarly, at 1 John 5:6-8 (NE) not only the spirit but also "the water, and the blood" are said to be "witnesses." But water and blood are obviously not persons, and neither is the holy spirit a person.

In harmony with this is the Bible's general usage of "holy spirit" in an impersonal way, such as paralleling it with water and fire. (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8) People are urged to become filled with holy spirit instead of with wine. (Ephesians 5:18) They are spoken of as being filled with holy spirit in the same way they are filled with such qualities as wisdom, faith, and joy. (Acts 6:3; 11:24; 13:52) And at 2 Corinthians 6:6 holy spirit is included among a number of qualities. Such expressions would not be so common if the holy spirit were actually a person.

Then, too, while some Bible texts say that the spirit speaks, other texts show that this was actually done through humans or angels. (Matthew 10:19, 20; Acts 4:24, 25; 28:25; Hebrews 2:2) The action of the spirit in such instances is like that of radio waves transmitting messages from one person to another far away.

At Matthew 28:19 reference is made to "the name . . . of the holy spirit." But the word "name" does not always mean a personal name, either in Greek or in English. When we say "in the name of the law," we are not referring to a person. We mean that which the law stands for, its authority. Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament says: "The use of name (onoma) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority." So baptism 'in the name of the holy spirit' recognizes the authority of the spirit, that it is from God and functions by divine will

point 3 cleared.

 

[Saga of Gemini]

4) yup thats not true, because like u and I said, one can be a christhian from the mouth out, also a person can be a JW just to follow its protocole, or to please someone.

The fact that someone says: "Im a JW" does not shield him.

Like u well said, it has to come with acts, following what christ did.

5)Many religions teach that the wicked will go to a fiery hell and be tormented forever. Is this teaching logical and Scriptural? The human life span is limited to 70 or 80 years. Even if someone was guilty of extreme wickedness all his life, would everlasting torment be a just punishment? No. It would be grossly unjust to torment a man forever for the sins that he committed in a short lifetime.

Only God can reveal what happens after people die, and he has done so in his written Word, the Bible. This is what the Bible says: "As the [beast] dies, so the [man] dies; and they all have but one spirit . . . All are going to one place. They have all come to be from the dust, and they are all returning to the dust." (Ecclesiastes 3:19, 20) There is no mention here of a fiery hell. Humans return to dust—to nonexistence—when they die.

In order to be tormented, a person has to be conscious. Are the dead conscious? Once again, the Bible gives the answer: "The living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all, neither do they anymore have wages, because the remembrance of them has been forgotten." (Ecclesiastes 9:5) It is impossible for the dead, who are "conscious of nothing at all," to experience agony anywhere.

We cease to exist when we die, but this does not mean that everything is necessarily finished. The faithful man Job knew that he would go to the grave, Sheol, when he died. But listen to his prayer to God: "O that in Sheol you would conceal me, that you would keep me secret until your anger turns back, that you would set a time limit for me and remember me! If an able-bodied man dies can he live again? . . . You will call, and I myself shall answer you."—Job 14:13-15.

Job believed that if he was faithful until death, he would be remembered by God and in time be resurrected. This was the belief of all of God's servants in ancient times. Jesus himself confirmed this hope and showed that God would use him to raise the dead. Christ's own words give us this assurance: "The hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear [Jesus'] voice and come out, those who did good things to a resurrection of life, those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgment."—John 5:28, 29.

Very shortly God will remove all wickedness and establish a new world under heavenly rulership. (Psalm 37:10, 11; Daniel 2:44; Revelation 16:14, 16) The result will be a paradise over the whole earth, inhabited by people who serve God. In the Bible we read: "I heard a loud voice from the throne say: 'Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.'"—Revelation 21:3, 4.

Well all cleared hehe.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

The trinity itself seems to be the most obvious flaw in Christian belief. Despite how much people try to rationalize it, it goes against the idea of monotheism.

Some will say that it is just the same god in 3 different forms, but why not 1 form, or 30 forms, or 30 000 000 000 forms? Why three? It just seems so arbitrary to me.

 

[Saga of Gemini]

@ sobieskiII:

to whom are u adressng to? not me rigth? or did you just wanted to make a coment.

 

[Saga of Gemini]

Originally posted by FredLC
Archer:

Not only that. Also that saying "there is only one road" is not really helpful in defining which such road is.

Saga:

See my point? I disagree that lying equals to murder. I think the last one is far more damaging to the fabric of society. Now, I am not a Christian, but I once were, and back than, I would have said the very same thing. And I know some practicing Christians who would gladly agree with me.

Would you be entitled to judge me, and them, fakes because we disagree on biblical interpretation? Because if it demands that a man have to be fair, I can rather esily justify biblically that considering such blatantly different offenses as the same would be to disrespect God's teachings.

Not quite so clear-cut, huh?

Regards .

Yes it is clear cut, since the bible explicitly says so.
Remember is not how u see it, its how gods see it, if before the human laws, murder is worst than lyng to god its equally bad.

 

[Saga of Gemini]

Originally posted by FredLC




I just cleared that I go even father than that and that the mentioning that only one path is correct does not help in identifying such path.

Regards .

Yup but it helps in understanding that not everyone that calls himself christhian is.

Like I said, the list I posted at the beggining helps.

 

[Saga of Gemini]

Originally posted by Archer 007
If they are faking it, they are not truely Christian. The point is we dont know who the fakes are.

we dont but God does, and where did god told us what he wanted and such?.......you guessed it in the bible yup.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Originally posted by Saga of Gemini
Yup but it helps in understanding that not everyone that calls himself christhian is.

Like I said, the list I posted at the beggining helps.

According to what you consider a Christian, which ultimately will rest on inaccurate representations of his life.

 

[Archer 007]

I like how Saga states Jesus has schizophrenia.

 

[Smidlee]

For those who doesn't believe in the trinity here is a verse anyone who just goes to church one time(Christmas) a year will know by heart. Just because Catholics learned about the Trinity in scriptures doesn't make it wrong itself. We know more about Revelation today than christians did a 100 years ago.
The Christmas verse is in Isaiah 9:6 which is going to be hard for some to grasp :
"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name ( not names!!) shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, the everlasting FATHER, The Prince of Peace."

Just because I'm not a Catholic doesn't mean I can't learn something from a Catholic. I disagree with a lot of Catholics doctrine but I believe they were right about the Trinity.

 

[cegman]

12??? or 11 commandments I can't remeber anymore. You try and follow these and believe that CHRIST(ians hence the name) died for there sins and was reborn.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Originally posted by Saga of Gemini
@ sobieskiII:

to whom are u adressng to? not me rigth? or did you just wanted to make a coment.

To you, and to any Christian that assumes their outline for what Christianity is, is indeed the true criteria.

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by cegman
12??? or 11 commandments I can't remeber anymore. You try and follow these and believe that CHRIST(ians hence the name) died for there sins and was reborn.

10 or 633, depending on view point.

 

[FredLC]

Originally posted by Saga of Gemini
Yes it is clear cut, since the bible explicitly says so.
Remember is not how u see it, its how gods see it, if before the human laws, murder is worst than lyng to god its equally bad.

Through paraboles that can be understood the manner you do, or in other manners. There is no way around it, Saga. No matter how many times you attest the certainty you have on your personal reading of the bible, it remains a mere interpretation of it, not truly binding even for others who like to rely on the very same book.

Originally posted by Saga of Gemini
Yup but it helps in understanding that not everyone that calls himself christhian is.

Like I said, the list I posted at the beggining helps.

Let me try saying it one more time. The list you posted is your list, and these are your words, not the words written in the bible. They are nothing but one reading of the bible, one of many possible. A Christian of different denomination could come up with a different list of principles, and just as easily judge you a false Christian, case in which our hypothetical friend will be just as wrong as you are now.

You have no mandate to rule on how to interpret that book, my friend. Can you grasp that?

Regards .

 

[puglover]

Originally posted by FredLC
Saga, the crux of being a Christian is believing in Christ.

Ah, but Jesus himself said that even the demons BELIEVE in Christ. They just don't worship him as God. The simpleist criteria for a Christian is that they believe that Christ is God and they serve him and treat him as a God.

 

[Inter4]

puglover..did you read saga's post about trinity?

according to the bible Jesus and God are two different individuals.

 

[cegman]

Puglover, I believe that we don't even need to believe he is God just that he is perfect and therefore died to save us from our sins. There is also the rebirth stuff but that is too contraversial and not exactly neccassary to believe that it happened.

Archer 007, I was talking about 10 commandment brought down the mountain by Moses and the 1 or 2 commandment given by Christ when he was here on earth the love your neighbor commandment.