Understanding God Plurality as one Person

[e v e]

Is that an affirmation you are not a Christian?

and it is not just the Vatican the Eastern Orthodox hold the same

its an affirmation that you are now name calling and do not yourself know what real christianity is.

 

[e v e]

everyone on earth could hold to what you do and that would not make it correct. All your argument from authority is related to is opinions of men.

Nor will I be bullied by those views.

 

[e v e]

If every single fallen human hounded me to agree with you I would not. Because what i care about is His opinion -- not yours.

 

[e v e]

orthodoxy is exactly the cold blooded
unloving view that brought the
inquisition.

this is why we as flawed humans are NOT
to judge.

only Christ can.

 

[TomL]

its an affirmation that you are now name calling and do not yourself know what real christianity is.

It was a question based on your own words

 

[e v e]

It was a question based on your own words

no ... it was a question based on how you understand my words.

 

[e v e]

Im not against you @TomL,
but simply,
you have not understood anything I
have ever said.

 

[TomL]

I am not bullied by words such as historic christian tradition and orthodox.

You understand the Eastern orthodox are the early division of the church which was not Roman Catholic.

They equally hold to the doctrine of the trinity so you cannot tar those who hold the doctrine of the trinity with a connection to the vatican

 

[TomL]

Im not against you @TomL,
but simply,
you have not understood anything I
have ever said.

Maybe the problem is in what you say

 

[e v e]

deity is His nature.

so, right now we are in an animal nature,
flesh. the fallen nature = sin nature.

 

[e v e]

Maybe the problem is in what you say

maybe its in how you understand
what i say

 

[TomL]

maybe its in how you understand
what i say

And maybe not

 

[e v e]

And maybe not

well we disagree.

I will stick with Only Christ will and can judge.

 

[e v e]

the track record of traditions of men is poor.

israelites ignore prophets, curse themselves, go into captivity...

many accept pagan ptolemy's septuagint 'version' of what God said.. not that those many knew, since they (including the ptolemy selected scribes translating) did not listen to the prophets.

rabble asks for christ's crucifixion, listens to esau pharisees .. same types as ptolemy.

organized christianity under vatican sway anoints augustine as an authority... to this day the councils and views of theology remain Augustinian. thus platonic. no corrections made. or else superficial... reformation fails.

e.g., calvin - utter fail. lots of people agree to books, doctrines, under augustine's traditions.

inquisitions - many murdered based on men's opinions of doctrines = tradition. driven by the fleshmind.

christianity splinters into many sects. produces kjv under supervision of john dee. known sorcerer friend of James.

judging and opinions of men as to what God said and who is christian - continues to this day.

prophets? they are viewed as history or the past. understandings of them are a mess ... nothing changed there. they'd be treated the same today.

many christians believe God's covenant changed after His son arrived. Never understood the prophets. nothing new there.

Protestants still spouting vatican worded theological statements.

 

[e v e]

So whatever historic christian tradition you are holding up... not interested in most of it.

it is a disaster zone...

 

[e v e]

You understand the Eastern orthodox are the early division of the church which was not Roman Catholic.

They equally hold to the doctrine of the trinity so you cannot tar those who hold the doctrine of the trinity with a connection to the vatican

not that i would say they are right in everything but they dont agree with you on the filioque trinity question. i gave you a link.

 

[e v e]

im not saying Eastern O. is correct... just saying that they do not necessarily agree with your version but that the reason for their schism (1054) was this filioque question.

protestantism did not continue from E.O. but broke off its own branch later, 1517 or so, from catholicism.

 

[e v e]

You understand the Eastern orthodox are the early division of the church which was not Roman Catholic.

They equally hold to the doctrine of the trinity so you cannot tar those who hold the doctrine of the trinity with a connection to the vatican

I have not tarred anyone?

Each soul is judged separately by Him

not enmasse by religious ideologies ...

 

[TomL]

I have not tarred anyone?

Each soul is judged separately by Him

not enmasse by religious ideologies ...

Ah but you did with a reference to the vatican

 

[TomL]

not that i would say they are right in everything but they dont agree with you on the filioque trinity question. i gave you a link.

How do you know what I believe about the filoque and that is off topic in any case