What is God's first creation?

[keypurr]

I may have met the greatest theologian when I was sixteen years old, funny part is he was thirteen years old. This small boy came up to me an a small bicycle and asked me, "Do you believe in God?". I answered, "of course I do"

He then turned on his little bike and said, "I believe in Jesus, but not the old man"

I believe complete faith in Jesus and His work on the cross, washing away our sins, has brought salvation for me and many who truly believe!

I do good works now being saved, like posting here and trying to helping my church and community, but I do not think I have to pray to any other than Jesus to go to heaven.

I do nit believe I have to think i all out, or even care more than enough to be saved, which is more wanted Jesus in my life than being a great Bible scholar, and doing such, for most, only confuses them and makes getting closer to salvation impossible.

Keeping theology simple and seeking Jesus and having Him in your life is the correct path towards salvation. All other learning is extra, and if only done to impress people on forums, it might lead one straight to hell.

K2U, I feel the same way sometimes. I was brought up as a Trinity believer. But then I read that God was one and only one. God did not come down and die, he sent his son. Even though he gave his son his fullness, his son is a creation, not God. He is a created FORM of God (a god), and that is the logos that went into the human Jesus. We both love him for the pain he went through for us. But the fact is YHWH, the only true God, is a jealous God and does not approve of mankind creating another God. Christ came to do the will of his God,

THAT IS MY POINT.

I love the God of my Lord Jesus Christ.


Bless you K, have a good night.

 

[Idolater]

...He then turned on his little bike and said, "I believe in Jesus

Me too. And I'm happy to know that believing in Jesus means believing in His Resurrection, because believing that He is risen, is also believing in the confirmation of everything He did and said---and of Who He is.

, but not the old man"

Do you know if he meant that he didn't believe in his own father, or do you know that he meant The Father?

I believe complete faith in Jesus and His work on the cross, washing away our sins, has brought salvation for me and many who truly believe!

I do good works now being saved, like posting here and trying to helping my church and community, but I do not think I have to pray to any other than Jesus to go to heaven.

I do nit believe I have to think i all out, or even care more than enough to be saved, which is more wanted Jesus in my life than being a great Bible scholar, and doing such, for most, only confuses them and makes getting closer to salvation impossible.

Keeping theology simple and seeking Jesus and having Him in your life is the correct path towards salvation. All other learning is extra, and if only done to impress people on forums, it might lead one straight to hell.

Or, pursuing theology is valuable effort for Christians. Catholic theology is ipso facto the one correct school of theological thought, because of the Catholic Church being the one that traces back to Jesus, and the first millennium when Peter's pastorate presided in charity over not just the Roman cathedral, but also the archdiocese of Rome, and the whole Church; just as Peter did. Peter invented the job of pope. Everything Peter did, after he died, his successor did that same job. It's the supreme pastorate of the Church, and it's as old as Acts 2:10 KJV, when the archdiocese of Rome began, the same day as all the other truly ancient Church archdioceses.

Instead of trying to figure out theology purely in the abstract, consider that Christ didn't found a theology, and that He did found a Church.

 

[Idolater]

I may have met the greatest theologian when I was sixteen years old, funny part is he was thirteen years old. This small boy came up to me an a small bicycle and asked me, "Do you believe in God?". I answered, "of course I do"...

Me too! It is founded upon Christ's Resurrection. As in, 'How'd that happen?' Because of God. So God is real. God is nonfiction. That's founded upon Christ's Resurrection being nonfiction.

Can you imagine the trivial nature of the Catholic response to Keypurr's latest post to you? He's arguing about the Trinity, but the Catholic just knows that the Catholic Church is Jesus's actual Church, and the Catholic Church has been Trinitarian from the beginning, and nothing other than the Trinity has ever been taught. Non-trinitarians were excommunicated, that's how purely the Trinity was taught by the Catholic Church, throughout over 19 centuries.

So the response to Keypurr isn't about what he thinks the Bible says, it's about what he, Keypurr's, saying, and what that means, about Jesus's success in founding His Church. If the Trinity is false, then Jesus's actual Church plunged immediately into heinous error; almost right away, within the Apostolic age. That's how unsuccessful Jesus must have been, if the Trinity is false.

And so, when you look at theology from the physical perspective, things such as 'the Trinity is false,' we reject out of hand, because of what it implies about the ability of our Lord to found a robust Church. Intercontinental ballistic missile proof. There's absolutely no possibility that Christ founded His Church, and that rather immediately, an error involving blasphemy, fatally infected Peter's pastorate, and all of the Church's pasatorates, with a few exceptions, each who were excommunicated.

It's not possible, from the physical perspective, to doubt the certainty that the Trinity is legitimately Christian, if you believe that Jesus did not just establish a spiritual kingdom, but also a physical kingdom. His Church is the kingdom of God in seed form. The society of His Church is the kingdom of God, in seed form. The coming kingdom of God is already here, in seed form, in the society of Jesus's Church.

 

[NWL]

If the Trinity is false, then Jesus's actual Church plunged immediately into heinous error; almost right away, within the Apostolic age. That's how unsuccessful Jesus must have been, if the Trinity is false.

That's exactly what happened and was foretold in scripture by the apostles themselves:

(Acts 20:29, 30) "..I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, 30 and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.."

(2 Peter 2:1-3) "..However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These will quietly bring in destructive sects, and they will even disown the owner who bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. 2 Furthermore, many will follow their brazen conduct, and because of them the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively. 3 Also, they will greedily exploit you with counterfeit words. But their judgment, decided long ago, is not moving slowly, and their destruction is not sleeping.."

The Catholic Church has been Trinitarian from the beginning, and nothing other than the Trinity has ever been taught. Non-trinitarians were excommunicated, that's how purely the Trinity was taught by the Catholic Church, throughout over 19 centuries.

The original church was the one Christ set up after his death, the ones the first apostles were part of. Nowhere do we see the trinity being taught by the apostles and disciplines therefore your claim in bogus. Even after the apostles death do we not see a clear sign of the trinity being taught, as understood today, until near the end of the 2 CE.

And so, when you look at theology from the physical perspective, things such as 'the Trinity is false,' we reject out of hand, because of what it implies about the ability of our Lord to found a robust Church. Intercontinental ballistic missile proof. There's absolutely no possibility that Christ founded His Church, and that rather immediately, an error involving blasphemy, fatally infected Peter's pastorate, and all of the Church's pasatorates, with a few exceptions, each who were excommunicated.

Yet that is exactly what happened.

 

[Idolater]

That's exactly what happened and was foretold in scripture by the apostles themselves:

(Acts 20:29, 30) "..I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, 30 and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.."

OK, so you are saying that Trinitarian bishops were not treating the Church with tenderness?
And also, when they drew away the disciples after themselves, you're saying that they literally drew every last one of them? Except for the non-Trinitarians, who were excommunicated? Is this what you're saying?

Peter 2:1-3) "..However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These will quietly bring in destructive sects, and they will even disown the owner who bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. 2 Furthermore, many will follow their brazen conduct, and because of them the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively. 3 Also, they will greedily exploit you with counterfeit words. But their judgment, decided long ago, is not moving slowly, and their destruction is not sleeping.."

When did the Catholic Church 'disown the owner who bought them?' The Catholic Church preaches Christ and Him crucified, and that's plainly what she does.
And how is the Catholic Church greedily exploiting Catholics? She is the greatest charitable organization on earth, did you know that?

The original church was the one Christ set up after his death, the ones the first apostles were part of.

Right, the one that Peter presided over, in charity, as the supreme pastor of the Church. He was the archbishop of the archdiocese of Rome when he died, and the man who succeeded him as archbishop of Rome, Linus, was Peter's successor, in Peter's pastorate. For 1000 years, the archbishop of the archdiocese of Rome, which was Peter's job when he died, was universally the supreme pastor of the Church, and that was the same Church Christ 'set up,' that 'the first apostles were part of.'

Nowhere do we see the trinity being taught by the apostles and disciplines therefore your claim in bogus. Even after the apostles death do we not see a clear sign of the trinity being taught, as understood today, until near the end of the 2 CE.

The oral tradition took a while to appear, but in the New Testament there's more than enough passages that indicate that the Trinity was what Peter meant, when he confessed that Jesus is God; specifically, Peter said that Jesus is the Son of God. John 3:16 KJV John 3:18 KJV 'only'

Yet that is exactly what happened.

You have to believe that, otherwise you'd be a Trinitarian.

 

[NWL]

OK, so you are saying that Trinitarian bishops were not treating the Church with tenderness?
And also, when they drew away the disciples after themselves, you're saying that they literally drew every last one of them? Except for the non-Trinitarians, who were excommunicated? Is this what you're saying?
When did the Catholic Church 'disown the owner who bought them?' The Catholic Church preaches Christ and Him crucified, and that's plainly what she does.
And how is the Catholic Church greedily exploiting Catholics? She is the greatest charitable organization on earth, did you know that?
Right, the one that Peter presided over, in charity, as the supreme pastor of the Church. He was the archbishop of the archdiocese of Rome when he died, and the man who succeeded him as archbishop of Rome, Linus, was Peter's successor, in Peter's pastorate. For 1000 years, the archbishop of the archdiocese of Rome, which was Peter's job when he died, was universally the supreme pastor of the Church, and that was the same Church Christ 'set up,' that 'the first apostles were part of.'
The oral tradition took a while to appear, but in the New Testament there's more than enough passages that indicate that the Trinity was what Peter meant, when he confessed that Jesus is God; specifically, Peter said that Jesus is the Son of God. John 3:16 KJV John 3:18 KJV 'only'
You have to believe that, otherwise you'd be a Trinitarian.

The 'church' after the apostles deaths begun teachings false doctrine that materialised after the decades and centuries after the apostles, it had even started when they were still alive.

To name a few, the false doctrines taught were such things as:

• The trinity
• Literal hellfire
• Immortality of the soul
• A fleshly resurrection for Jesus rather than a spiritual one
• Idolatry
• Blasphemy in the form of saint worship

Yes the Church may do good now and in the past, but just because someone does good doesn't mean what they teach is true. Scripture itself states that Satan transform himself into an angel of light, therefore acts of kindness aren't always synonymous with truth.

(2 Corinthians 11:14) "..And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light.."

 

[JudgeRightly]

The 'church' after the apostles deaths begun teachings false doctrine that materialised after the decades and centuries after the apostles, it had even started when they were still alive.

To name a few, the false doctrines taught were such things as:

• The trinity
• Literal hellfire
• Immortality of the soul
• A fleshly resurrection for Jesus rather than a spiritual one
• Idolatry
• Blasphemy in the form of saint worship

Yes the Church may do good now and in the past, but just because someone does good doesn't mean what they teach is true. Scripture itself states that Satan transform himself into an angel of light, therefore acts of kindness aren't always synonymous with truth.

(2 Corinthians 11:14) "..And no wonder, for Satan himself keeps disguising himself as an angel of light.."

THREE QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE IF THE TRINITY IS BIBLICALLY TRUE OR FALSE. If any one of these questions can be answered 'no,' then the Trinity can be rejected as an unbiblical belief. But if all three can be answered 'yes,' then the concept of the Trinity can be accepted as true. 1. Does the Bible mention three distinct persons? 2. Does the Bible refer to each of these persons as God? 3. Does the Bible teach there is only one God? The answers: 1. Are three distinct persons mentioned? YES. A. The Father (1 John 3:1) B. The Son (1 John 1:3) C. The Holy Spirit (John 14:6; 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-14; Romans 15:30; Ephesians 4:30) 2. Are each of these persons referred to as God? YES. A. God the Father (1 Thessalonians 1:1) B. God the Son (John 1:1; 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9) C. God the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4) 3. Is there only one God? YES. (see Deuteronomy 4:35-39; Psalm 86:10; Isaiah 45:5; 45:22)

FOR ANYONE WHO REJECTS THE TRINITY AS BIBLICAL:
Please show how the verses provided do not answer in the affirmative all three questions asked.

 

[NWL]

1. Are three distinct persons mentioned? YES.
A. The Father (1 John 3:1)
B. The Son (1 John 1:3)
C. The Holy Spirit (John 14:6; 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-14; Romans 15:30; Ephesians 4:30)

This means nothing and proves nothing.

2. Are each of these persons referred to as God? YES.
A. God the Father (1 Thessalonians 1:1)
B. God the Son (John 1:1; 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9)
C. God the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4)

Here is where this falls apart. You do not understand the term 'God' according to how the Greek and Hebrew speakers back then understood the term. The term God/god did not only ever refer to Almighty God as it does in English today.

If you readily accpet anyone in the bible who are refereed to as God as almighty God themselves then you should be worshipping Angels, Humans and even Satan who are all mentioned as God in the bible if you wish for your reasoning to remain consistent.

(2 Corinthians 4:4) "..among whom [Satan] the god (ho theos, same as when Jesus is called god in John 20:28)of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.."

(Psalm 82:1) "..God takes his place in the divine assembly; In the middle of the gods he judges.."

(John 10:34) "..Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”.."

3. Is there only one God? YES.
(see Deuteronomy 4:35-39; Psalm 86:10; Isaiah 45:5; 45:22)

Yes, and 1 Cor 8:6 makes it clear who that one God is, "For even though there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God, the Father.."(1 Corinthians 8:5, 6)

FOR ANYONE WHO REJECTS THE TRINITY AS BIBLICAL:
Please show how the verses provided do not answer in the affirmative all three questions asked

Since I was so kind enough to reply show me where it states that these three persons are one who are co-equal and co-eternal as the trinity doctrine teaches.

 

[keypurr]

THREE QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE IF THE TRINITY IS BIBLICALLY TRUE OR FALSE. If any one of these questions can be answered 'no,' then the Trinity can be rejected as an unbiblical belief. But if all three can be answered 'yes,' then the concept of the Trinity can be accepted as true. 1. Does the Bible mention three distinct persons? 2. Does the Bible refer to each of these persons as God? 3. Does the Bible teach there is only one God? The answers: 1. Are three distinct persons mentioned? YES. A. The Father (1 John 3:1) B. The Son (1 John 1:3) C. The Holy Spirit (John 14:6; 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-14; Romans 15:30; Ephesians 4:30) 2. Are each of these persons referred to as God? YES. A. God the Father (1 Thessalonians 1:1) B. God the Son (John 1:1; 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9) C. God the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4) 3. Is there only one God? YES. (see Deuteronomy 4:35-39; Psalm 86:10; Isaiah 45:5; 45:22)

FOR ANYONE WHO REJECTS THE TRINITY AS BIBLICAL:
Please show how the verses provided do not answer in the affirmative all three questions asked.

Show us how they do display a Trinity if you can.

 

[popsthebuilder]

THREE QUESTIONS TO DETERMINE IF THE TRINITY IS BIBLICALLY TRUE OR FALSE. If any one of these questions can be answered 'no,' then the Trinity can be rejected as an unbiblical belief. But if all three can be answered 'yes,' then the concept of the Trinity can be accepted as true. 1. Does the Bible mention three distinct persons? 2. Does the Bible refer to each of these persons as God? 3. Does the Bible teach there is only one God? The answers: 1. Are three distinct persons mentioned? YES. A. The Father (1 John 3:1) B. The Son (1 John 1:3) C. The Holy Spirit (John 14:6; 14:26; 15:26; 16:13-14; Romans 15:30; Ephesians 4:30) 2. Are each of these persons referred to as God? YES. A. God the Father (1 Thessalonians 1:1) B. God the Son (John 1:1; 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9) C. God the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4) 3. Is there only one God? YES. (see Deuteronomy 4:35-39; Psalm 86:10; Isaiah 45:5; 45:22)

FOR ANYONE WHO REJECTS THE TRINITY AS BIBLICAL:
Please show how the verses provided do not answer in the affirmative all three questions asked.

has been debunked by me personally before.

Silly stuff.

Sent from my Nokia 6.1 using Tapatalk

 

[keypurr]

has been debunked by me personally before.

Silly stuff.

Sent from my Nokia 6.1 using Tapatalk

Most of the stuff they post is silly.

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


Ever wonder why the third person of the Trinity is not mentioned in this verse???????

 

[Right Divider]

Most of the stuff they post is silly.

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Ever wonder why the third person of the Trinity is not mentioned in this verse???????

So when one or two are mentioned, it requires that all three are mentioned.

Your logic is illogical old heretic.

 

[drbrumley]

Most of the stuff they post is silly.

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.


Ever wonder why the third person of the Trinity is not mentioned in this verse???????

That's your hangup…..not ours

 

[Ktoyou]

Me too! It is founded upon Christ's Resurrection. As in, 'How'd that happen?' Because of God. So God is real. God is nonfiction. That's founded upon Christ's Resurrection being nonfiction.

Can you imagine the trivial nature of the Catholic response to Keypurr's latest post to you? He's arguing about the Trinity, but the Catholic just knows that the Catholic Church is Jesus's actual Church, and the Catholic Church has been Trinitarian from the beginning, and nothing other than the Trinity has ever been taught. Non-trinitarians were excommunicated, that's how purely the Trinity was taught by the Catholic Church, throughout over 19 centuries.

So the response to Keypurr isn't about what he thinks the Bible says, it's about what he, Keypurr's, saying, and what that means, about Jesus's success in founding His Church. If the Trinity is false, then Jesus's actual Church plunged immediately into heinous error; almost right away, within the Apostolic age. That's how unsuccessful Jesus must have been, if the Trinity is false.

And so, when you look at theology from the physical perspective, things such as 'the Trinity is false,' we reject out of hand, because of what it implies about the ability of our Lord to found a robust Church. Intercontinental ballistic missile proof. There's absolutely no possibility that Christ founded His Church, and that rather immediately, an error involving blasphemy, fatally infected Peter's pastorate, and all of the Church's pasatorates, with a few exceptions, each who were excommunicated.

It's not possible, from the physical perspective, to doubt the certainty that the Trinity is legitimately Christian, if you believe that Jesus did not just establish a spiritual kingdom, but also a physical kingdom. His Church is the kingdom of God in seed form. The society of His Church is the kingdom of God, in seed form. The coming kingdom of God is already here, in seed form, in the society of Jesus's Church.

I do not know why Keypur thinks that way; it does not seem to me, he was brought up that way.

Trying to think for yourself invites the Devil to do the thinking for you. Far better being a Catholic, and believing in the Trinity, than trying to figure out religion by yourself and ending up all mixed up and confused.

 

[Ktoyou]

K2U, I feel the same way sometimes. I was brought up as a Trinity believer. But then I read that God was one and only one. God did not come down and die, he sent his son. Even though he gave his son his fullness, his son is a creation, not God. He is a created FORM of God (a god), and that is the logos that went into the human Jesus. We both love him for the pain he went through for us. But the fact is YHWH, the only true God, is a jealous God and does not approve of mankind creating another God. Christ came to do the will of his God,

THAT IS MY POINT.

I love the God of my Lord Jesus Christ.


Bless you K, have a good night.

My opinion, you would have been better off not trying to read it yourself, rather sticking to prayer and going along with how you were raised.

 

[Idolater]

...Trying to think for yourself invites the Devil to do the thinking for you.

I think that, certainly, if we survey the landscape of Christian thought, that you must be right, since there are so many divergent ideas. They can't all be right, and in fact, there can only be one right one; so all of the others are wrong; so I think we'd have to agree with you; that it does invite 'the Devil to do the thinking for you.'

Far better being a Catholic, and believing in the Trinity, than trying to figure out religion by yourself and ending up all mixed up and confused.

After decades of pursuing the truth in theology, that's my conclusion too. In fact, I've concluded that the Catholic Church today, is the same Church that Jesus Christ and His Apostles founded back in the first century.

 

[Bright Raven]

After decades of pursuing the truth in theology, that's my conclusion too. In fact, I've concluded that the Catholic Church today, is the same Church that Jesus Christ and His Apostles founded back in the first century.

Please explain why you believe todays Catholic Church is the same as that fellowship founded by Jesus and the Apostles?

 

[meshak]

That's kind, Keypurr. I see Paul tells us that we must call Him 'Lord Jesus,' and that we must believe that He is risen from the dead.

You do both of those things, right?

So you're a Christian.

right on, brother

 

[meshak]

My words are Jesus is a MAN. GOD is NOT A MAN.

He was a Man, but not anymore. He went to heaven.

Remember what you said that Jesus says "in heaven there is no male or female"? Meaning there is no human in heaven.

 

[Idolater]

Please explain why you believe todays Catholic Church is the same as that fellowship founded by Jesus and the Apostles?

Because there was only one Trinitarian Church for 1000 years. After that, the Church broke into pieces, with the Reformation being the biggest splintering, that's led to today's reality of reportedly 10s of thousands of different Christian traditions. Only one of them, the Catholic Church, can trace herself back all the way to the Apostolic age. The Catholic Church is Jesus's Church.