Pacland's Philippine Boxing Forum

Discussion on boxing and other sports, Filipino greats and anything under the sun.
It is currently Mon Sep 27, 2021 11:55 am

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 381 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:39 pm 
Offline
Light Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:55 pm
Posts: 1215
payabangan at pagalingan kung sinong magaling sa interpretasyon ng 40,000 plus na kulto. Sali na mga Born against group, inc, at iba pang clown churches... :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:04 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Back to basics.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;

I think you are familiar with John 1:1.


John 1:1
"In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god."

** So where is one entity "God" composed of Father and Christ? :D

** In Genesis, it shows the Father was talking with someone and that was Christ as some of us know. (since the others don't know it :D )

** So where is that one entity called "God" which composed of the Father and Christ there?

I thought you said you already know all there is to know. It appears you still don't. I'll show the Hebrew word for "God".

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth...26 Then Elohim said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;

howellstamaria wrote:
** In John 1:1, it tells us that Christ is the WORD, and that WORD was already with God since the beginning. And that WORD was god.

(strong proof that he really is not a man, that's why INC's doctrine the he never was a god is so UNBIBLICAL and these are the people that you consider more ryt!? :D )

** So where is that one entity called "God" which composed of the Father and Christ there?

Hint: El is singular. Elohim is plural.

howellstamaria wrote:
** You are just assuming and not proving anything with your belief. :D I will wait anyway if you still got other verse to use that is imperative and if that is the case, I am the man who accepts truth, esp if our soul is what at stake. I can admit anytime that I am wrong with my belief just show us a strong evidence in the bible that what you are telling us is true. This is how are leader had taught us, accept only what is biblically true. If we are doubtful to what our leader has been teaching us, they are open for any questions. That is a showcae of sincerity that they only want the truth. For the member's soul and for God's glory not them. :D

It's not a problem to me if you failed to understand Elohim.

howellstamaria wrote:
** How bout in INC? Your church? can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? :D (pls answer honestly)

There are threads about faith in this forum. If you care to read, you might learn something. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
becoz the bible tells us, even Christ tells us that they are different or separate being.
Jesus even regards his Father as a SUPERIOR being than him.
proof?

John 14:28
"..... I go unto the Father: for my Father is GREATER THAN I."

You just need to accept that they are two different being and the Father is greater than Christ. :D It is not being disrespectful with Christ becoz he himself said it.

I'll elaborate on the unity in "God" which still escapes you. There are two beings, individual Gods, but these two form a class or family called "God".

The comparison in man is husband and wife. There are two beings but after marriage, they are ONE flesh.

Ephesians 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”

The Father and Jesus are ONE God.

howellstamaria wrote:
** even the word BECAME flesh (I will follow you on this word since it was used in other translation), it doesn't mean Christ really became man.
Becoz that's your point ryt? Christ became man, so obviously he is inferior if that was the case. But it was only YOU ALONGWITH THE INC's who considered Christ a man.

The apostles though Christ manifested in flesh still considered him a god since he was the word in the beginning which is a god, and it will never change.

2 Peter 1:1
"Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"

** for you and INC's Jesus is a man, but for the apostles and us, he is still a god.

** how can you even break this phrase from the apostle? and who do you want me to believe, you or the apostles? :D

Can't you avoid dragging INC into our discussion? This is one on one. :) Besides, I also don't agree with the INC stand on the nature of Jesus Christ.

Prior to and after his resurrection, the being named I AM, Word, YHWH, Jesus Christ, was and is God. In between, he was lower than angels and subject to the power of death. And he died.

howellstamaria wrote:
** What is another proof from the bible that Christ only used a human body?

1 John 4:2
"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:"

" Dito'y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa't espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:"

** he has come in flesh, and it didnt tell us that Christ is flesh, he is god. Naparitong nasa laman, meaning there is something within that laman/flesh, and that is Christ.

** It is easy to understand if you are willing to understand but if you are persistent with your own belief, then that is the problem there.

There is no problem in keeping your belief along with the INC's that Christ is a man and we will stick to that belief along with the apostles that Christ is god. :D

You are misusing the verse to support your understanding which is that Christ did not die.


howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
There is one "God". And this "God" is composed of two beings referred to as "God" and the Word who is also "God".

The description "family" of the unity of the beings composing "God" is used to enable man to grasp it. There is a father and a son. There is a family in heaven.

Ephesians 3:14 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named...


**There is family in heaven ryt, it's biblical and I think that is where the concept of having a family on earth came from. As you have said, THEY ARE UNITED and amen for that! :D but being united doesnt mean they are in one entity or being as "God". They are UNITED ONE AND NOT ABSOLUTE ONE. :D Christ even said, "My Father and I are one" but it doesnt mean he is the Father and at the same time he is the son Jesus. They are united one just like the WIFE AND HUSBAND WHICH IS ALSO CONSIDERED BY THE BIBLE AS ONE. Us being fiilipinos are one (whenever pac fights :lol: ). His Father and Christ are one in what sense? They are one in their goal to make us righteous like them.

So again, your use of the verse doesn't prove anything that "God" is composed of the Father and the son. That the word "family" proves that one entity "God" is composed of the Father and the son. It is really inconsiderable honestly. Sorry! :D

If you still don't get it, your "sorry" is understandable. But you can understand it later.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
I've pointed out Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2 which I think you have already read. But you can read again and understand in the light of the other passages.


**Just post the exact verse if you really know what you are saying just like what am doing always, the exact verse! :D Immortal became mortal? do you really understand the word immortal?

**Immortal means living in an infinite/endless time.
And how dare you to put end in Christ's life, he being the begotten son of god which exists since the beginning of everything. :D am not angry though. just want the right words for this. :D

**so you will gonna ask, didn't Jesus die? yes, the human body, flesh that he used it was crucified and died. It was the mortal you were referring to, the body, but not the Christ that is within that body.

Nothing is impossible for God. God made the Word mortal for the purpose of death. And Jesus died.

Your belief that Christ did not die is directly the opposite to what Paul emphasizes. Christ died. Christ's death is of first importance.

1 Corinthians 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died...

To say that Christ did not die is a lie. If he did not die, then the resurrection was a hoax. Why did Christ have to be raised from the dead? Obviously because he was lifeless!

1 Corinthians 15:4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

To preach that Christ did not die is to say that the Father was just fooling around when he raised Christ from the dead.

Acts 13:30 But God raised Him from the dead.

howellstamaria wrote:
Christ is an immortal being yes! but to say that he became mortal, AGAIN IT SHOWS INNOCENCE OF THE BIBLE. It is true that Christ manifested in flesh. It is written. He used a HUMAN BODY WHICH IS MORTAL BUT THE CHRIST THAT IS WITHIN THAT BODY REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN IMMORTAL. :) :)

Using all caps in the forum is equivalent to shouting. You should not be shouting a false belief.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
The word used is "became". There is a change from spirit to flesh.

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh...

Your group's belief that "He used a HUMAN BODY WHICH IS MORTAL BUT THE CHRIST THAT IS WITHIN THAT BODY REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN IMMORTAL" will simply mean that Christ did not die. This is what is clearly not biblical.


** I just answered and explained it. It was the flesh or body (that Christ used) that died.

** try to look at the pigs that were possessed by the bad spirits, the pigs drowned themselves but it didnt kill the bad spirits but they just went out. Becoz they are immortal and that is the reason why God prepares eternal damnation or everlasting punishment for this everlasting spirits. He could make them mortal and just kill them right away so that the evil would end already ayt!? But God is a God of His word, justice, fairness and integrity. Spirit meant to be a spirit that's why to end all these evil soon, eternal punishment is what God prepares.

Your analogy of spirit getting inside humans or pigs is not applicable. It's clear the spirits entered into these beings.

In Christ's case, the spirit became flesh.

I have a hunch the evil spirits will someday be likewise killed by God after he is finished in creating man in his image according to his likeness.

howellstamaria wrote:
** honestly ask yourself being a mortal man, how can you kill an immortal spirit? and how can a mortal man kill the begotten son of God which exists before everything.

I am not asking that question anymore. The bible shows that an immortal can become mortal. The immortal being laid down his life.

1 John 3:16 By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us.

Notice that what Christ laid down is his life. It is not that he just discarded his lifeless body.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Not to me in this case. :)


** becoz you have your own belief and mine is based in what Ive learned which is biblical. :D

It would help you if you take another look at your belief. But it's your choice.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
What is ridiculous is your proposition that, in reality, Christ did not really die.


** It was the body that he used that died (again).

Simply, to you Christ did not really die.

howellstamaria wrote:
The REAL AND DREADFUL DEATH (2nd death as the bible termed it in Revelation) that a man could ever experience is the everlasting death in the lake of fire. The punishment that God prepares.

Your statement is not biblical. Not even logical.

When a man dies, he doesn't experience anything. His consciousness ceases at the point of death. What is harrowing is before death and it is so because the man is still alive and can still feel and think. At death, the man knows nothing.

howellstamaria wrote:
** when a man died? do you think he really died as in, he vanished forever? I think you know the answer coz how God will be able to punish them (the judged wicked ones) forver if they would just vanish away.

Death is what awaits the man who chooses not to make God to reign over him. The choice is made after the man has been imbued or gifted with the Holy Spirit to capacitate him to really exercise knowingly his freedom to choose.

The men who have since died without receiving the Holy Spirit are now unconscious. They have the hope of being resurrected again because Christ himself was resurrected from the dead. Had Christ not been raised from the dead, then those men who have since died have perished and those who will still die will perish. Thankfully Christ was raised from the dead.

1 Corinthians 15:14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.

howellstamaria wrote:
** so if you know also that biblically these men really didn't die or tasted the real death, even they experienced the first death, they really didnt die cioz the real death(forever punishment) is yet to come.

The really died. They have decomposed. They're unconscious now. The difference between the first death and the second is that, because of Christ's resurrection, those who died the first death will be resurrected. Those who will be meted the second death will no longer be revived. They will perish.

The oft quoted and most popular bible verse is clear on the opposite of everlasting life. Perish.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

howellstamaria wrote:
How can you tell us that Christ within that body/flesh had died? Your problem is, you cant accept the fact that he just used a human body. You and the INC's have the same FALSE BELIEFA COZ THE APOSTLE IS TEACHING US THAT HE IS STILL A GOD THATS WITH THE FATHER IN THE BEGINNING.

I'll point to you what spirit was in Christ when he became flesh. God filled the flesh turned spirit Word with the Holy Spirit.

Luke 4:1 Then Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit...

howellstamaria wrote:
That's your problem and not us, and we have proved that by showing a lot of verses. I was actually still limited using verses coz I already forgot the other verses since I am not doing this (forum post) for several years. :D

To make a person understand is not my function or any man's. I only explain. The granting of understanding is God's job.

howellstamaria wrote:
To be continued.... as I promised, I will answer all your queries. :D

It appears you have not responded to all my posts. No problem, take your time. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:57 pm 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 3263
Location: Sitio Bunubon
I am learning a lot with the above exchanges, Ka Epi. You have clear responses and your Biblical quotes are exactly explained. I only have a question about that "perish" thing. I though when the word, perish, in the Bible is used, it pertains to the eternal damnation or punishment in the lake of fire. Now it seems that it is not or there is another (or correct?) meaning of it. Thank you.

_________________
PERCEPTION: Just because you dress like a slut doesn't mean you are a slut. And just because I act like a rapist doesn't mean I am a rapist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:17 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
Mang Heruino wrote:
I am learning a lot with the above exchanges, Ka Epi. You have clear responses and your Biblical quotes are exactly explained. I only have a question about that "perish" thing. I though when the word, perish, in the Bible is used, it pertains to the eternal damnation or punishment in the lake of fire. Now it seems that it is not or there is another (or correct?) meaning of it. Thank you.

There is another, and it is the correct, meaning of eternal damnation or punishment. As in John 3:16, the word "but" in Matthew 25:46 shows that "everlasting punishment" is the opposite of "eternal life".

Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

"Everlasting punishment" does not mean everlasting punishing. It means that the effect of the punishment, which is death, is irreversible. Eternal death is the opposite of eternal life.

The misunderstanding of "eternal damnation or punishment" stems from Satan's lie believed by many that the soul will not die contrary to God's declaration.

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”
2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’”
4 Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die.

If the "eternal damnation or punishment" means that the person punished will not die but suffer without ceasing forever, then God being merciful is belied.

To perish is to be gone forever. The existence of a person will vanish. Forgotten. He will be as if he had never been.

Obadiah 1:16...And they shall be as though they had never been.

The "older" PRMOers discussed "perish" in the thread "What do you understand by "perish" in John 3:16?" viewtopic.php?f=20&t=82548


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:03 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
quote="Epifanio M. Almeda"]
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Back to basics.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;

I think you are familiar with John 1:1.


John 1:1
"In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god."

** So where is one entity "God" composed of Father and Christ? :D

** In Genesis, it shows the Father was talking with someone and that was Christ as some of us know. (since the others don't know it :D )

** So where is that one entity called "God" which composed of the Father and Christ there?

I thought you said you already know all there is to know. It appears you still don't. I'll show the Hebrew word for "God".

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth...26 Then Elohim said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;

howellstamaria wrote:
** In John 1:1, it tells us that Christ is the WORD, and that WORD was already with God since the beginning. And that WORD was god.

(strong proof that he really is not a man, that's why INC's doctrine the he never was a god is so UNBIBLICAL and these are the people that you consider more ryt!? :D )

** So where is that one entity called "God" which composed of the Father and Christ there?


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Hint: El is singular. Elohim is plural.?


word Elohim is still questionable as when to use it as plural or singular AND YOU ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL PERSON TO GIVE "ELOHIM" THE MEANING BEING PLURAL JUST TO JUSTIFY YOUR BELIEF OF THE WORD "GOD" which for you composed of the Father and the son.

(WIKIPEDIA)
Elohim occurs frequently throughout the received text of the Torah. In some cases (e.g. Exodus 3:4, "... Elohim called unto him out of the midst of the bush ..."), it acts as a singular noun in Hebrew grammar, and is then generally understood to denote the single God of Israel. In other cases, Elohim acts as an ordinary plural of the word Eloah, and refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple gods (for example, Exodus 20:3, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me.").

In the Hebrew Bible Elohim, when meaning the God of Israel, is mostly grammatically singular. Even in Genesis 1:26 "Then God said (singular verb), 'Let us make (plural verb) man in our image, after our likeness'." Elohim is singular.
________________
**based on the above statement, Elohim ACTS AND GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD TO DENOTE THE SINGLE GOD OF ISRAEL (which is the Father). :D This proves really that your belief of the word "God" composed of the Father and son is FALSE. :D MOst esp your given ex in Genesis.

** sometimes Elohim used to refer to multiple gods (the deities) like that in Exodus 20:3 (and not pertaining to the God the Father but to the deities) :D

** So where is your proof AGAIN, that the word "God" is one entity composed of the Father and the son? :D

howellstamaria wrote:
** You are just assuming and not proving anything with your belief. :D I will wait anyway if you still got other verse to use that is imperative and if that is the case, I am the man who accepts truth, esp if our soul is what at stake. I can admit anytime that I am wrong with my belief just show us a strong evidence in the bible that what you are telling us is true. This is how are leader had taught us, accept only what is biblically true. If we are doubtful to what our leader has been teaching us, they are open for any questions. That is a showcae of sincerity that they only want the truth. For the member's soul and for God's glory not them. :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It's not a problem to me if you failed to understand Elohim.


I think it is not hard to understand the word ELOHIM. :D

howellstamaria wrote:
** How bout in INC? Your church? can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? :D (pls answer honestly)


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
There are threads about faith in this forum. If you care to read, you might learn something. :)


Why can't you answer directly? :D Us, we are noted for having an open forum on TV, or question and answer portion where diff people of diff religion can ask any questions. Regardless if you believe what our leader's answers are since not all could really accept the truth. Atleast, there is that sincerity to help people to help them solve their doubts, questions in mind using verses of the bible.

Question again, does your religion also entertain questions regarding faith from diff people? If your answer AGAIN is, "here! just read threads and you might learn something" Think again! :D


howellstamaria wrote:
becoz the bible tells us, even Christ tells us that they are different or separate being. Jesus even regards his Father as a SUPERIOR being than him.
proof?

John 14:28
"..... I go unto the Father: for my Father is GREATER THAN I."

You just need to accept that they are two different being and the Father is greater than Christ. :D It is not being disrespectful with Christ becoz he himself said it.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
I'll elaborate on the unity in "God" which still escapes you. There are two beings, individual Gods, but these two form a class or family called "God".

The comparison in man is husband and wife. There are two beings but after marriage, they are ONE flesh.

Ephesians 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”

The Father and Jesus are ONE God.


** And this doesn't mean that the wife is the husband and the husband is the wife and still, they are two different beings. Two different beings that will be judged. :D

John 10:30
"I and my Father are one."

This is what the bible says, and not what you were saying "Father and Jesus are ONE GOD. This is something you CAN'T PROVE BIBLICALLY. :D





howellstamaria wrote:
** even the word BECAME flesh (I will follow you on this word since it was used in other translation), it doesn't mean Christ really became man.
Becoz that's your point ryt? Christ became man, so obviously he is inferior if that was the case. But it was only YOU ALONGWITH THE INC's who considered Christ a man.

The apostles though Christ manifested in flesh still considered him a god since he was the word in the beginning which is a god, and it will never change.

2 Peter 1:1
"Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"

** for you and INC's Jesus is a man, but for the apostles and us, he is still a god.

** how can you even break this phrase from the apostle? and who do you want me to believe, you or the apostles? :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Can't you avoid dragging INC into our discussion? This is one on one. :) Besides, I also don't agree with the INC stand on the nature of Jesus Christ.

Prior to and after his resurrection, the being named I AM, Word, YHWH, Jesus Christ, was and is God. In between, he was lower than angels and subject to the power of death. And he died.


** why are you hurt whenever I mention INC? Just asking. :D
** It was like a President for ex who made himself lower by taking the place of a beggar for example or typical person just to know how does it feel like. He lowers himself but still, we know he is still the president. For a while, he took off his title being the president by doing what a typical person does but still, it doesn't change him for good, he is still the president.

howellstamaria wrote:
** What is another proof from the bible that Christ only used a human body?

1 John 4:2
"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:"

" Dito'y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa't espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:"

** he has come in flesh, and it didnt tell us that Christ is flesh, he is god. Naparitong nasa laman, meaning there is something within that laman/flesh, and that is Christ.

** It is easy to understand if you are willing to understand but if you are persistent with your own belief, then that is the problem there.

There is no problem in keeping your belief along with the INC's that Christ is a man and we will stick to that belief along with the apostles that Christ is god. :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You are misusing the verse to support your understanding which is that Christ did not die.


See. You can't dispute the verse! it is easy to say i misused it but you can't dispute actually coz the verse tells us the HE ONLY USED A HUMAN BODY. :D It is the bible and not me who is telling that.

1 John 4:2
"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:"

" Dito'y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa't espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:"


howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
There is one "God". And this "God" is composed of two beings referred to as "God" and the Word who is also "God".

The description "family" of the unity of the beings composing "God" is used to enable man to grasp it. There is a father and a son. There is a family in heaven.

Ephesians 3:14 For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named...


**There is family in heaven ryt, it's biblical and I think that is where the concept of having a family on earth came from. As you have said, THEY ARE UNITED and amen for that! :D but being united doesnt mean they are in one entity or being as "God". They are UNITED ONE AND NOT ABSOLUTE ONE. :D Christ even said, "My Father and I are one" but it doesnt mean he is the Father and at the same time he is the son Jesus. They are united one just like the WIFE AND HUSBAND WHICH IS ALSO CONSIDERED BY THE BIBLE AS ONE. Us being fiilipinos are one (whenever pac fights :lol: ). His Father and Christ are one in what sense? They are one in their goal to make us righteous like them.

So again, your use of the verse doesn't prove anything that "God" is composed of the Father and the son. That the word "family" proves that one entity "God" is composed of the Father and the son. It is really inconsiderable honestly. Sorry! :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
If you still don't get it, your "sorry" is understandable. But you can understand it later.


Iam really sorry coz you can't prove your stand. :D You have used the word "ELOHIM", but it just proved you wrong. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:07 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
I already told you that we are different. If you have lots of time for this forum post, then it is good for you. But I am just telling you to respect when I am free or available responding to your queries. I am a busy man that got work throughout the day and then, practice and games for volleyball and basketball afterwork. I am actually trying hard to spare time during my work just to answer your questions. Honestly.

So if I can't answer you that quickly as you would like me to, if that is an issue for you, then it's ok. :D

Just want to make this clear first and foremost. Since I have joined this topic and dispute that Christ built the church by giving the irrefutable verse

Hebrew 3:4
"For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God."

This proves that it was God the Father who built everything which includes the church obviously. You tried to dispute this by giving the verse Hebrew 3:6 by saying that the verse is telling us that it was Christ who actually owns it.

Hebrew 3:6
"But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end."

The I answered back that "HIS own house"/ HIS there referred to the God the Father and not the son, and I gave you the other translations that prove that IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IS WRONG AND NOT THE BIBLE.

Hebrew 3:6 (good news)
"But Christ is faithful as the Son in charge of God's house. We are his house if we keep up our courage and our confidence in what we hope for."

(New international version)
"But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast."

From this, it is clear that YOU ARE WRONG, YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND NOT THE VERSE ITSELF (but you just can't admit to yourself). Since you can't refute or dispute it, you just tried to elude and started to say that there is no issue on who owns and built the church. But ironically, your thread's title is emphasizing that it was Christ who built the church and even tried to use a couple of verses to prove it , but you just misunderstood it.

So that's one there. And that could have closed my dispute with this topic. :D

But don't worry, am so interested to answer your other questions and just make sure you also answer mine. Just remind me if I forgot something coz it is pretty obvious that there are already lots of posts here and by reading it, it takes us a lot of time ayt!? :D

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
God is in control. God can draw to Christ that man he wants to grant repentance to in this age.
The example of the Christian persecutor Saul illustrates this point.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
This belief is clearly erroneous. God would not be God if he "is not in control for now". While he
is allowing Satan to be god in this age, God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to finish his
administrative duties on earth. God can limit how far Satan could go as in the case of Job and he can
intervene anytime in man's affairs as he sees fit.

Satan is having a field day only because God is allowing man to be independent of God. Through
Adam and Eve, man chose to be free from God's control and protection.


** God can control us yes. He is so powerful for me not to say He can't. But the fact the He gave us this "freewill" He is not controlling it, He won't intervene on it. Becoz if He does control our freewill, it's absurd to call it freewill anymore, and if that is the case, He should have done controlling us for us all to get saved which what He actually wanted.

** But that's not the essence of freewill. For us that had the chance to listen to His words, it is our own choice , decision on which way are we gonna go. Is it God's or satan's way. He won't control us on this one, he allows us to choose. Once a person had that decision in his heart (for ex. he chose to submit himself and follow what is righteous) then God would intervene and help that man to attain that perfection with the help of the holy spirit coz if it is just us, we can't becoz flesh is weak.

** Paul is a good ex right, from being a christian persecutor, to being an apostle. Not becoz He controlled Paul to join Jesus' team that instantly coz He should/could have done that to all of us. But for sure, He saw Paul's heart that this man is ready to serve and follow righteousness (if only this man could hear His words which is the truth.) So that was the time He intervene and made him one of Christ's disciple.

** I just cant remember the exact verse that tells us that God and Jesus could read man's heart which Satan can't. (I would look for it anyway)

** Allowing satan to finish his administrative duties is like allowing him to deceive men which God does not want to happen. What is the duty and goal of satan? to pervert the truth, to divert men from the truth, to deceive in short and be his follower against God. Would God allow this? Think again! :D

** The reason why God still doesnt end the human race is NOT BECOZ HE IS ALLOWING SATAN TO FINISH HIS ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES. (They are enemies and for sure He won't allow that.) It is becoz of God's compassion to men. He would like to give men a chance for everday He is giving us to repent, to understand HIs words, and be in His righteousness for them to get saved. It's like in the times of Noah. God waits for the others to repent while Noah is still building the ark before He submerged the earth.

1 Peter 3:20
"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

2 Peter 3:15
"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you."

(tagalog)
"At inyong ariin na ang pagpapahinuhod ng ating Panginoon ay pagliligtas......."

* Again, it is not allowing Satan to do his administrative duties. :D But God still doesn't end the world coz of His "pagpapahinuhod" becoz of His aspiration to save us all. :D

** That's why He wants His words to be preached in the whole world so that there is fairness and justice that no man could reason out or question God if for ex a man had been sentenced for the eternal punishment.

** And this is what our group's doing. The effort of preaching the word of God to the whole wide world by all means that we could ever do. Primarily thru television, then radio and internet.

** Does your church do this anyway? :D

** questions are being entertained live and on the spot.
** bible exposition all over the countries
** the result, awards and appreciation of what they have been hearing. Ofcorz the glory is to God. To His truth.
** expectedly, not all could appreciate but the appreaciation and awards we have been getting means, what our leaders are preaching is something.

** How bout your church? musta? :D

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
There is no impossible for God.


YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN biblically speaking! :D Don't worry, am not mocking! I am just telling you the truth. For you there is no impossible for God. But for the bible there is something impossible for God.

Hebrews 6:18
"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us"

** It is not me who said YOU ARE WRONG, it was the bible. :D

** Our church name is....

Members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth. 1 Timothy 3:15

** Am so proud of it. :D

** aren't you proud of your church? :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:07 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
I will continue this.. as always.. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:53 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
A Christian is not provocative and answers only when asked in humility the bible describes as
"with meekness and fear".

Preaching what you believe and answering questions are not fighting. Correcting publicly others who are
preaching their beliefs is provocative and will lead to conflict. And this is minding another's
business. Correcting a person's belief is only proper when one asks for it or he is one of your group.


** Ye right. With meekness and fear. It is biblical and amen to that. :D Sometimes, by telling the truth, it could really hurt someone esp those people that dont want to be taught, be coz they have their own rule and belief. BUt not all people though are like that. There are peple which are willing to learn and accept if they are wrong and openly willing to be corrected.

Telling your friend nicely and remind him that cheating is not good is not provocative though. Telling your loved ones about what is good and bad is no wrong.

We had been taught to become meek. yes! and not been taugh on how to become FIERCE, CRUEL OR SAVAGE. Just like the other religious group.

Have you heard, seen anyway that members from our group killed someone? I dont think so that there was. BUt try to look at the works of the members from the other group. It shows who has really been taught well of the words of God. not being pompous but it really shows. :D

The inquisition of the catholic church.
http://www.exposingchristianity.com/Inquisition.html

INC murder
https://remote.halifax.org/,DanaInfo=ww ... NQJaf7uLJM

:D :D :D

** Preaching the true words of God even publicly is figting against all the forces of evil. This is what the apostles and Jesus himself did actually. That's why some of them were persecuted and killed.

Matthew 23:13-14
"13 Datapuwa't sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba at mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! sapagka't sinasarhan ninyo ang kaharian ng langit laban sa mga tao: sapagka't kayo'y hindi na nagsisipasok, at ang nagsisipasok man ay ayaw ninyong bayaang mangakapasok. 14 Sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba't mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! Sapagka't sinasakmal ninyo ang mga bahay ng mga babaing bao, at inyong dinadahilan ang mahahabang panalangin: kaya't magsisitanggap kayo ng lalong mabigat na parusa. "

Lucas 3:7
"Sinasabi nga niya sa mga karamihang nagsisilabas upang mangagpabautismo sa kaniya, Kayong lahi ng mga ulupong, sino ang sa inyo'y nagudyok upang tumakas sa galit na darating?"

This is Jesus and apostle. :D

Correcting others belief even if he is not asking is what the apostle and Christ did. The chosen one, leader of God preaches even no one asks. His purpose is to disseminate the truth even he was not asked.

He said to the apostles, spread the word of God upto the ends of the world and not "preach them whenever they ask only. :D

Marcos 16:15
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 6:38 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Hint: El is singular. Elohim is plural.?


word Elohim is still questionable as when to use it as plural or singular AND YOU ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL PERSON TO GIVE "ELOHIM" THE MEANING BEING PLURAL JUST TO JUSTIFY YOUR BELIEF OF THE WORD "GOD" which for you composed of the Father and the son.

(WIKIPEDIA)
Elohim occurs frequently throughout the received text of the Torah. In some cases (e.g. Exodus 3:4, "... Elohim called unto him out of the midst of the bush ..."), it acts as a singular noun in Hebrew grammar, and is then generally understood to denote the single God of Israel. In other cases, Elohim acts as an ordinary plural of the word Eloah, and refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple gods (for example, Exodus 20:3, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me.").

In the Hebrew Bible Elohim, when meaning the God of Israel, is mostly grammatically singular. Even in Genesis 1:26 "Then God said (singular verb), 'Let us make (plural verb) man in our image, after our likeness'." Elohim is singular.
________________
**based on the above statement, Elohim ACTS AND GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD TO DENOTE THE SINGLE GOD OF ISRAEL (which is the Father). :D This proves really that your belief of the word "God" composed of the Father and son is FALSE. :D MOst esp your given ex in Genesis.

** sometimes Elohim used to refer to multiple gods (the deities) like that in Exodus 20:3 (and not pertaining to the God the Father but to the deities) :D

** So where is your proof AGAIN, that the word "God" is one entity composed of the Father and the son? :D

Your authority is Wikipedia!?!

One of my authorities is the Online Bible Companion. See: http://www.companionbiblecondensed.com/OT/Genesis...pdf

Let's focus on "God" in Genesis 1:1. The Online Bible Companion: "God. Heb. Elohim, pl."

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It's not a problem to me if you failed to understand Elohim.


I think it is not hard to understand the word ELOHIM. :D

But you're not showing it.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
There are threads about faith in this forum. If you care to read, you might learn something. :)


Why can't you answer directly? :D Us, we are noted for having an open forum on TV, or question and answer portion where diff people of diff religion can ask any questions. Regardless if you believe what our leader's answers are since not all could really accept the truth. Atleast, there is that sincerity to help people to help them solve their doubts, questions in mind using verses of the bible.

Your question "can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? (pls answer honestly)" was presumptive that you know more than any of the PRMOers. I was just giving you a hint that Christians are humble people since Christ is teaching humility.

If you want, you can open a thread on your belief on faith and let it be subjected to scrutiny by the other posters.

howellstamaria wrote:
Question again, does your religion also entertain questions regarding faith from diff people? If your answer AGAIN is, "here! just read threads and you might learn something" Think again! :D

First let us be clarified about your stand on what is religion and what is Church. Whether or not these are the same.

PRMOers are open to ask anybody about their beliefs or non belief by just creating a thread.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
I'll elaborate on the unity in "God" which still escapes you. There are two beings, individual Gods, but these two form a class or family called "God".

The comparison in man is husband and wife. There are two beings but after marriage, they are ONE flesh.

Ephesians 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”

The Father and Jesus are ONE God.


** And this doesn't mean that the wife is the husband and the husband is the wife and still, they are two different beings. Two different beings that will be judged. :D

John 10:30
"I and my Father are one."

This is what the bible says, and not what you were saying "Father and Jesus are ONE GOD. This is something you CAN'T PROVE BIBLICALLY. :D

You missed my explanation. :) I'll try again.

A & B formed a partnership called A & B partnership. A & B are the two partners in the A & B partnership. A is a separate person from B and vice versa. A & B partnership is an entity separate and distinct from each of A & B.

God (A) and the Word (B) compose the partnership called "God".

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Can't you avoid dragging INC into our discussion? This is one on one. :) Besides, I also don't agree with the INC stand on the nature of Jesus Christ.

Prior to and after his resurrection, the being named I AM, Word, YHWH, Jesus Christ, was and is God. In between, he was lower than angels and subject to the power of death. And he died.


** why are you hurt whenever I mention INC? Just asking. :D

If I "hurt", I "hurt" for you because you profess to be a bible believer. We are talking with each other one on one. When you inject a debasing comment on another before me who is not a party in our discussion, you are actually gossiping. And Paul discourages gossips! (1 Timothy 5:11-14)

howellstamaria wrote:
** It was like a President for ex who made himself lower by taking the place of a beggar for example or typical person just to know how does it feel like. He lowers himself but still, we know he is still the president. For a while, he took off his title being the president by doing what a typical person does but still, it doesn't change him for good, he is still the president.

The Word did not just take off his title but his Godly nature of being not subject to death. The purpose was to die and he died.

You position is that Christ allowed himself to be demoted to perform a make believe death. And that he did not really die. Nothing could be farther from the truth!

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You are misusing the verse to support your understanding which is that Christ did not die.


See. You can't dispute the verse! it is easy to say i misused it but you can't dispute actually coz the verse tells us the HE ONLY USED A HUMAN BODY. :D It is the bible and not me who is telling that.

1 John 4:2
"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God:"

" Dito'y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa't espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios:"

Take another look at the verse. "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" because he became flesh. There was a change in Christ's nature of being spirit to flesh.

If your belief be sustained, the verse might state, "Jesus Christ has come as spirit inside the flesh". Which is not the case.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
If you still don't get it, your "sorry" is understandable. But you can understand it later.


Iam really sorry coz you can't prove your stand. :D You have used the word "ELOHIM", but it just proved you wrong. :D

No, you didn't. You just showed what reference you prefer between Wikepedia and the Bible Companion. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 7:35 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
I already told you that we are different. If you have lots of time for this forum post, then it is good for you. But I am just telling you to respect when I am free or available responding to your queries. I am a busy man that got work throughout the day and then, practice and games for volleyball and basketball afterwork. I am actually trying hard to spare time during my work just to answer your questions. Honestly.

So if I can't answer you that quickly as you would like me to, if that is an issue for you, then it's ok. :D

If you read again my posts, I was assuring you to take your time. But you are perceiving the opposite. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
Just want to make this clear first and foremost. Since I have joined this topic and dispute that Christ built the church by giving the irrefutable verse

Hebrew 3:4
"For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God."

This proves that it was God the Father who built everything which includes the church obviously. You tried to dispute this by giving the verse Hebrew 3:6 by saying that the verse is telling us that it was Christ who actually owns it.

Hebrew 3:6
"But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end."

The I answered back that "HIS own house"/ HIS there referred to the God the Father and not the son, and I gave you the other translations that prove that IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IS WRONG AND NOT THE BIBLE.

Hebrew 3:6 (good news)
"But Christ is faithful as the Son in charge of God's house. We are his house if we keep up our courage and our confidence in what we hope for."

(New international version)
"But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast."

From this, it is clear that YOU ARE WRONG, YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND NOT THE VERSE ITSELF (but you just can't admit to yourself). Since you can't refute or dispute it, you just tried to elude and started to say that there is no issue on who owns and built the church. But ironically, your thread's title is emphasizing that it was Christ who built the church and even tried to use a couple of verses to prove it , but you just misunderstood it.

So that's one there. And that could have closed my dispute with this topic. :D

You did not post the versions which render "His" and "God" as "his" and there are many. My stand is between the two beings who co-own and co-built the Church, It is Christ who actually built it. The phrase "built all things" is general. The specific is Christ's statement, "I will build my Church".

This is a non-issue you attempted to be one. Now I'll wait for my other unresponded comments on your stand like the Father giving the commandments to Moses instead of Jesus Christ, that the Church has be formed even in the OT times, your stand on the great white throne judgment, your reaction to my stand that salvation is not the primary purpose of Christ's death and resurrection, etc. These are more important and interesting issues.

But there's no pressure at all because you're busy. And who is not between the two of us?

howellstamaria wrote:
But don't worry, am so interested to answer your other questions and just make sure you also answer mine. Just remind me if I forgot something coz it is pretty obvious that there are already lots of posts here and by reading it, it takes us a lot of time ayt!? :D

No, it won't worry me a bit even if you don't respond. You bragged that you could enlighten me but so far I haven't been yet. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
This belief is clearly erroneous. God would not be God if he "is not in control for now". While he is allowing Satan to be god in this age, God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to finish his
administrative duties on earth. God can limit how far Satan could go as in the case of Job and he can
intervene anytime in man's affairs as he sees fit.

Satan is having a field day only because God is allowing man to be independent of God. Through
Adam and Eve, man chose to be free from God's control and protection.


** God can control us yes. He is so powerful for me not to say He can't. But the fact the He gave us this "freewill" He is not controlling it, He won't intervene on it. Becoz if He does control our freewill, it's absurd to call it freewill anymore, and if that is the case, He should have done controlling us for us all to get saved which what He actually wanted.

You were talking about God's not being in control of the calamities like typhoons, earthquakes, and the like.

howellstamaria wrote:
** But that's not the essence of freewill. For us that had the chance to listen to His words, it is our own choice , decision on which way are we gonna go. Is it God's or satan's way. He won't control us on this one, he allows us to choose. Once a person had that decision in his heart (for ex. he chose to submit himself and follow what is righteous) then God would intervene and help that man to attain that perfection with the help of the holy spirit coz if it is just us, we can't becoz flesh is weak.

** Paul is a good ex right, from being a christian persecutor, to being an apostle. Not becoz He controlled Paul to join Jesus' team that instantly coz He should/could have done that to all of us. But for sure, He saw Paul's heart that this man is ready to serve and follow righteousness (if only this man could hear His words which is the truth.) So that was the time He intervene and made him one of Christ's disciple.

** I just cant remember the exact verse that tells us that God and Jesus could read man's heart which Satan can't. (I would look for it anyway)

** Allowing satan to finish his administrative duties is like allowing him to deceive men which God does not want to happen. What is the duty and goal of satan? to pervert the truth, to divert men from the truth, to deceive in short and be his follower against God. Would God allow this? Think again! :D

This is for you to think. God is not saving everyone in this age.

howellstamaria wrote:
** The reason why God still doesnt end the human race is NOT BECOZ HE IS ALLOWING SATAN TO FINISH HIS ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES. (They are enemies and for sure He won't allow that.) It is becoz of God's compassion to men. He would like to give men a chance for everday He is giving us to repent, to understand HIs words, and be in His righteousness for them to get saved. It's like in the times of Noah. God waits for the others to repent while Noah is still building the ark before He submerged the earth.

1 Peter 3:20
"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

2 Peter 3:15
"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you."

(tagalog)
"At inyong ariin na ang pagpapahinuhod ng ating Panginoon ay pagliligtas......."

* Again, it is not allowing Satan to do his administrative duties. :D But God still doesn't end the world coz of His "pagpapahinuhod" becoz of His aspiration to save us all. :D

** That's why He wants His words to be preached in the whole world so that there is fairness and justice that no man could reason out or question God if for ex a man had been sentenced for the eternal punishment.

So your stand is that God and Satan are in a contest of winning souls. Poor God. Satan is winning!!! Don't you think?

My stand is that there is no contest between God and Satan. Satan reports to God when God summons him. God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a season.

howellstamaria wrote:
** And this is what our group's doing. The effort of preaching the word of God to the whole wide world by all means that we could ever do. Primarily thru television, then radio and internet.

** Does your church do this anyway? :D

** questions are being entertained live and on the spot.
** bible exposition all over the countries
** the result, awards and appreciation of what they have been hearing. Ofcorz the glory is to God. To His truth.
** expectedly, not all could appreciate but the appreaciation and awards we have been getting means, what our leaders are preaching is something.

So your purpose is to convict and convince people to become like you. That people who hear should be convinced.

My stand is different as regards "preaching". I share what I understand. I answer when asked. I act respectfully and esteem others better than myself because actions speak louder than words.

When a person's actions do not conform to what he is teaching by offending people, they will just say, "I can't hear what you are shouting because your actions speak louder!"

howellstamaria wrote:
** How bout your church? musta? :D

I've shown you the thread "Where is the Church Jesus built". That's how you will know about the group in which I'm a part.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
There is no impossible for God.


YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN biblically speaking! :D Don't worry, am not mocking! I am just telling you the truth. For you there is no impossible for God. But for the bible there is something impossible for God.

Hebrews 6:18
"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us"

** It is not me who said YOU ARE WRONG, it was the bible. :D

You are being picky and assume I don't know the verse. The statement is general and is based on Christ's statement.

Matthew 19:26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

We were talking about an immortal which God could turn into mortal as what happened to the Word.

Accentuate the positive. :)
howellstamaria wrote:
** Our church name is....

Members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth. 1 Timothy 3:15

** Am so proud of it. :D

** aren't you proud of your church? :D

Do you really understand what the "Church of God" is? In the thread "Where is the Church Jesus built" you might pick up some insights. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 7:52 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
A Christian is not provocative and answers only when asked in humility the bible describes as "with meekness and fear".

Preaching what you believe and answering questions are not fighting. Correcting publicly others who are
preaching their beliefs is provocative and will lead to conflict. And this is minding another's
business. Correcting a person's belief is only proper when one asks for it or he is one of your group.


** Ye right. With meekness and fear. It is biblical and amen to that. :D Sometimes, by telling the truth, it could really hurt someone esp those people that dont want to be taught, be coz they have their own rule and belief. BUt not all people though are like that. There are peple which are willing to learn and accept if they are wrong and openly willing to be corrected.

Telling your friend nicely and remind him that cheating is not good is not provocative though. Telling your loved ones about what is good and bad is no wrong.

We had been taught to become meek. yes! and not been taugh on how to become FIERCE, CRUEL OR SAVAGE. Just like the other religious group.

Have you heard, seen anyway that members from our group killed someone? I dont think so that there was. BUt try to look at the works of the members from the other group. It shows who has really been taught well of the words of God. not being pompous but it really shows. :D

The inquisition of the catholic church.
http://www.exposingchristianity.com/Inquisition.html

INC murder
https://remote.halifax.org/,DanaInfo=ww ... NQJaf7uLJM

:D :D :D


** Preaching the true words of God even publicly is figting against all the forces of evil. This is what the apostles and Jesus himself did actually. That's why some of them were persecuted and killed.

Matthew 23:13-14
"13 Datapuwa't sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba at mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! sapagka't sinasarhan ninyo ang kaharian ng langit laban sa mga tao: sapagka't kayo'y hindi na nagsisipasok, at ang nagsisipasok man ay ayaw ninyong bayaang mangakapasok. 14 Sa aba ninyo, mga eskriba't mga Fariseo, mga mapagpaimbabaw! Sapagka't sinasakmal ninyo ang mga bahay ng mga babaing bao, at inyong dinadahilan ang mahahabang panalangin: kaya't magsisitanggap kayo ng lalong mabigat na parusa. "

Lucas 3:7
"Sinasabi nga niya sa mga karamihang nagsisilabas upang mangagpabautismo sa kaniya, Kayong lahi ng mga ulupong, sino ang sa inyo'y nagudyok upang tumakas sa galit na darating?"

This is Jesus and apostle. :D

The speaker in Luke 3 is John the Baptist, not John the apostle. And John the Baptist is of a different class of a man because even when he was still in his mother's womb, he was already filled with the Holy Spirit. Unlike the apostles and Christians.

Luke 1:15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.

howellstamaria wrote:
Correcting others belief even if he is not asking is what the apostle and Christ did. The chosen one, leader of God preaches even no one asks. His purpose is to disseminate the truth even he was not asked.

He said to the apostles, spread the word of God upto the ends of the world and not "preach them whenever they ask only. :D

Marcos 16:15
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature."

Spreading the good news is just for people to hear it as a witness to them. But the preacher cannot teach everyone. Only those whose ears God opens to be able to hear (understand) would be asking the right questions and progress towards discipleship. It is God who gives the increase in the growth of the Church.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:10 am 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 3263
Location: Sitio Bunubon
Bro. Epi, by reading your exchanges w/ howell, I am really learning a lot. Only that I came specifically across two Bible verses which appear to be literally showing opposite ideas: One quoted by Howell and the other by you.


Hebrews 6:18
"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us"


Matthew 19:26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”


My personal take on this is that God being the God of truth will never lie hence will not go against His own words. I believe that the Bible has no contradiction but looking literally at the two verses, how can we explain that these are complimentary?

_________________
PERCEPTION: Just because you dress like a slut doesn't mean you are a slut. And just because I act like a rapist doesn't mean I am a rapist.


Last edited by Mang Heruino on Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:15 am 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 3263
Location: Sitio Bunubon
Bro. howell, is your religion the one behind the tv program "Ang Datin Daan" with Eliseo Soriano?

_________________
PERCEPTION: Just because you dress like a slut doesn't mean you are a slut. And just because I act like a rapist doesn't mean I am a rapist.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 16, 2011 5:08 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
Mang Heruino wrote:
Bro. Epi, by reading your exchanges w/ howell, I am really learning a lot.

You only have God to thank for if you are "really learning a lot" because it only means you are being privileged from among the many in this age to be considered a field where God sows seeds. What will happen next depends on your exercise of the freedom to choose.

The self explanatory parable of the sower provides an insight:

Matthew 13:3 Then He spoke many things to them in parables, saying: “Behold, a sower went out to sow. 4 And as he sowed, some seed fell by the wayside; and the birds came and devoured them. 5 Some fell on stony places, where they did not have much earth; and they immediately sprang up because they had no depth of earth. 6 But when the sun was up they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away. 7 And some fell among thorns, and the thorns sprang up and choked them. 8 But others fell on good ground and yielded a crop: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. 9 He who has ears to hear, let him hear!”

The Parable of the Sower Explained

Matthew 13:18 “Therefore hear the parable of the sower: 19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside. 20 But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. 22 Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful. 23 But he who received seed on the good ground is he who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.”

Mang Heruino wrote:
Only that I came specifically across two Bible verses which appear to be literally showing opposite ideas: One quoted by Howell and the other by you.

Hebrews 6:18
"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us"

Matthew 19:26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

My personal take on this is that God being the God of truth will never lie hence will not go against His own words. I believe that the Bible has no contradiction but looking literally at the two verses, how can we explain that these are complimentary?

Your "personal take" is good start and yes, "the Bible has no contradiction".

To understand a word or phrase or bible statement, a reader should consider the context of which the word, phrase or statement is used.

Let's understand what is the import of the phrase "it is impossible for God to lie".

Hebrews 6:13 For when God made a promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, 14 saying, “Surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you.” 15 And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. 16 For men indeed swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute. 17 Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, 18 that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us.

The phrase "it is impossible for God to lie" is used is connection to God's "promise to Abraham". That God would not renege on his promise. That he would fulfill what he promised. If God does not fulfill what he promised, then God would be a liar. But God has been fulfilling what he promised to Abraham and Abraham's descendants have been reaping blessings not because of what they do but because of what Abraham did which caused God to make the promise.

The phrase "it is impossible for God to lie" simply means that when God makes a promise, he will fulfill it.

The phrase "with God all things are possible" is used relation to man's salvation.

Matthew 19:23 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
25 When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?”
26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

Jesus was explaining the difficulty "for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven" because his heart would be more on his riches. His time would be occupied with the material things he could enjoy with his riches leaving him no moment to even think that his life is just but for a moment. So the kingdom of God matter is far from his priorities.

But he is also a field in which the seeds God sows could fall. And you have read Matt 13:22 which states, "Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful".

For a man to be saved, "all things are possible" with God. But if salvation depends on men, "this is impossible".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2011 5:44 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Hint: El is singular. Elohim is plural.?


howellstamaria wrote:
word Elohim is still questionable as when to use it as plural or singular AND YOU ARE NOT THE OFFICIAL
PERSON TO GIVE "ELOHIM" THE MEANING BEING PLURAL JUST TO JUSTIFY YOUR BELIEF OF THE WORD "GOD" which for you composed
of the Father and the son.

(WIKIPEDIA)
Elohim occurs frequently throughout the received text of the Torah. In some cases (e.g. Exodus 3:4, "... Elohim called
unto him out of the midst of the bush ..."), it acts as a singular noun in Hebrew grammar, and is then generally
understood to denote the single God of Israel. In other cases, Elohim acts as an ordinary plural of the word Eloah,
and refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple gods (for example, Exodus 20:3, "Thou shalt have no other gods before
me.").

In the Hebrew Bible Elohim, when meaning the God of Israel, is mostly grammatically singular. Even in Genesis 1:26
"Then God said (singular verb), 'Let us make (plural verb) man in our image, after our likeness'." Elohim is singular.

________________

howellstamaria wrote:
**based on the above statement, Elohim ACTS AND GENERALLY UNDERSTOOD TO DENOTE THE SINGLE GOD OF ISRAEL (which
is the Father). This proves really that your belief of the word "God" composed of the Father and son is FALSE.
MOst esp your given ex in Genesis.

** sometimes Elohim used to refer to multiple gods (the deities) like that in Exodus 20:3 (and not pertaining to
the God the Father but to the deities)

** So where is your proof AGAIN, that the word "God" is one entity composed of the Father and the son?



Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Your authority is Wikipedia!?!

One of my authorities is the Online Bible Companion. See: http://www.companionbiblecondensed.com/OT/Genesis...pdf

Let's focus on "God" in Genesis 1:1. The Online Bible Companion: "God. Heb. Elohim, pl."


howellstamaria wrote:
What is wrong with wikipedia? It is actually so famous that lots of people are using it and besides,
it uses different references and they could be sued if they tell things which are not true.
It doesn't mean you have a different reference then it is already the truth. Even if you will read different
sites about ELOHIM, almost all of them say it is really still debatable.
And I think it is ABSURD to rely on something which is still not sure to believe that the word GOD is composed
of the Father and the son whereas lots of verses (the best basis for a belief) that tell us that the Father and the son
are 2 different being.

______________________________________________
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It's not a problem to me if you failed to understand Elohim.


howellstamaria wrote:
I think it is not hard to understand the word ELOHIM.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
But you're not showing it.

howellstamaria wrote:


One credible site in Wikipedia shows it along with the other sites.

______________________________________________

howellstamaria wrote:
** How bout in INC? Your church? can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? (pls answer honestly)




Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
There are threads about faith in this forum. If you care to read, you might learn something.


howellstamaria wrote:
Why can't you answer directly? Us, we are noted for having an open forum on TV, or question and answer portion where
diff people of diff religion can ask any questions. Regardless if you believe what our leader's answers are since not all
could really accept the truth. Atleast, there is that sincerity to help people to help them solve their doubts, questions
in mind using verses of the bible.

Question again, does your religion also entertain questions regarding faith from diff people? If your answer AGAIN is,
"here! just read threads and you might learn something" Think again!


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Your question "can you or other people ask questions regarding faith? (pls answer honestly)" was presumptive that you
know more than any of the PRMOers. I was just giving you a hint that Christians are humble people since Christ is
teaching humility.

If you want, you can open a thread on your belief on faith and let it be subjected to scrutiny by the other posters.



howellstamaria wrote:
You still can't answer directly. The question is simple and I would just rephrase it. Does your religion entertain questions
regarding faith from diff people of diff religion too. Coz our group does. Ofcorz it is not me. I am just a member
but our leader does it so well. Having a segment (question and answer) like that is not being presumptous esp
the kind of knowledge our leader is having. Thru him, we learned that we need not worship idols. Thru him we learned
that there were no 3 kings in the bible, that there is no purgatory, that the rosary is prohibited by God, that you
dont need to build church like those of so many people did that's why thousand of diff religion's names were registered,
but we just need to associate ourselves to what God had built and what the apostles had preached which is the church of God.
Is that being presumptous esp our leader always uses verse as his answers and keeps on telling people that what he is saying
is not his own since he is just reading the verse.

He is so open actually if you have doubts on what he is preaching and would even give you time or even a healthful debate just to justify
whose beliefs is based in the bible. A debate just to show people you are good is not ryt but a debate to show people
the truth of God, the authenticity of the scripture and to justify your belief that everything is in the bible is nothing wrong.


That is what am talking about. Chance for the others to question what your leaders are preaching and what you guys are believing.
If there is nothing like that, you tell me and that is fine. I am just asking.

And If you want me to open a thread for the others to scrutinize, which means, I would defend it then, it is an act of
humility I guess that it is much better if I would give you guys the official sites of our group that has lots of
topics of certain beliefs of us in the bible, and surely, your queries, questions are so welcome. I keep on telling you,
am just a member and there is no other person in our group to start off a topic to discuss with than our leader.
That is may respect for him, and that is how confident we are. If you ask, so why are you on this forum? Just red your post
so I guess there is nothing wrong to react esp we had basis of our belief. Anyway, am not forcing anyone to believe me, And am
sure that is also your stand. But to start off a topic. The best is the topic that our leader has already posted online.
And will give you one example later about the "impossible for God to lie".

_____________________________

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
First let us be clarified about your stand on what is religion and what is Church. Whether or not these are the same.

howellstamaria wrote:

Our leader has a post for this one. I will try to post it here for you. That is humility.

_______________________________________
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
I'll elaborate on the unity in "God" which still escapes you. There are two beings, individual Gods, but these two
form a class or family called "God".

The comparison in man is husband and wife. There are two beings but after marriage, they are ONE flesh.

Ephesians 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall
become one flesh.”

The Father and Jesus are ONE God.


howellstamaria wrote:
** And this doesn't mean that the wife is the husband and the husband is the wife and still, they are two different
beings. Two different beings that will be judged.

John 10:30
"I and my Father are one."

This is what the bible says, and not what you were saying "Father and Jesus are ONE GOD. This is something you CAN'T
PROVE BIBLICALLY.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You missed my explanation. I'll try again.

A & B formed a partnership called A & B partnership. A & B are the two partners in the A & B partnership. A is a
separate person from B and vice versa. A & B partnership is an entity separate and distinct from each of A & B.

God (A) and the Word (B) compose the partnership called "God".


howellstamaria wrote:
That's the problem there, you have your own explanation without any proof at all biblically.
You said "these two form a class or family called GOD", "The Father and Jesus are one God."
Yours is just presumption coz you can't prove it biblically. If there is? where is it? what verse?
You gave us Genesis, yes the Father was talking with someone, but did it prove that the Father
and the son (whom He was talking with) are in one entity called GOD? nope! it didn't! So where is your proof.
You are now insisting the hebrew word ELOHIM just to support your belief. Yes what u r using says ELOHIM is
plural, but how will you explain the claim of the other scholars reported by diff sites that some say ELOHIM
is usually used to denote one being and that is the Father. It is still vague and debatable and not a strong basis
to support your belief.


___________________________________________________
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
If I "hurt", I "hurt" for you because you profess to be a bible believer. We are talking with each other one on one. When
you inject a debasing comment on another before me who is not a party in our discussion, you are actually gossiping. And
Paul discourages gossips! (1 Timothy 5:11-14)


howellstamaria wrote:
It is not a gossip, it is a fact. When we say that person is a killer, and we proved it. There is nothing wrong there.
You are telling a fact and just want people to become cautious for them not become a victim. You are just OVERREACTING AGAIN.
That's why I am giving you the link as a proof and not just a gossip.

____________________________________________________
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
The Word did not just take off his title but his Godly nature of being not subject to death. The purpose was to die and
he died.

You position is that Christ allowed himself to be demoted to perform a make believe death. And that he did not really die.
Nothing could be farther from the truth!


howellstamaria wrote:

Filipos 2:6-7

"Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:But made himself of no reputation,
and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:"

"Na siya, bagama't nasa anyong Dios, ay hindi niya inaring isang bagay na nararapat panangnan ang pagkapantay niya sa Dios,"
Kundi bagkus hinubad niya ito, at naganyong alipin, na nakitulad sa mga tao:"

When Christ took it off? did the godliness of him disappear?
Nung hubarin nya yung pagkadios? ibig sabihin ba sau, nawala ng tuluyan yung pagkadios nya?

Based in your belief, yes it disappeared! But it is wrong! Once you are a president, even if you
took upon you the form of being a servant, you are still the president. It won't change.

and the phrase "was made in the likeness of men" "na nakitulad sa tao" it proves that he really is
not a man.

1 Juan 4:2

"Dito'y nakikilala ninyo ang Espiritu ng Dios: ang bawa't espiritung nagpapahayag na si Jesucristo
ay naparitong nasa laman ay sa Dios."

"By this ye know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ hath come in
the flesh, is from God::"

See that? naparitong nsa laman. Inside that laman is Christ that is god. He just took the form of being a servant.
It is very clear. And this is also the belief of the apostles even he manifested in flesh that he
is still a god but you keep on insisting that he is a man.

John 20:28

"Nang magkagayo'y sinabi niya kay Tomas, idaiti mo rito ang iyong daliri, at tingnan mo ang aking mga
kamay; at idaiti mo rito ang iyong kamay, at isuot mo siya sa aking tagiliran: at huwag kang di
mapanampalatayahin, kundi mapanampalatayahin. 28 Sumagot si Tomas, at sa kaniya'y sinabi, Panginoon ko
at Dios ko."

"Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand,
and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto
him, My Lord and my God"

Titus 2:13
"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour
Jesus Christ;"

For us and the apostles he is god but for you, he is man.

Can we erase this fact from the bible? c'mon. or don't tell me you are right than the apostles.

+_____________________________________

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Take another look at the verse. "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" because he became flesh.
There was a change in Christ's nature of being spirit to flesh.

If your belief be sustained, the verse might state, "Jesus Christ has come as spirit inside the

flesh". Which is not the case.


howellstamaria wrote:
Christ being god is already a spirit. your phrase "Jesus christ has come as spirit inside the flesh."
is redundant and not correct. It is like saying"A spirit has come as spirit inside the flesh."
Christ is really a spirit being a god that has come in flesh; took upon him the form of a servant.
So rightful and so nice. =>


___________________________
howellstamaria wrote:
Iam really sorry coz you can't prove your stand. You have used the word "ELOHIM", but it just
proved you wrong.
EPI:
No, you didn't. You just showed what reference you prefer between Wikepedia and the Bible Companion.
howellstamaria wrote:


Wikipedia might be bad if it doesn't conform your belief. =>


______________________________________________________________

howellstamaria wrote:
Just want to make this clear first and foremost. Since I have joined this topic and dispute that Christ built the church by giving the irrefutable verse

Hebrew 3:4
"For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God."

This proves that it was God the Father who built everything which includes the church obviously. You tried to dispute this by giving the verse Hebrew 3:6 by saying that the verse is telling us that it was Christ who actually owns it.

Hebrew 3:6
"But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end."

The I answered back that "HIS own house"/ HIS there referred to the God the Father and not the son, and I gave you the other translations that prove that IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IS WRONG AND NOT THE BIBLE.

Hebrew 3:6 (good news)
"But Christ is faithful as the Son in charge of God's house. We are his house if we keep up our courage and our confidence in what we hope for."

(New international version)
"But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast."

From this, it is clear that YOU ARE WRONG, YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND NOT THE VERSE ITSELF (but you just can't admit to yourself). Since you can't refute or dispute it, you just tried to elude and started to say that there is no issue on who owns and built the church. But ironically, your thread's title is emphasizing that it was Christ who built the church and even tried to use a couple of verses to prove it , but you just misunderstood it.

So that's one there. And that could have closed my dispute with this topic.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:

You did not post the versions which render "His" and "God" as "his" and there are many. My stand is
between the two beings who co-own and co-built the Church, It is Christ who actually built it.
The phrase "built all things" is general. The specific is Christ's statement, "I will build my Church".

This is a non-issue you attempted to be one. Now I'll wait for my other unresponded comments on your
stand like the Father giving the commandments to Moses instead of Jesus Christ, that the Church has be
formed even in the OT times, your stand on the great white throne judgment, your reaction to my stand
that salvation is not the primary purpose of Christ's death and resurrection, etc. These are more
important and interesting issues.

But there's no pressure at all because you're busy. And who is not between the two of us?


howellstamaria wrote:

I did not post the versions which render "his" coz that is actually where you got wrong. I posted
these versions for you to understand that "his" in certain verses pertains to the Father and not to
the son as you believe.


Hebrew 3:6 (New american standard bible)
"but Christ was faithful as a Son over his house-- whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence
and the boast of our hope firm until the end."

HIS HOUSE. For you "his" there is Christ to prove me that it was Christ who owns and built the church.
But I gave you the other versions to prove to you that it was the Father who owns the house even in that
particular verse.

(New international version)
But Christ is faithful as a son over God's house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our
courage and the hope of which we boast.

(english standard version)
but Christ is faithful over God’s house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our
confidence and our boasting in our hope.

1 Timothy 3:15
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God,
which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

so Hebrew 3:4 is still not enough for you to believe that the Father was the one who built the church!?

Hebrew 3:4

"For every house is builded by some [man]; but he that built all things is God."

That is your problem anyway.

Your only valid basis is Matthew 16:18 and I understand that, but you still got it wrong.

Matthew 16:18
"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and
the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Jesus is the speaker yes, but according to Jesus also..
John 12:48
"Sapagka't ako'y hindi nagsasalita na mula sa aking sarili; kundi ang Ama na sa akin ay nagsugo,
ay siyang nagbigay sa akin ng utos, kung ano ang dapat kong sabihin, at kung ano ang dapat kong
salitain."

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I
should say, and what I should speak."

who is speaking according to Jesus himself?

And it is kinda awkward to say that Jesus will build his church upon that rock if he is also the rock.
how's that!?
-- it is now becoming non-issue for you whereas it is actually the issue coz of your thread's title.
-- Yup, the commandments during the time of Moises is from the Father.
-- yup, it is our belief, Church does exist even before Christ.
-- Judgement day? great tribulation first, then the return of Christ.

1 Thessalonians 4:16

For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel
and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are
still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the
air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words.

1000 years rule of Christ, then comes the judgement day as to who will really be saved and not.

-- I said Christ was sent to earth primarily for salvation.

-- Every issue regarding Jesus and the Father is important including as to who built and owns it and
you cant prove your stand. That is the summary of the story. -- I assume you are also playing basketball and volleyball afterwork. =)

_______________________________

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:

I don't "fight" the others who profess belief in the bible. God is in control and could always lead
people he chooses to be part of the Church in this age. The Christian's fight is more of his overcoming
the tests for him to develop in him LOVE which is God's nature.


howellstamaria wrote:
God is not in control for now but in the future yes


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:

This belief is clearly erroneous. God would not be God if he "is not in control for now". While he
is allowing Satan to be god in this age, God is in control precisely by allowing Satan to finish his
administrative duties on earth. God can limit how far Satan could go as in the case of Job and he can
intervene anytime in man's affairs as he sees fit.




howellstamaria wrote:
** God can control us yes. He is so powerful for me not to say He can't. But the fact the He gave us
this "freewill" He is not controlling it, He won't intervene on it. Becoz if He does control our
freewill, it's absurd to call it freewill anymore, and if that is the case, He should have done
controlling us for us all to get saved which what He actually wanted.

** But that's not the essence of freewill. For us that had the chance to listen to His words,
it is our own choice , decision on which way are we gonna go. Is it God's or satan's way. He won't
control us on this one, he allows us to choose. Once a person had that decision in his heart
(for ex. he chose to submit himself and follow what is righteous) then God would intervene and
help that man to attain that perfection with the help of the holy spirit coz if it is just us, we can't becoz flesh is weak.

** Paul is a good ex right, from being a christian persecutor, to being an apostle. Not becoz He controlled Paul to join Jesus' team that instantly coz He should/could have done that to all of us. But for sure, He saw Paul's heart that this man is ready to serve and follow righteousness (if only this man could hear His words which is the truth.) So that was the time He intervene and made him one of Christ's disciple.

** I just cant remember the exact verse that tells us that God and Jesus could read man's heart which Satan can't. (I would look for it anyway)

** Allowing satan to finish his administrative duties is like allowing him to deceive men which God does not want to happen. What is the duty and goal of satan? to pervert the truth, to divert men from the truth, to deceive in short and be his follower against God. Would God allow this? Think again!

** The reason why God still doesnt end the human race is NOT BECOZ HE IS ALLOWING SATAN TO FINISH HIS ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES. (They are enemies and for sure He won't allow that.) It is becoz of God's compassion to men. He would like to give men a chance for everday He is giving us to repent, to understand HIs words, and be in His righteousness for them to get saved. It's like in the times of Noah. God waits for the others to repent while Noah is still building the ark before He submerged the earth.

1 Peter 3:20
"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

2 Peter 3:15
"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you."

(tagalog)
"At inyong ariin na ang pagpapahinuhod ng ating Panginoon ay pagliligtas......."

* Again, it is not allowing Satan to do his administrative duties. But God still doesn't end the world coz of His "pagpapahinuhod" becoz of His aspiration to save us all.

** That's why He wants His words to be preached in the whole world so that there is fairness and justice that no man could reason out or question God if for ex a man had been sentenced for the eternal punishment.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
u were talking about God's not being in control of the calamities like typhoons, earthquakes,
and the like.


howellstamaria wrote:


When did I say God is not being in control of the calamities? when and where?
becoz in the bible actually, earhtquake signifies God's wrath. It is not a good practice
to add or say something which you know I never said. ok!?

Just admit you are wrong again by telling us that God is in control. You can't refute what I have just
explained. So stop putting words that are not mine.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
So your stand is that God and Satan are in a contest of winning souls. Poor God. Satan
is winning!!! Don't you think?

My stand is that there is no contest between God and Satan. Satan reports to God when God summons him.
God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a
season.

howellstamaria wrote:

It's obvious that there is a fight bet good and evil, God and satan. Dont you know that?
Efeso 16:12
"Sapagka't ang ating pakikibaka ay hindi laban sa laman at dugo, kundi laban sa mga pamunuan, laban sa mga
kapangyarihan, laban sa mga namamahala ng kadilimang ito sa sanglibutan, laban sa mga ukol sa espiritu ng
kasamaan sa mga dakong kaitaasan"

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against
the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."

and what's the purpose of Jesus', prophets, apostles' preaching? it is to disseminate the words of God which is the truth
that could lead men to salvation.

That is why men were cautioned not to believe in every spirit becoz there are lots of false prophets that could lead their
soul to hell.

1 John 4:1
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false
prophets are gone out into the world."

---- What do you think of father raping his daughter? lady was raped and killed brutally? rampant adultery?
bombings? war? Is this the work of God? definitely not. These are works of satan. He might have won
number of souls as it was prophesized actually in the book of revelation but who is the ultimate winner time comes?
Satan himself along with this cohorts would be punished forver. Who would be the ultimate winner in the end?
Do I need to answer this?

-- There is no contest bet God and satan according to you but there is a fight accodring to the bible.
What is the purpose then of God's willingness for us to learn His truth and Satan will be punished forver?


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
God is just allowing man to experience to the fullest how it is to be without God on his side for a
season.


howellstamaria wrote:
It is like saying that God is allowing man to kill whereas He prohibits it. God allows us to steal whereas He prohibits it.
It is like God allows us to murder and rape a lady , whereas He absolutely is against it.
Your point is TOTALLY ILLOGICAL AND UNBIBLICAL. Sorry! It was just ridiculous for you to say that.

_________________________________________________________________________

howellstamaria wrote:
** And this is what our group's doing. The effort of preaching the word of God to the whole wide world by all means
that we could ever do. Primarily thru television, then radio and internet.

** Does your church do this anyway?

** questions are being entertained live and on the spot.
** bible exposition all over the countries
** the result, awards and appreciation of what they have been hearing. Ofcorz the glory is to God. To His truth.
** expectedly, not all could appreciate but the appreaciation and awards we have been getting means, what our leaders
are preaching is something.
EPI:
So your purpose is to convict and convince people to become like you. That people who hear should be convinced.


howellstamaria wrote:

I am pertaining to our group as a whole and not myself. It is very clear actually or you cant just say that
your group cant do what we have been doing. That's fine anyway coz there is no other religious group so far
that has been awarded and appreciated by diff award giving bodies. That is for a fact. And that is why you cant answer me
directly.

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:


My stand is different as regards "preaching". I share what I understand. I answer when asked. I act respectfully
and esteem others better than myself because actions speak louder than words.

When a person's actions do not conform to what he is teaching by offending people, they will just say, "I can't
hear what you are shouting because your actions speak louder!"


howellstamaria wrote:
OUR stand of preaching? There must be leaders to preach. Not all in the church can preach but there are certain
people who can and should preach. If the apostles and Jesus had done preaching thru travelling to diff places in their
motive of preaching the words of God to the most population. And told the apostles to preach the gospel to the whole world

Mark 16:15

"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature."

In our time right now where technology is so advanced, we could use diff means on how to adhere on this Christ's aspiration.
That's why am asking you if your church also does preaching thru television, radio and internet where significant
huge number of people could hear you. And not only on this forum.

_____________


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 381 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

philboxing.com | pinoygreats.com
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group