Pacland's Philippine Boxing Forum

Discussion on boxing and other sports, Filipino greats and anything under the sun.
It is currently Mon Oct 18, 2021 3:37 pm

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 381 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 ... 26  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 5:51 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
Are you really sure that this is the doctrine of the Iglesia ni Manalo (coz it seems that you are offended when I use INC), that every thing that the Father built and owns, Jesus owns and built too? Coz the main reason we suppose why the church founded by Mr. Manalo was named CHURCH OF CHRIST is bcoz of the belief that it was Christ who built it, and that's why you
guys always use and apparently your favorite, Matthew 16:18 "... upon this rock I wll build my church..." ryt? You even guys use Romans 16:16 (..all the churches of christ...) to emphasize that it was really Christ who built the church.

You must be with the group which openly quarrels with the INC. You can't detach from your words Manalo and the INC.

I had a previous long discussion with revin, an INC member, and our discussion in an earlier thread was cordial. In the end, we agreed to leave our differences in understanding, particularly on whether Christ is only a man, to each other's choice.

howellstamaria wrote:
Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can't disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief.

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. :D I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can't directly answer it. Coz this topic won't end if we'll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.

What I'm saying, not "telling" because I won't care if you will not agree in the end, is that there is no point in making an issue as to the ownership and to who "really built" "all things" including the Church. There is no question that God owns and created all things. But "God" owning and creating "all things" does not exclude Jesus Christ, a God being in the God family who plans with the Father and executes the plan, who you want to exclude and be discredited.

There are points raised which need to be reformed or be dismissed as a non-issue. Your pointing to God as the builder of the Church and not Christ falls in this category.

howellstamaria wrote:
My next question is:

where in the bible can you find that whatever God the Father built and owns, Jesus Christ built and owns too?

It's obvious. God is a family. Don't remove Jesus Christ from "God".

howellstamaria wrote:
coz accdg. to

John 12:49 "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."

In this verse, who owns the commandment? The Father owns the commandment ryt? Jesus was sent here to propagate His commandments for it is the key for salvation. If it is also owned by Jesus himself, he would have not said that, ryt? :D

When the immortal Word became the mortal Jesus, the latter "could do nothing" and was totally dependent on the God being left in heaven, the Father. Jesus as a man on earth was directing man to the Father. But this doesn't mean that Jesus lost his being part of the God family who co-planned everything with the Father.

So Jesus' words in your quoted verse does not really remove Jesus' co-ownership and co-authorship of the commandments.

howellstamaria wrote:
In the time of israelites, Jesus was not introduced then. MOses was the one whom God had chosen to give His commandments for them. Who owns those commandments? Moses doesn't even know yet Jesus during that time for you to tell that it was also owned by Christ, and the fact that it was Chrst himself taught to the first christians that those were his Father's
commandments.

And who do you think was the God who dealt with Moses? If you think it's the Father, think again.

I say it's the God being who later became Jesus Christ. Saying "Jesus was not introduced then" is not correct

howellstamaria wrote:
how are you gonna explain then what you were saying that whatever the Father owns and built, Jesus owns and built too? which verse?

Now, to answer you bout Hebrew 3:6 (and for you am avoiding it, let's see :D ), coz you are now admitting indirectly and cautiously that in Hebrew 3:4, yes, the Father built everythng including the church.

Hebrew 3:6
"but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end." (KJV)

OVER HIS HOUSE... his there doesn't pertain to Christ, it pertains to the God the Father which accdg to Hebrew 3:4, the One who built everything. The bible does not contradict itself. It is contradicting when someone like you alters the real meaning of it.

To prove that HIS is pertaining to the Father and not the son.
Let's try other different versions of the bible.

Good news version (favorite translation of the INC's)

HEBREW
1 My Christian friends, who also have been called by God! Think of Jesus, whom God sent to be the High Priest of the faith we profess.2 (A)He was faithful to God, who chose him to do this work, just as Moses was faithful in his work in God's house.3 A man who builds a house receives more honor than the house itself. In the same way Jesus is worthy of much greater honor than Moses.4 Every house, of course, is built by someone—and God is the one who has built all things.5 Moses was faithful in God's house as a servant, and he spoke of the things that God would say in the future.6 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.

English standard version

1Therefore, holy brothers,[a] you who share in(A) a heavenly calling, consider Jesus,(B) the apostle and high priest of our confession, 2who was faithful to him who appointed him,(C) just as Moses also was faithful in all God’s house.3For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses—as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. 4(For every house is built by someone, but(D) the builder of all things is God.) 5(E) Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house(F) as a servant,(G) to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, 6but Christ is faithful over [b]God’s house as(H) a son. And(I) we are his house if indeed we(J) hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.[c

It was clear ryt? It is pertaining to the house of God the Father. The house is the church accdg to the bible and Jesus is the head of the church. Romans 16:16 doesnt prove it was Jesus who built the church since you admit that there are 12 verses that say, CHURCH OF GOD. Yes, there is no problem calling it church of christ since the bible itself use that term
but to conclude it was Jesus who built it, it's diff, way different. It will contradict itself if that is the case. Jesus was sent to save the body, or the house, or the church and incharged to lead it. The fact that the bible says time comes, Jesus will gonna surrender the church to God. It shows that it was really God who owns it, and that's not being disrespectful or demoting Jesus coz that is his real purpose or mission. To save the body which is the church.

My comment above on the co-ownership and being co-builders of the Father and Jesus applies.

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
howellstamaria wrote:
PLEASE ANSWER THIS HONESTLY WITH YOUR HEART for the sake of the other souls. :D


You want to portray your concern "of the other souls". Is God saving all souls in this age?

You did not respond to this question.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Now prove that the Father interacted with "the previous prophets".
To interact is to communicate. Moses is a good example. God had sent his commandments thru Moses. :D

Your position is that the God who communicated with Moses is the Father. I ask for proof by the way. :)

Mine is it was the being who became Jesus Christ. I gave you the reference to a thread but obviously you didn't read it.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Also, in your statement, "The mere fact that He sent us His son, for us to adhere on what He wants us to do, or simply His will, that was God's interaction with us coz He wants us to be saved", is saving the only purpose that God sent Jesus for man according to your enlightenment?

Yes! Defintely! He was sent to propagate His words w/c is the truth, bring them inside the church, primarily for salvation.

Primarily. Is there a secondary or more purpose?

My understanding is that after saving a man from the eternal death penalty of sin, Jesus' was to proceed with his creation of man in God's image according to God's likeness.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
And the fact that Christ was already with the Father since the beginning of everything, this shows that Jesus Christ is not human, coz INC's like you believe that Christ is human ryt? (this is another issue anyway which we can also discuss some other time :D )

Didn't the Word shed off his God nature to become mortal?

So it is clear that you really believe that Christ is a man, or becomes a man? (the bible totally disputes your belief then:D )[/quote]
It is clear that the Spirit Word became mortal flesh. Instead of "the bible totally disputes" my belief, it "totally" supports it.

howellstamaria wrote:
and are you saying that Christ's form of being a god has been taken away and become mortal? when and where was that in the bible?

He was an immortal being but had to shed of immortality for the purpose of death. Otherwise, Christ would not have died. See Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You've mentioned, unnecessarily in our exchanges, INC 2 times already. Do you have a quarrel with the INC?


- becoz false belief may lead you to hell..God does want everybody to be saved... unlike in INC, your doctrine is that INC's are the only ones that will be saved.[b] So how bout the children that dont understand yet the bible? They will get punished accdg. to your doctrine and how cruel is that!

It is not "false belief may lead you to hell". It is one's choice as to whether one makes God to reign over him or not. If the choice is not, that man goes to the lake of fire for his life's end (not being alive for eternity in pain).

Many will be saved and become finished creations of God in his image according to God's likeness.

The children and the people who have since died without knowing God in this age will have their chance for salvation in the age which follows the next age.

howellstamaria wrote:
Becoz I totally not agree with the so many doctrines of INC which will lead people to hell.

God is in control. When Christ opens a man's understanding, no other man's or group's doctrine could sway the man.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:45 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
(Sentences were mistakenly interchanged, the corrected and in color.)
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
howellstamaria wrote:
Are you really sure that this is the doctrine of the Iglesia ni Manalo (coz it seems that you are offended when I use INC), that every thing that the Father built and owns, Jesus owns and built too? Coz the main reason we suppose why the church founded by Mr. Manalo was named CHURCH OF CHRIST is bcoz of the belief that it was Christ who built it, and that's why you
guys always use and apparently your favorite, Matthew 16:18 "... upon this rock I wll build my church..." ryt? You even guys use Romans 16:16 (..all the churches of christ...) to emphasize that it was really Christ who built the church.

You must be with the group which openly quarrels with the INC. You can't detach from your words Manalo and the INC.

I had a previous long discussion with revin, an INC member, and our discussion in an earlier thread was cordial. In the end, we agreed to leave our differences in understanding, particularly on whether Christ is only a man, to each other's choice.

howellstamaria wrote:
Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can't disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief.

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. :D I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can't directly answer it. Coz this topic won't end if we'll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.

What I'm saying, not "telling" because I won't care if you will not agree in the end, is that there is no point in making an issue as to the ownership and to who "really built" "all things" including the Church. There is no question that God owns and created all things. But "God" owning and creating "all things" does not exclude Jesus Christ, a God being in the God family who plans with the Father and executes the plan, who you want to exclude and be discredited.

There are points raised which need to be reformed or be dismissed as a non-issue. Your pointing to God as the builder of the Church and not Christ falls in this category.

howellstamaria wrote:
My next question is:

where in the bible can you find that whatever God the Father built and owns, Jesus Christ built and owns too?

It's obvious. God is a family. Don't remove Jesus Christ from "God".

howellstamaria wrote:
coz accdg. to

John 12:49 "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."

In this verse, who owns the commandment? The Father owns the commandment ryt? Jesus was sent here to propagate His commandments for it is the key for salvation. If it is also owned by Jesus himself, he would have not said that, ryt? :D

When the immortal Word became the mortal Jesus, the latter "could do nothing" and was totally dependent on the God being left in heaven, the Father. Jesus as a man on earth was directing man to the Father. But this doesn't mean that Jesus lost his being part of the God family who co-planned everything with the Father.

So Jesus' words in your quoted verse does not really remove Jesus' co-ownership and co-authorship of the commandments.

howellstamaria wrote:
In the time of israelites, Jesus was not introduced then. MOses was the one whom God had chosen to give His commandments for them. Who owns those commandments? Moses doesn't even know yet Jesus during that time for you to tell that it was also owned by Christ, and the fact that it was Chrst himself taught to the first christians that those were his Father's
commandments.

And who do you think was the God who dealt with Moses? If you think it's the Father, think again.

I say it's the God being who later became Jesus Christ. Saying "Jesus was not introduced then" is not correct

howellstamaria wrote:
how are you gonna explain then what you were saying that whatever the Father owns and built, Jesus owns and built too? which verse?

Now, to answer you bout Hebrew 3:6 (and for you am avoiding it, let's see :D ), coz you are now admitting indirectly and cautiously that in Hebrew 3:4, yes, the Father built everythng including the church.

Hebrew 3:6
"but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end." (KJV)

OVER HIS HOUSE... his there doesn't pertain to Christ, it pertains to the God the Father which accdg to Hebrew 3:4, the One who built everything. The bible does not contradict itself. It is contradicting when someone like you alters the real meaning of it.

To prove that HIS is pertaining to the Father and not the son.
Let's try other different versions of the bible.

Good news version (favorite translation of the INC's)

HEBREW
1 My Christian friends, who also have been called by God! Think of Jesus, whom God sent to be the High Priest of the faith we profess.2 (A)He was faithful to God, who chose him to do this work, just as Moses was faithful in his work in God's house.3 A man who builds a house receives more honor than the house itself. In the same way Jesus is worthy of much greater honor than Moses.4 Every house, of course, is built by someone—and God is the one who has built all things.5 Moses was faithful in God's house as a servant, and he spoke of the things that God would say in the future.6 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.

English standard version

1Therefore, holy brothers,[a] you who share in(A) a heavenly calling, consider Jesus,(B) the apostle and high priest of our confession, 2who was faithful to him who appointed him,(C) just as Moses also was faithful in all God’s house.3For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses—as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. 4(For every house is built by someone, but(D) the builder of all things is God.) 5(E) Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house(F) as a servant,(G) to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, 6but Christ is faithful over [b]God’s house as(H) a son. And(I) we are his house if indeed we(J) hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.[c

It was clear ryt? It is pertaining to the house of God the Father. The house is the church accdg to the bible and Jesus is the head of the church. Romans 16:16 doesnt prove it was Jesus who built the church since you admit that there are 12 verses that say, CHURCH OF GOD. Yes, there is no problem calling it church of christ since the bible itself use that term
but to conclude it was Jesus who built it, it's diff, way different. It will contradict itself if that is the case. Jesus was sent to save the body, or the house, or the church and incharged to lead it. The fact that the bible says time comes, Jesus will gonna surrender the church to God. It shows that it was really God who owns it, and that's not being disrespectful or demoting Jesus coz that is his real purpose or mission. To save the body which is the church.

My comment above on the co-ownership and being co-builders of the Father and Jesus applies.

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
howellstamaria wrote:
PLEASE ANSWER THIS HONESTLY WITH YOUR HEART for the sake of the other souls. :D


You want to portray your concern "of the other souls". Is God saving all souls in this age?
You did not respond to this question.


howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Now prove that the Father interacted with "the previous prophets".
To interact is to communicate. Moses is a good example. God had sent his commandments thru Moses. :D

Your position is that the God who communicated with Moses is the Father. I ask for proof by the way. :)

Mine is it was the being who became Jesus Christ. I gave you the reference to a thread but obviously you didn't read it.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Also, in your statement, "The mere fact that He sent us His son, for us to adhere on what He wants us to do, or simply His will, that was God's interaction with us coz He wants us to be saved", is saving the only purpose that God sent Jesus for man according to your enlightenment?

Yes! Defintely! He was sent to propagate His words w/c is the truth, bring them inside the church, primarily for salvation.

Primarily. Is there a secondary or more purpose?

My understanding is that after saving a man from the eternal death penalty of sin, Jesus' was to proceed with his creation of man in God's image according to God's likeness.

howellstamaria wrote:
And the fact that Christ was already with the Father since the beginning of everything, this shows that Jesus Christ is not human, coz INC's like you believe that Christ is human ryt? (this is another issue anyway which we can also discuss some other time :D )

Didn't the Word shed off his God nature to become mortal?

howellstamaria wrote:
So it is clear that you really believe that Christ is a man, or becomes a man? (the bible totally disputes your belief then:D )

It is clear that the Spirit Word became mortal flesh. Instead of "the bible totally disputes" my belief, it "totally" supports it.

howellstamaria wrote:
and are you saying that Christ's form of being a god has been taken away and become mortal? when and where was that in the bible?

He was an immortal being but had to shed off immortality for the purpose of death. Otherwise, Christ would not have died. See Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You've mentioned, unnecessarily in our exchanges, INC 2 times already. Do you have a quarrel with the INC?


- becoz false belief may lead you to hell..God does want everybody to be saved... unlike in INC, your doctrine is that INC's are the only ones that will be saved.[b] So how bout the children that dont understand yet the bible? They will get punished accdg. to your doctrine and how cruel is that!

It is not "false belief may lead you to hell". It is one's choice as to whether one makes God to reign over him or not. If the choice is not, that man goes to the lake of fire for his life's end (not being alive for eternity in pain).

Many will be saved and become finished creations of God in his image according to God's likeness.

The children and the people who have since died without knowing God in this age will have their chance for salvation in the age which follows the next age.

howellstamaria wrote:
Becoz I totally not agree with the so many doctrines of INC which will lead people to hell.

God is in control. When Christ opens a man's understanding, no other man's or group's doctrine could sway the man.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2011 6:57 pm 
Offline
Middleweight
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:46 pm
Posts: 753
Location: Desert Queen
Jesus Christ already saves us, kaya hindi na natin kailangang gumawa ng mabuti upang tayo ay maligtas sa kapahamakan kundi'y gumawa tayo ng mabuti para tumbasan, suklian o magpasalamat sa kanyang ginawang pagligtas sa atin. 8)

_________________
Dito mo makikita ang hinahanap mo: http://www.fakland.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:38 pm 
Offline
Cruiserweight
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 10:40 am
Posts: 3889
Location: under your bed
Super Pacman wrote:
Jesus Christ already saves us, kaya hindi na natin kailangang gumawa ng mabuti upang tayo ay maligtas sa kapahamakan kundi'y gumawa tayo ng mabuti para tumbasan, suklian o magpasalamat sa kanyang ginawang pagligtas sa atin. 8)

Chavit Singson is also doing that.

No. just kidding bro. That's a good thing you said.

_________________
"In times of war, the father bury their sons.
In times of peace, sons bury their father."
-Herodotus


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 5:39 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
just wait for my answer k!? too busy here! :D 8) got work all day. practice and actual competition for volleyball and basketball after. BUt yes, I would answer all your questions. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:10 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
Prayerful study might be of help. :)

Actually, my questions to you, and these are becoming few, are to challenge your understanding just as I would welcome challenging questions to mine. Your responses might lead to better understanding which is really the object of Ephessians 4:11-13.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:51 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
howellstamaria wrote:
Are you really sure that this is the doctrine of the Iglesia ni Manalo (coz it seems that you are offended when I use INC), that every thing that the Father built and owns, Jesus owns and built too? Coz the main reason we suppose why the church founded by Mr. Manalo was named CHURCH OF CHRIST is bcoz of the belief that it was Christ who built it, and that's why you
guys always use and apparently your favorite, Matthew 16:18 "... upon this rock I wll build my church..." ryt? You even guys use Romans 16:16 (..all the churches of christ...) to emphasize that it was really Christ who built the church.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You must be with the group which openly quarrels with the INC. You can't detach from your words Manalo and the INC.

I had a previous long discussion with revin, an INC member, and our discussion in an earlier thread was cordial. In the end, we agreed to leave our differences in understanding, particularly on whether Christ is only a man, to each other's choice.


--Yeah! and I am proud of that group coz no other group in the whole world that accurately teaches what the whole bible is saying than our group. :D

And it is not only the INC that we fight, but rather all the religion that are injecting false beliefs to people. We are not against someone or somebody personally esp the members of diff group but we are against the wrong beliefs, lies, deceit that could lead people to eternal damnation.

Those religion that does not fight against these are not of God (just for the sake of saying that they are peaceful coz they dont criticise others). Why? becoz real christians, real people of God does have fight. :D

Ephesians 6:12
"For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age."

-- We can prove the Christ is not a man. There are lots of verses that prove this. Even without using the bible, logically speaking, he is the son of God, so he must be God. Carabao bears a baby carabao, dog bears a dog, God bears a god and not a man. :D


howellstamaria wrote:
Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can't disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief.

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. :D I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can't directly answer it. Coz this topic won't end if we'll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
What I'm saying, not "telling" because I won't care if you will not agree in the end, is that there is no point in making an issue as to the ownership and to who "really built" "all things" including the Church. There is no question that God owns and created all things. But "God" owning and creating "all things" does not exclude Jesus Christ, a God being in the God family who plans with the Father and executes the plan, who you want to exclude and be discredited.

There are points raised which need to be reformed or be dismissed as a non-issue. Your pointing to God as the builder of the Church and not Christ falls in this category.


--There is no issue AGAIN as to who really built the church, yet your thread's title is WHY CHRIST DID BUILD THE CHURCH.. You even use Romans 16:16 just to justify your belief that it was Christ. I gave you Hebrew 3:4 and yes, you have learned coz you obviously cant refute it that God built everything including the church. Then you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6, believing that it was christ who owns the church. I gave you the other diff translations of that same verse you used to prove that it is your understanding that has problem and I convincingly showed you that it was God who owns and built the church. So, you cant REFUTE IT AND JUST ACCEPT THAT IT WAS REALLY GOD WHO REALLY BUILT AND OWNS THE CHURCH. But, still just not to let your belief be shamed, you keep on saying that there is no issue on who realy built the church coz what God owns and built, Christ built and owns also. I refute it coz Jesus himself said, the commandment, teachings that he was saying is from God which obviously means, God owns it coz Jesus should have not said that if he also owns that. Just like the commandments sent by God to Moises.

John 12:49
"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."

Your belief again that whatever God built and owns, Chrst built and owns too IS WRONG BIBLICALLY. :D

-- I am not excluding Christ. As Ive said, he has become the tool for the creation. Jesus founded the church, but God the Father was the one who established it. It's different. :D

-- And to prove again that you are wrong for saying that Christ built the church. What if I say in the bible, church was already in existence even before Christ. How is that? :D

--- another one, you said the word "God" is composed of the Father and Christ. That's where you got ur belief that if the Father built it, Christ also built it. AM I RYT?

question is.. where is that in the bible that a single entity/word God is composed of two beings which is the Father and Christ?

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.



howellstamaria wrote:
My next question is:

where in the bible can you find that whatever God the Father built and owns, Jesus Christ built and owns too?


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It's obvious. God is a family. Don't remove Jesus Christ from "God".


-- Then show your proof in the bible that that certain word "God" is a family that composed of the Father and Christ. I would be patient to wait for it. :D


howellstamaria wrote:
coz accdg. to

John 12:49 "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."

In this verse, who owns the commandment? The Father owns the commandment ryt? Jesus was sent here to propagate His commandments for it is the key for salvation. If it is also owned by Jesus himself, he would have not said that, ryt? :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
When the immortal Word became the mortal Jesus, the latter "could do nothing" and was totally dependent on the God being left in heaven, the Father. Jesus as a man on earth was directing man to the Father. But this doesn't mean that Jesus lost his being part of the God family who co-planned everything with the Father.

So Jesus' words in your quoted verse does not really remove Jesus' co-ownership and co-authorship of the commandments.


--Where in the bible proves that an immortal could become mortal? :D :D 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. :) :) Do I make sense? :D It is the same mortal body that was crucified and died. It's ridiculous to think that Christ, the begotten son of God, existing even before everythng could just be killed by mortal humans. C'mon? :lol:

Philippians 2:6-7
"Who, being in the form of God, though 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."

Christ that exists before everything WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN coz he is really not a man but a god. :D INC believes that Christ was born being a man, lives being a man, died being a man, and went through to his Father as a man which is wrong biblically. Chrst is not a man, but rather a god that used a human body. So, for you to tell that an immortal Christ became a mortal man is DEFINITELY WRONG BIBLICALLY.!

- Where in the bible that Jesus is the co-owner of the commandments? If he is the one who says it is his Father's. :D

"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."

It's unreasonable for Christ to say this if he also owns the commandment. He wouldn't have said his Father gave him the commandment if he also owns it. Logic. :D



howellstamaria wrote:
In the time of israelites, Jesus was not introduced then. MOses was the one whom God had chosen to give His commandments for them. Who owns those commandments? Moses doesn't even know yet Jesus during that time for you to tell that it was also owned by Christ, and the fact that it was Chrst himself taught to the first christians that those were his Father's
commandments.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
And who do you think was the God who dealt with Moses? If you think it's the Father, think again.

I say it's the God being who later became Jesus Christ. Saying "Jesus was not introduced then" is not correct


-- Too basic. :D The bible said, noone ever spoke to God the Father. Noone ever heareth His audible voice, but when I say God interacts or communicates to Moises, God used His angel. God is too powerful for a human to talk with directly. Proof? Man had stumbled when an angel spoke. That was the power of the voice of an angel how much more of God. And God has diff means to interact with people He had chosen. It could also be thru dreams. :D
Apostles' and Jesus' propagation of His words is God's interaction to men. :D

So if your belief is God cant interact with men, THINK AGAIN! :D

-- Then show any proof in the bible that Jesus was already introduced during the time of Moises. :D


howellstamaria wrote:
how are you gonna explain then what you were saying that whatever the Father owns and built, Jesus owns and built too? which verse?

Now, to answer you bout Hebrew 3:6 (and for you am avoiding it, let's see :D ), coz you are now admitting indirectly and cautiously that in Hebrew 3:4, yes, the Father built everythng including the church.

Hebrew 3:6
"but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end." (KJV)

OVER HIS HOUSE... his there doesn't pertain to Christ, it pertains to the God the Father which accdg to Hebrew 3:4, the One who built everything. The bible does not contradict itself. It is contradicting when someone like you alters the real meaning of it.

To prove that HIS is pertaining to the Father and not the son.
Let's try other different versions of the bible.

Good news version (favorite translation of the INC's)

HEBREW
1 My Christian friends, who also have been called by God! Think of Jesus, whom God sent to be the High Priest of the faith we profess.2 (A)He was faithful to God, who chose him to do this work, just as Moses was faithful in his work in God's house.3 A man who builds a house receives more honor than the house itself. In the same way Jesus is worthy of much greater honor than Moses.4 Every house, of course, is built by someone—and God is the one who has built all things.5 Moses was faithful in God's house as a servant, and he spoke of the things that God would say in the future.6 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.

English standard version

1Therefore, holy brothers,[a] you who share in(A) a heavenly calling, consider Jesus,(B) the apostle and high priest of our confession, 2who was faithful to him who appointed him,(C) just as Moses also was faithful in all God’s house.3For Jesus has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses—as much more glory as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. 4(For every house is built by someone, but(D) the builder of all things is God.) 5(E) Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house(F) as a servant,(G) to testify to the things that were to be spoken later, 6but Christ is faithful over [b]God’s house as(H) a son. And(I) we are his house if indeed we(J) hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.[c

It was clear ryt? It is pertaining to the house of God the Father. The house is the church accdg to the bible and Jesus is the head of the church. Romans 16:16 doesnt prove it was Jesus who built the church since you admit that there are 12 verses that say, CHURCH OF GOD. Yes, there is no problem calling it church of christ since the bible itself use that term
but to conclude it was Jesus who built it, it's diff, way different. It will contradict itself if that is the case. Jesus was sent to save the body, or the house, or the church and incharged to lead it. The fact that the bible says time comes, Jesus will gonna surrender the church to God. It shows that it was really God who owns it, and that's not being disrespectful or demoting Jesus coz that is his real purpose or mission. To save the body which is the church.

My comment above on the co-ownership and being co-builders of the Father and Jesus applies.

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
howellstamaria wrote:
PLEASE ANSWER THIS HONESTLY WITH YOUR HEART for the sake of the other souls. :D


You want to portray your concern "of the other souls". Is God saving all souls in this age?


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You did not respond to this question.


-- Then I will now. :D
-- God does want to save all men, as in all.

I Timothy 2:4
"Who wants everyone to be saved and to come to know the truth."

But what soul are you referring to? if you pertain to men, He wants to save all men but He is not saving all men in this age esp those men who inject belief that are blatantly opposite that of His teachings. If you pertain to the spirit of those who died, they will be judged along wth the other living men come judgement day.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Now prove that the Father interacted with "the previous prophets".
To interact is to communicate. Moses is a good example. God had sent his commandments thru Moses. :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:

Your position is that the God who communicated with Moses is the Father. I ask for proof by the way. :)

Mine is it was the being who became Jesus Christ. I gave you the reference to a thread but obviously you didn't read it.


-- I just answered this. I said, God communicates with Moises coz how could Moises be able to tell people what God wants them to do. But if you were saying that I said, God spoke directly to Moises, it's different, and I have never said that. It is basic, no man heareth yet His voice.

-BEING BECAME A JESUS CHRIST? and who was that being that became JESUS CHRIST? That is somethig new! :D ok! where is that in the bible? :D

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Also, in your statement, "The mere fact that He sent us His son, for us to adhere on what He wants us to do, or simply His will, that was God's interaction with us coz He wants us to be saved", is saving the only purpose that God sent Jesus for man according to your enlightenment?

Yes! Defintely! He was sent to propagate His words w/c is the truth, bring them inside the church, primarily for salvation.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Primarily. Is there a secondary or more purpose?

My understanding is that after saving a man from the eternal death penalty of sin, Jesus' was to proceed with his creation of man in God's image according to God's likeness.


-- yup that's his sole purpose, for our salvation. He descended to propagate his Father's words for us to know the truth for SALVATION. He died for the body to redeem it from sins TO SAVE it. It is what the bible is saying. Good will be SAVED, evil will be damned. God wants us to be SAVED, and so He sent us His son. :D

-- Jesus' was to proceed with his creation of man in God's image according to God's likeness????? where is this in the bible? :D

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
And the fact that Christ was already with the Father since the beginning of everything, this shows that Jesus Christ is not human, coz INC's like you believe that Christ is human ryt? (this is another issue anyway which we can also discuss some other time :D )

Didn't the Word shed off his God nature to become mortal?

So it is clear that you really believe that Christ is a man, or becomes a man? (the bible totally disputes your belief then:D )


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It is clear that the Spirit Word became mortal flesh. Instead of "the bible totally disputes" my belief, it "totally" supports it.


-- it is vague that the word became mortal flesh. :D The word is god, and that word is pertaining to Christ who was wth the Father in the beginning.

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

aren't you the one who is demoting Chrst from being a god to mortal man? :D

although some translation use the word "became man", some use "was made flesh" but the tagalog translation is the most correct by saying "nagkatawang-tao"

The word which is Christ did not become man (ever after) from being a god which is apparently your belief. He used a body of a man. That man was the mortal, flesh that had been killed and crucified. BUt the Christ that's within that body is still the begotten son of God which is a god that's immortal. The tagalog word is rightful, NAGKATAWANG TAO. Si Cristo na dios ay nagkatawang tao. What is the man/tao? the body or the katawan. Why did Christ need to use a katwan/body? becoz he is a spirit and a god. Can a spirit or god then be killed by crucifixion? Think again! :D 8)

It's like a man who wore a robot suit. The man didnt become totally a robot. The robot is the suit, but what's inside that suit is still a man. :D

The proof that Chrst even when he used a human body or flesh, is still a god and not man.

JOhn 20:28
"And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God." (pertaining to Jesus)

Titus 2:13
"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR Jesus Christ."

so for the apostles and us, Jesus Chrst though manifested in flesh is still a god, but for you and the INC's, he is just man. :D



howellstamaria wrote:
and are you saying that Christ's form of being a god has been taken away and become mortal? when and where was that in the bible?


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
He was an immortal being but had to shed of immortality for the purpose of death. Otherwise, Christ would not have died. See Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2.


I have already answered this. Why dont you post the exact verses as your basis. :D Let's see and analyze.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You've mentioned, unnecessarily in our exchanges, INC 2 times already. Do you have a quarrel with the INC?


- becoz false belief may lead you to hell..God does want everybody to be saved... unlike in INC, your doctrine is that INC's are the only ones that will be saved.[b] So how bout the children that dont understand yet the bible? They will get punished accdg. to your doctrine and how cruel is that!


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It is not "false belief may lead you to hell". It is one's choice as to whether one makes God to reign over him or not. If the choice is not, that man goes to the lake of fire for his life's end (not being alive for eternity in pain).

Many will be saved and become finished creations of God in his image according to God's likeness.

The children and the people who have since died without knowing God in this age will have their chance for salvation in the age which follows the next age.


-- false belief may lead you to hell is biblical. That's the reason why Jesus and the apostles had preached the truth of God, to battle which is false and lies. Becoz those lies are of satan.
And false blind preachers preaching lies are rampant. What will gonna happen to their blinded members with same false beliefs?

Matthew 15:14
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into ditch." :D

And what if a person thinks what he is doing is right? for example the worship of a graven image. for him he is serving God.
but what does the bible say to those who worship graven image?

for some religious group, killing their enemy is just right for their sugo?
but what does the bible say if you kill?

there are things which are right for us, but totally it is not but the opposite.

Proverbs 14:12
"There is a way which seemeth right for a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death."

Lies, false beliefs are of satan and no one can be saved having them but will lead you to hell. agreed? :D

That's the reason why God is fair enough that He wants His words to be known by the whole world before the judgement day, coz His words are the truth that would lead people to His kingdom.


howellstamaria wrote:
Becoz I totally not agree with the so many doctrines of INC which will lead people to hell.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
God is in control. When Christ opens a man's understanding, no other man's or group's doctrine could sway the man.


Just hope that God would open your understanding. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:59 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Prayerful study might be of help. :)

Actually, my questions to you, and these are becoming few, are to challenge your understanding just as I would welcome challenging questions to mine. Your responses might lead to better understanding which is really the object of Ephessians 4:11-13.


Just answer my questions and I will answer yours even it is not few. :D
Remember that you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6 believing that it was Jesus who owns the house on the verse. :D I used the INC's favorite translation and it proved you wrong. :D

Just try to search my other religious posts using my username and I dont need to study anymore coz I have already or rather we have already studied this several years ago and the topic is not even new to us. :D Let's just answer all the questions using the bible regardless of when do we like to answer. We don't know each other personally so just respect when is the best time we could give response. ayt!? :D

Just want to tell you that am just a typical member of the group you are thnking. That's for sure! :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:20 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Prayerful study might be of help. :)

Actually, my questions to you, and these are becoming few, are to challenge your understanding just as I would welcome challenging questions to mine. Your responses might lead to better understanding which is really the object of Ephessians 4:11-13.


Just answer my questions and I will answer yours even it is not few. :D
Remember that you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6 believing that it was Jesus who owns the house on the verse. :D I used the INC's favorite translation and it proved you wrong. :D

Not wrongly used. My position remains that whatever God owns and built Christ owns and built because Christ is part of the God family. You said Christ is just like Binay in the Binay-Noynoy team or just a tool is what is wrong. Christ is God as the Father is (John 1:1).

In the OT where the Word was not yet the man Jesus Christ, there is no distinction in "God". This is the reason why you mistakenly said it was the Father who dealt with Moses. It is only in the NT where "God" is referred to the Father because Jesus was pointing men to the Father. But the Word's becoming flesh didn't make Jesus no longer part of "God" where credit to being the builder of the Church would be viewed as wrong.

howellstamaria wrote:
Just try to search my other religious posts using my username and I dont need to study anymore coz I have already or rather we have already studied this several years ago and the topic is not even new to us. :D Let's just answer all the questions using the bible regardless of when do we like to answer. We don't know each other personally so just respect when is the best time we could give response. ayt!? :D

I don't find any reason to read your "other religious posts" because I'm not being enlightened by your posts as you bragged at first. If you think you have no more need to study, then you think you already attained that level of knowledge where Christ is which is preposterous. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
Just want to tell you that am just a typical member of the group you are thnking. That's for sure! :D

Then I think you have yet a lot to learn and needs to study more as I do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:14 am 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You must be with the group which openly quarrels with the INC. You can't detach from your words Manalo and the INC.

I had a previous long discussion with revin, an INC member, and our discussion in an earlier thread was cordial. In the end, we agreed to leave our differences in understanding, particularly on whether Christ is only a man, to each other's choice.


--Yeah! and I am proud of that group coz no other group in the whole world that accurately teaches what the whole bible is saying than our group. :D

Of course it's obvious it is only your group which teaches your own beliefs. But don't you members examine what your teachers teach? I used to watch ADD programs because of some similarities with my beliefs. I stopped when the broadcaster mentioned about man going to heaven and that this age is the only age of salvation.

howellstamaria wrote:
And it is not only the INC that we fight, but rather all the religion that are injecting false beliefs to people. We are not against someone or somebody personally esp the members of diff group but we are against the wrong beliefs, lies, deceit that could lead people to eternal damnation.

Those religion that does not fight against these are not of God (just for the sake of saying that they are peaceful coz they dont criticise others). Why? becoz real christians, real people of God does have fight. :D

Ephesians 6:12
"For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age."

-- We can prove the Christ is not a man. There are lots of verses that prove this. Even without using the bible, logically speaking, he is the son of God, so he must be God. Carabao bears a baby carabao, dog bears a dog, God bears a god and not a man. :D

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.

As to your dare that you "can prove the Christ is not a man", try to comment in the thread, "To bible believers, did Christ really die?" in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112287

howellstamaria wrote:
Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can't disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief.

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. :D I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can't directly answer it. Coz this topic won't end if we'll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.

If my stand still doesn't get across to you that the question as to who owns and who built the Church between the Father and Jesus is a non-issue, then it wouldn't. It's not a problem to me.

Between the two beings who co-planned the building of the Church from the foundation of the world, I place Jesus as the actual builder of the Church.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
What I'm saying, not "telling" because I won't care if you will not agree in the end, is that there is no point in making an issue as to the ownership and to who "really built" "all things" including the Church. There is no question that God owns and created all things. But "God" owning and creating "all things" does not exclude Jesus Christ, a God being in the God family who plans with the Father and executes the plan, who you want to exclude and be discredited.

There are points raised which need to be reformed or be dismissed as a non-issue. Your pointing to God as the builder of the Church and not Christ falls in this category.


--There is no issue AGAIN as to who really built the church, yet your thread's title is WHY CHRIST DID BUILD THE CHURCH.. You even use Romans 16:16 just to justify your belief that it was Christ. I gave you Hebrew 3:4 and yes, you have learned coz you obviously cant refute it that God built everything including the church. Then you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6, believing that it was christ who owns the church. I gave you the other diff translations of that same verse you used to prove that it is your understanding that has problem and I convincingly showed you that it was God who owns and built the church. So, you cant REFUTE IT AND JUST ACCEPT THAT IT WAS REALLY GOD WHO REALLY BUILT AND OWNS THE CHURCH. But, still just not to let your belief be shamed, you keep on saying that there is no issue on who realy built the church coz what God owns and built, Christ built and owns also. I refute it coz Jesus himself said, the commandment, teachings that he was saying is from God which obviously means, God owns it coz Jesus should have not said that if he also owns that. Just like the commandments sent by God to Moises.

John 12:49
"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."

Your belief again that whatever God built and owns, Chrst built and owns too IS WRONG BIBLICALLY. :D

I've explained the difference in contexts which you apparently couldn't accept. If it is your stand that whatever Christ says in every situation is not really his and is of the Father, then you are the one in error.

howellstamaria wrote:
-- I am not excluding Christ. As Ive said, he has become the tool for the creation. Jesus founded the church, but God the Father was the one who established it. It's different. :D

Jesus as a "tool" is to me repulsive.

Now show that "It's different" the founding and establishment of the Church.

howellstamaria wrote:
-- And to prove again that you are wrong for saying that Christ built the church. What if I say in the bible, church was already in existence even before Christ. How is that? :D

Strange to me. Show it and I'll comment. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
--- another one, you said the word "God" is composed of the Father and Christ. That's where you got ur belief that if the Father built it, Christ also built it. AM I RYT?

Right.

howellstamaria wrote:
question is.. where is that in the bible that a single entity/word God is composed of two beings which is the Father and Christ?

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.
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.

When Christ uttered the words in John 14:28, he, the Word, already became flesh, a mortal being having shed off his God nature of being immortal.

Btw, are the words Jesus spoke in your quoted verse also the Father's?

howellstamaria wrote:
-- Then show your proof in the bible that that certain word "God" is a family that composed of the Father and Christ. I would be patient to wait for it. :D

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...

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
When the immortal Word became the mortal Jesus, the latter "could do nothing" and was totally dependent on the God being left in heaven, the Father. Jesus as a man on earth was directing man to the Father. But this doesn't mean that Jesus lost his being part of the God family who co-planned everything with the Father.

So Jesus' words in your quoted verse does not really remove Jesus' co-ownership and co-authorship of the commandments.


--Where in the bible proves that an immortal could become mortal? :D :D

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.

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. :) :)

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.

howellstamaria wrote:
Do I make sense? :D

Not to me in this case. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
It is the same mortal body that was crucified and died. It's ridiculous to think that Christ, the begotten son of God, existing even before everythng could just be killed by mortal humans. C'mon? :lol:

What is ridiculous is your proposition that, in reality, Christ did not really die.

howellstamaria wrote:
Philippians 2:6-7
"Who, being in the form of God, though 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."

Christ that exists before everything WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN coz he is really not a man but a god. :D INC believes that Christ was born being a man, lives being a man, died being a man, and went through to his Father as a man which is wrong biblically. Chrst is not a man, but rather a god that used a human body. So, for you to tell that an immortal Christ became a mortal man is DEFINITELY WRONG BIBLICALLY.!

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

You need to reexamine your belief that "Chrst is not a man, but rather a god that used a human body" if you want to grow in understanding.

The key word is "became" which connotes a change. This same word, "became", was used when flesh and blood Christ was restored to his former nature of being a spirit at his resurrection.

1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam (Jesus) became a life-giving spirit.

This change from flesh and blood to spirit is the real object of God's creating man in his image according to his likeness.

1 Corinthians 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

howellstamaria wrote:
- Where in the bible that Jesus is the co-owner of the commandments? If he is the one who says it is his Father's. :D

"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."

It's unreasonable for Christ to say this if he also owns the commandment. He wouldn't have said his Father gave him the commandment if he also owns it. Logic. :D

It is even you who said God gave the commandments to Moses. And you think that that "God" was the Father. I say, the "God" who gave the commandments to Moses is the being who became Jesus Christ.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
And who do you think was the God who dealt with Moses? If you think it's the Father, think again.

I say it's the God being who later became Jesus Christ. Saying "Jesus was not introduced then" is not correct


-- Too basic. :D The bible said, noone ever spoke to God the Father. Noone ever heareth His audible voice, but when I say God interacts or communicates to Moises, God used His angel. God is too powerful for a human to talk with directly. Proof? Man had stumbled when an angel spoke. That was the power of the voice of an angel how much more of God. And God has diff means to interact with people He had chosen. It could also be thru dreams. :D
Apostles' and Jesus' propagation of His words is God's interaction to men. :D

So if your belief is God cant interact with men, THINK AGAIN! :D

-- Then show any proof in the bible that Jesus was already introduced during the time of Moises. :D

It was you who said that the Father interacted with men in the OT. You just changed your statement that God interacted through angels.

Jesus as a human is the same being who was the God known in the OT times. He is the being Adam and Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Israel, Moses, etc. knew as God.

John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You want to portray your concern "of the other souls". Is God saving all souls in this age?

You did not respond to this question.


-- Then I will now. :D
-- God does want to save all men, as in all.

I Timothy 2:4
"Who wants everyone to be saved and to come to know the truth."

But what soul are you referring to? if you pertain to men, He wants to save all men but He is not saving all men in this age esp those men who inject belief that are blatantly opposite that of His teachings.

Soul is man. This is my position as to salvation. God will save all men from the penalty of death including "those men who inject belief that are blatantly opposite that of His teachings". Not all in this age but in the age after the next age.

After saving a soul from the power of death, God will give the soul/man the Holy Spirit to be able to understand God. After man already knows who God is and what his purpose is, the soul will choose whether to make God his ruler or not. If he chooses God to reign over him, the man will be changed to spirit and live forever. Otherwise, God will slay him and the soul dies, unconscious, forever.

howellstamaria wrote:
If you pertain to the spirit of those who died, they will be judged along wth the other living men come judgement day.

I have an idea of your understanding of "judgment day". For the sake of discussion and the others who are following this thread, please state what transpires during the white throne "judgment" according your enlightenment.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Your position is that the God who communicated with Moses is the Father. I ask for proof by the way. :)

Mine is it was the being who became Jesus Christ. I gave you the reference to a thread but obviously you didn't read it.


-- I just answered this. I said, God communicates with Moises coz how could Moises be able to tell people what God wants them to do. But if you were saying that I said, God spoke directly to Moises, it's different, and I have never said that. It is basic, no man heareth yet His voice.

You said God interacted with the former prophets. And you believe it was the Father and not Jesus Christ who did.

howellstamaria wrote:
-BEING BECAME A JESUS CHRIST? and who was that being that became JESUS CHRIST? That is somethig new! :D ok! where is that in the bible? :D

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

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Primarily. Is there a secondary or more purpose?

My understanding is that after saving a man from the eternal death penalty of sin, Jesus' was to proceed with his creation of man in God's image according to God's likeness.


-- yup that's his sole purpose, for our salvation. He descended to propagate his Father's words for us to know the truth for SALVATION. He died for the body to redeem it from sins TO SAVE it. It is what the bible is saying. Good will be SAVED, evil will be damned. God wants us to be SAVED, and so He sent us His son. :D

To say that Jesus' purpose is merely "for our salvation" is incomplete. There is much more to do for Jesus and the Father after man is saved from the penalty of death.

howellstamaria wrote:
-- Jesus' was to proceed with his creation of man in God's image according to God's likeness????? where is this in the bible? :D

I don't think you would want to learn more because you said you already have all the knowledge there is to learn. :)

But for those who might want to, the thread is "God is Creating Man – the Overlooked Main Bible Theme",
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=174014

I've translated these into:

Binisaya: Gihimo pa sa Diyos ang Tawo – Ang Wala Himatikding Tema sa Biblia
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=180520

Tagalog: Ginagawa pa ng Diyos ang Tao – Ang Nakaligtaang pinaka tema ng Biblia
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=180523

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It is clear that the Spirit Word became mortal flesh. Instead of "the bible totally disputes" my belief, it "totally" supports it.


-- it is vague that the word became mortal flesh. :D The word is god, and that word is pertaining to Christ who was wth the Father in the beginning.

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

aren't you the one who is demoting Chrst from being a god to mortal man? :D

although some translation use the word "became man", some use "was made flesh" but the tagalog translation is the most correct by saying "nagkatawang-tao"

The word which is Christ did not become man (ever after) from being a god which is apparently your belief. He used a body of a man. That man was the mortal, flesh that had been killed and crucified. BUt the Christ that's within that body is still the begotten son of God which is a god that's immortal. The tagalog word is rightful, NAGKATAWANG TAO. Si Cristo na dios ay nagkatawang tao. What is the man/tao? the body or the katawan. Why did Christ need to use a katwan/body? becoz he is a spirit and a god. Can a spirit or god then be killed by crucifixion? Think again! :D 8)

It's like a man who wore a robot suit. The man didnt become totally a robot. The robot is the suit, but what's inside that suit is still a man. :D

The proof that Chrst even when he used a human body or flesh, is still a god and not man.

JOhn 20:28
"And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God." (pertaining to Jesus)

Titus 2:13
"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR Jesus Christ."

so for the apostles and us, Jesus Chrst though manifested in flesh is still a god, but for you and the INC's, he is just man. :D

In short, to you Christ did not die. Man is still in his sins.

Your position has been forwarded by a poster in an old thread to which a poster with the username "marcus" responded that if it were so, then God "cheated". I couldn't agree more to marcus' observation.

The thread, "To bible believers, Did Christ really die", would be of help to those who want to be challenged in their beliefs. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
He was an immortal being but had to shed of immortality for the purpose of death. Otherwise, Christ would not have died. See Philippians 2 and Hebrews 2.


I have already answered this. Why dont you post the exact verses as your basis. :D Let's see and analyze.

Your answer doesn't fit. To not digress the issue in this thread and to repeat what had already been discussed, just go to the thread, "To bible believers, did Christ really die?" in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112287

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
It is not "false belief may lead you to hell". It is one's choice as to whether one makes God to reign over him or not. If the choice is not, that man goes to the lake of fire for his life's end (not being alive for eternity in pain).

Many will be saved and become finished creations of God in his image according to God's likeness.

The children and the people who have since died without knowing God in this age will have their chance for salvation in the age which follows the next age.


-- false belief may lead you to hell is biblical. That's the reason why Jesus and the apostles had preached the truth of God, to battle which is false and lies. Becoz those lies are of satan.
And false blind preachers preaching lies are rampant. What will gonna happen to their blinded members with same false beliefs?

Matthew 15:14
"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into ditch." :D

And what if a person thinks what he is doing is right? for example the worship of a graven image. for him he is serving God.
but what does the bible say to those who worship graven image?

for some religious group, killing their enemy is just right for their sugo?
but what does the bible say if you kill?

there are things which are right for us, but totally it is not but the opposite.

Proverbs 14:12
"There is a way which seemeth right for a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death."

Lies, false beliefs are of satan and no one can be saved having them but will lead you to hell. agreed? :D

That's the reason why God is fair enough that He wants His words to be known by the whole world before the judgement day, coz His words are the truth that would lead people to His kingdom.

God is not saving all men in this age. Those who he has in mind to be part of the team under Christ in the government of God after this age will be drawn to Christ including those who are now having the "false beliefs".

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.

And the white throne "judgment" is not only the rendition of the verdict where men would be but a period of opening their minds to understanding God. Then by their works where they already were given the Holy Spirit, their choice, they will be judged.

howellstamaria wrote:
Just hope that God would open your understanding. :D

More understanding to be exact. I'm striving for more understanding. And you should also.

But it is every man's choice to believe whether or not he already has all the knowledge there is to learn.

2 Peter 3:18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

The standard of knowledge one needs to attain is that of Christ which I admit I'm still far away.

Ephesians 4:11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ...

Didn't you just say you're group's already there? :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:20 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
You must be with the group which openly quarrels with the INC. You can't detach from your words Manalo and the INC.

I had a previous long discussion with revin, an INC member, and our discussion in an earlier thread was cordial. In the end, we agreed to leave our differences in understanding, particularly on whether Christ is only a man, to each other's choice.


--Yeah! and I am proud of that group coz no other group in the whole world that accurately teaches what the whole bible is saying than our group. :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Of course it's obvious it is only your group which teaches your own beliefs. But don't you members examine what your teachers teach? I used to watch ADD programs because of some similarities with my beliefs. I stopped when the broadcaster mentioned about man going to heaven and that this age is the only age of salvation.


** what about that man going to heaven? what is that? could you please elaborate it. This is the only age of salvation? explain it further pls. :D coz obviously, how about those peple who lived thousands of years ago. We are not like INC that already condemned those people outside their religion. :D

howellstamaria wrote:
And it is not only the INC that we fight, but rather all the religion that are injecting false beliefs to people. We are not against someone or somebody personally esp the members of diff group but we are against the wrong beliefs, lies, deceit that could lead people to eternal damnation.

Those religion that does not fight against these are not of God (just for the sake of saying that they are peaceful coz they dont criticise others). Why? becoz real christians, real people of God does have fight. :D

Ephesians 6:12
"For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age."

-- We can prove the Christ is not a man. There are lots of verses that prove this. Even without using the bible, logically speaking, he is the son of God, so he must be God. Carabao bears a baby carabao, dog bears a dog, God bears a god and not a man. :D


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.

As to your dare that you "can prove the Christ is not a man", try to comment in the thread, "To bible believers, did Christ really die?" in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112287


** You don't fight but the real Christians just like the apostles do. Our group won't stop fighting by preaching the true words of God. We are actually the only group that believes in the bible that entertains any questions from diff people of diff faith. That is a fact. And by doing so, it is a form of a fight against false beliefs. To tell people that asking money from diff people even in the market, streets etc using the name of God like those of the born again is a fight against that money-making and unbiblical teaching. Telling people that to kill in any aspect or reason is against God is fighting the belief of other group that killing the enemy for their sugo is just fine. Propagating the truth of God is fighting the lies of false preachers. And this is exacty what the verse is telling us. By simply telling your friend not to cheat with his wife is fighting the sin of adultery, the wickedness which is from satan :D

** God is not in control for now but in the future yes He is the supreme being that would end as victorous ofcorz. How can we say He is in control for now amidst all the war, bombings, killings, adultery. Those are the things of Satan and definitely God doesn't want that. God wants to control us that's for sure. He wants everything that is good for us. Just like a father to his son or daughter, but sometimes they themselves are the ones who do things out of their own will and not of God. That's why His words, the truth need to intervene to control us.

** I agree we need to bear all the temptations and adhere always to His words til our last breath for us to prove to Him that we are worthy of entering His kingdom,

Matthew 24:13
"But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."

but there are two forces that exist on earth, it is good and evil and people of God have a fight, as it is written (and not only my opinion :D ) a fight against wickednes and forces of evil.

howellstamaria wrote:
Now you are telling us that whatever God built and owns, Jesus owns and built too.. OR MAYBE YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED AND LEARNED ON HEBREW 3:4 that you can't disregard the clear verse that it was God who did build everythng, which obviously the church was included there. (which you cant answer/accept directly) but still you insert the name of Christ on who really built the church just to rationalize your belief.

I will answer with so much interest the Hebrew 3:6 which for you am avoiding it. :D I am just waiting you to answer first if the church was included in Hebrew 3:4 and you can't directly answer it. Coz this topic won't end if we'll just gonna throw questions without answering first ryt?

so it seems that your now convinced that the church was included there in Heb.3:4 and accepting that the Father created everything, but still inserting Christ on who really built the church.


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
If my stand still doesn't get across to you that the question as to who owns and who built the Church between the Father and Jesus is a non-issue, then it wouldn't. It's not a problem to me.

Between the two beings who co-planned the building of the Church from the foundation of the world, I place Jesus as the actual builder of the Church. .


** YOU place Jesus as the actual builder of the church but for Hebrew 3:4 it was the Father who built the church.

"For every house is builded by some man; but He that BUILT ALL THINGS IS GOD." :D

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
What I'm saying, not "telling" because I won't care if you will not agree in the end, is that there is no point in making an issue as to the ownership and to who "really built" "all things" including the Church. There is no question that God owns and created all things. But "God" owning and creating "all things" does not exclude Jesus Christ, a God being in the God family who plans with the Father and executes the plan, who you want to exclude and be discredited.

There are points raised which need to be reformed or be dismissed as a non-issue. Your pointing to God as the builder of the Church and not Christ falls in this category.


--There is no issue AGAIN as to who really built the church, yet your thread's title is WHY CHRIST DID BUILD THE CHURCH.. You even use Romans 16:16 just to justify your belief that it was Christ. I gave you Hebrew 3:4 and yes, you have learned coz you obviously cant refute it that God built everything including the church. Then you WRONGLY USED HEBREW 3:6, believing that it was christ who owns the church. I gave you the other diff translations of that same verse you used to prove that it is your understanding that has problem and I convincingly showed you that it was God who owns and built the church. So, you cant REFUTE IT AND JUST ACCEPT THAT IT WAS REALLY GOD WHO REALLY BUILT AND OWNS THE CHURCH. But, still just not to let your belief be shamed, you keep on saying that there is no issue on who realy built the church coz what God owns and built, Christ built and owns also. I refute it coz Jesus himself said, the commandment, teachings that he was saying is from God which obviously means, God owns it coz Jesus should have not said that if he also owns that. Just like the commandments sent by God to Moises.

John 12:49
"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."

Your belief again that whatever God built and owns, Chrst built and owns too IS WRONG BIBLICALLY. :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
I've explained the difference in contexts which you apparently couldn't accept. If it is your stand that whatever Christ says in every situation is not really his and is of the Father, then you are the one in error.


** Did I say in every situation that Christ says, it was the Father? :D I knew this is what you're gonna think though, but I know I didnt say that. Becoz the verse I have given you was referring to the commandments Father had given to Christ. So whatever teachings/commandments Christ had preached or told them, those were from the Father. :D basa!

John 12:49
"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."

I don't think the bible is in error. :D

howellstamaria wrote:
-- I am not excluding Christ. As Ive said, he has become the tool for the creation. Jesus founded the church, but God the Father was the one who established it. It's different. :D


Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Now show that "It's different" the founding and establishment of the Church.


** Foundation is the act of starting an institution or organization, etc. In speaking of the church, it was already established by God even before Christ (which I will give you the verse later :D ), but Christ was the one who founded it or started it to introduce to the people during his time. . God built it even before Christ, but when the time Christ needed to descend from heaven to bring back in the people from God's righteouness, he founded/introduced the church. That's why the name of our church is....

members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth.

So just and rightful biblically. So proud. :D

** HOw bout you? what is the name of your church? :D

howellstamaria wrote:
-- And to prove again that you are wrong for saying that Christ built the church. What if I say in the bible, church was already in existence even before Christ. How is that? :D

Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Strange to me. Show it and I'll comment. :)


**I know it is strange to you. :D coz what I have told you, no other group that teaches the bible rightfully than our group. :D

I will show it ofcorz. I will continue this. It's better if you will not gonna reply back first coz it is unfair to you that I havent answered yet all your queries. :D ayt!?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:30 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
I don't need to study this specific topic as who built the church coz I am satisfied already the way our leader had explained to us this particular topic. Everything is so biblical.

You are just over reacting. :D Words of God, His wisdom is undeniably deep and broad. That's why there is a chosen one, a leader that could decipher the wisdom of God biblically. Coz we admit, if it is only us, we can't simply understand it. The reason why we stopped worshipping idols, and the other things God had prohibited, it was becoz we had just been taught and enlightened. And the reason why we always have a congregation, prayer meeting, worship service is to continue studying, sharing God's wisdom. :D Just don't over react. :D k!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:14 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Of course it's obvious it is only your group which teaches your own beliefs. But don't you members examine what your teachers teach? I used to watch ADD programs because of some similarities with my beliefs. I stopped when the broadcaster mentioned about man going to heaven and that this age is the only age of salvation.


** what about that man going to heaven? what is that? could you please elaborate it. This is the only age of salvation? explain it further pls. :D coz obviously, how about those peple who lived thousands of years ago. We are not like INC that already condemned those people outside their religion. :D

I watched the telecast years ago and it could have been an old recorded program because your leader looked younger then. But I might be able to recall by your answering these questions with a yes or no:
1. Your belief is that man will go to heaven; and
2. Your belief is that judgment of all men will be made when Christ returns.

howellstamaria wrote:
And it is not only the INC that we fight, but rather all the religion that are injecting false beliefs to people. We are not against someone or somebody personally esp the members of diff group but we are against the wrong beliefs, lies, deceit that could lead people to eternal damnation.

Those religion that does not fight against these are not of God (just for the sake of saying that they are peaceful coz they dont criticise others). Why? becoz real christians, real people of God does have fight. :D

Ephesians 6:12
"For we are not fighting against human beings but against the wicked spiritual forces in the heavenly world, the rulers, authorities, and cosmic powers of this dark age."

We differ. Your position is offensive. Ephesians 6 is defensive which is my position.

Ephesians 6:10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might. 11 Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. 13 Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, 15 and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16 above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. 17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; 18 praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints—

A Christian is not provocative and answers only when asked in humility the bible describes as "with meekness and fear".

1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear...

howellstamaria wrote:
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.

As to your dare that you "can prove the Christ is not a man", try to comment in the thread, "To bible believers, did Christ really die?" in this link: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=112287


** You don't fight but the real Christians just like the apostles do. Our group won't stop fighting by preaching the true words of God. We are actually the only group that believes in the bible that entertains any questions from diff people of diff faith. That is a fact. And by doing so, it is a form of a fight against false beliefs. To tell people that asking money from diff people even in the market, streets etc using the name of God like those of the born again is a fight against that money-making and unbiblical teaching. Telling people that to kill in any aspect or reason is against God is fighting the belief of other group that killing the enemy for their sugo is just fine. Propagating the truth of God is fighting the lies of false preachers. And this is exacty what the verse is telling us. By simply telling your friend not to cheat with his wife is fighting the sin of adultery, the wickedness which is from satan :D

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.

Committing sin and violations of penal laws are another matters.

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

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:
He is the supreme being that would end as victorous ofcorz. How can we say He is in control for now amidst all the war, bombings, killings, adultery. Those are the things of Satan and definitely God doesn't want that. God wants to control us that's for sure. He wants everything that is good for us. Just like a father to his son or daughter, but sometimes they themselves are the ones who do things out of their own will and not of God. That's why His words, the truth need to intervene to control us.

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.

howellstamaria wrote:
** I agree we need to bear all the temptations and adhere always to His words til our last breath for us to prove to Him that we are worthy of entering His kingdom,

Matthew 24:13
"But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."

but there are two forces that exist on earth, it is good and evil and people of God have a fight, as it is written (and not only my opinion :D ) a fight against wickednes and forces of evil.

My position is that the fight is not to prove that the Christian is "worthy of entering His kingdom". Of his own might a man can never prove his worth. It is the attitude which matters. The overcoming attitude of always choosing the way of God in all circumstances which test the Christians submission to the rule of God over his life. With this kind of attitude, Christ supplies what's wanting.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
If my stand still doesn't get across to you that the question as to who owns and who built the Church between the Father and Jesus is a non-issue, then it wouldn't. It's not a problem to me.

Between the two beings who co-planned the building of the Church from the foundation of the world, I place Jesus as the actual builder of the Church. .


** YOU place Jesus as the actual builder of the church but for Hebrew 3:4 it was the Father who built the church.

"For every house is builded by some man; but He that BUILT ALL THINGS IS GOD." :D

You can reread my statement quoted above. :)

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
I've explained the difference in contexts which you apparently couldn't accept. If it is your stand that whatever Christ says in every situation is not really his and is of the Father, then you are the one in error.


** Did I say in every situation that Christ says, it was the Father? :D I knew this is what you're gonna think though, but I know I didnt say that. Becoz the verse I have given you was referring to the commandments Father had given to Christ. So whatever teachings/commandments Christ had preached or told them, those were from the Father. :D basa!

John 12:49
"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."

I don't think the bible is in error. :D

What is in error is your belief that the God being who handed down the ten commandments to Moses was the Father and not Jesus Christ.

I've given my position that Jesus, having divested his own power as a result of becoming flesh and mortal, was always pointing and giving credit to the Father. As Jesus stated, of his self, he could do nothing.

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Now show that "It's different" the founding and establishment of the Church.


** Foundation is the act of starting an institution or organization, etc. In speaking of the church, it was already established by God even before Christ (which I will give you the verse later :D ), but Christ was the one who founded it or started it to introduce to the people during his time. . God built it even before Christ, but when the time Christ needed to descend from heaven to bring back in the people from God's righteouness, he founded/introduced the church. That's why the name of our church is....

members of the Church of God in Christ Jesus the pillar and ground of truth.

So just and rightful biblically. So proud. :D

** HOw bout you? what is the name of your church? :D

The thesaurus in my laptop lists the words "found" and "establish" as synonymous.

I'll comment on your statements and give you the name of the Church in which I'm a part of after you read the thread, "Where is the Church Jesus Built?" viewtopic.php?f=20&t=158517

howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
Strange to me. Show it and I'll comment. :)


**I know it is strange to you. :D coz what I have told you, no other group that teaches the bible rightfully than our group. :D

"Strange" as in biblically foreign in my view. :) Make sure you specify "before church was already in existence even before Christ". But I won't mind if you delay in your response.

howellstamaria wrote:
I will show it ofcorz. I will continue this. It's better if you will not gonna reply back first coz it is unfair to you that I havent answered yet all your queries. :D ayt!?

I won't think is unfair to me. Take your time.

I'm responding to prevent backlogs. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:18 pm 
Offline
Heavyweight
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:22 am
Posts: 8389
howellstamaria wrote:
I don't need to study this specific topic as who built the church coz I am satisfied already the way our leader had explained to us this particular topic. Everything is so biblical.

You are just over reacting. :D Words of God, His wisdom is undeniably deep and broad. That's why there is a chosen one, a leader that could decipher the wisdom of God biblically. Coz we admit, if it is only us, we can't simply understand it. The reason why we stopped worshipping idols, and the other things God had prohibited, it was becoz we had just been taught and enlightened. And the reason why we always have a congregation, prayer meeting, worship service is to continue studying, sharing God's wisdom. :D Just don't over react. :D k!

With the way you project, I tend to be impressed that revin, the INC I discussed with in an older thread, had shown more humility in his approach. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:18 pm 
Offline
Lightweight
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:01 pm
Posts: 187
Location: Rizal, Philippines
howellstamaria wrote:
--- another one, you said the word "God" is composed of the Father and Christ. That's where you got ur belief that if the Father built it, Christ also built it. AM I RYT?


howellstamaria wrote:
question is.. where is that in the bible that a single entity/word God is composed of two beings which is the Father and Christ?


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?

** 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?

** 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

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

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:
When Christ uttered the words in John 14:28, he, the Word, already became flesh, a mortal being having shed off his God nature of being immortal.

Btw, are the words Jesus spoke in your quoted verse also the Father's?.


** 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

** 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


howellstamaria wrote:
-- Then show your proof in the bible that that certain word "God" is a family that composed of the Father and Christ. I would be patient to wait for it. :D


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


howellstamaria wrote:
Epifanio M. Almeda wrote:
When the immortal Word became the mortal Jesus, the latter "could do nothing" and was totally dependent on the God being left in heaven, the Father. Jesus as a man on earth was directing man to the Father. But this doesn't mean that Jesus lost his being part of the God family who co-planned everything with the Father.

So Jesus' words in your quoted verse does not really remove Jesus' co-ownership and co-authorship of the commandments.


--Where in the bible proves that an immortal could become mortal? :D :D

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.

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. :) :)


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.

** 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.

howellstamaria wrote:
Do I make sense? :D


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

howellstamaria wrote:
It is the same mortal body that was crucified and died. It's ridiculous to think that Christ, the begotten son of God, existing even before everythng could just be killed by mortal humans. C'mon? :lol:


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).
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.

** 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.

** 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.

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.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 381 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 ... 26  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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