The Doctrine of One God

Originally posted by Punker69
Christ called them children. Not his children. Besides, Malachi 2:10

"Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?"

There is only Father that hath created us. And if Jesus is to be called the everlasting Father he is that one Father.

* the context of the verse says one God, one Father who created us...

Originally posted by Punker69
[B]Collosians 1:16

"For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him , and for him:"

So we can establish from these verse of scripture that is only ONE father(Malachi 2:10). That Christ it the everlasting Father (Isaiah 9:6) and that by the Father all things are made (Malachi 2:10) and that Jesus created all things (Collosians 1:16)

Either your wrong or your saying the Bible is contradicting itself. [/B]

* wow... an obvious misinterpretation...

"For in him were all things created , in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him ;"
Colossians 1:16

* Christ DID NOT created all things... it was the Father who created all things...

"God that made the world and all things therein , seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;"
Acts 17:24

* however, the Father created all things through Christ...

"Yet to us there is one God, the Father , of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ , through whom are all things, and we through him."
I Corinthians 8:6

* the Father is God -> created all things... Christ -> all things are created through Christ...

Originally posted by Punker69
Consider me fooled.

The wisdom of God does not refer to a different person but merely to one of Gods attributes. He used his wisdom is making the earth...

[B]Psalms 126:5

"To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever."

Proverbs 3:19

"The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens."

Just like my wisdom is not different from myself the same is with God.
Thanks for pointing out 1 Corinthians 1:24. Christ is God manifested in flesh therefore all the wisdom of God is in Jesus.

Collosians 2:3

"In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."

Jesus is the wisdom of God. This doesn't mean that he a seperate person from the Father but that through Jesus Christ God reveals His wisdom to humanity. And Christ encompasses all that wisdom. [/B]

* i did not say Christ was separate from the Father... i said Christ was a different being... saying the Father created the heavens through wisdom or by wisdom is tantamount of saying the Father created the heavens through Christ or by Christ... no conflict...

Originally posted by Punker69
But it does say "he who hath seen me hath seen the Father". I can be one in unity with another person all I want. But the bottom line is when they see me they dont see that other person they see me. When we see Jesus we see the Father. We see the visible manifestation of God.

* because Christ is the image of God... and Christ is the Son of God... Christ was seen, and the Father is invisible so They are two different beings...

Originally posted by Punker69
I've already explained this in my previous statements. But just for kicks, your saying there was two births?

* yes... the Father gave birth to Christ as a spirit... and Mary gave give of Christ's flesh manifestation...

Originally posted by Punker69
I've given you plenty of verses my friend. I dont know how you can even make that statement. I've backed up everyone of my interpretations with a verse too.

* not until now...

Originally posted by Punker69
I dont quite understand the question. Can you explain it further?

* you said the Father was made flesh, right? and that the Father is Christ Himself, right? why the heck did Christ prayed to the Father, if the Father is also Himself?

"These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father , the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:"
John 17:1

* Christ lifted His eyes to heaven... of course, because He was talking to the Father who art in heaven (Matthew 6:9)... Christ was then here on earth, and praying to the Father in heaven... if the Father is also Christ, why would He even lift His eyes to heaven? or even say that the Father is in the heaven? you sure make Christ look stupid... fortunately, He is not, because Christ is NOT the Father...

Originally posted by Punker69
Sigh, its discouraging that I actually have to go through the abc's of the Bible with you.

[B]1 Kings 8:27

"But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee ; how much less this house that I have builded?"

God is omnipresent. Solomon said himself that the "heavens of heavens cannot contain God for he is everywhere. [/B]

* it's pretty horrible that you consider God's omnipresence as Bible's ABC's... God is NOT omnipresent...

"After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven , Hallowed be thy name."
Matthew 6:9

* Christ said, the Father is in heaven... read the context of what King Solomon had said... "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? how much less this house that I have builded?" that does not mean the Father is not in heaven...

Originally posted by Punker69
[B]Psalms 139:7-13

7"Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?"
8"If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there : if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there ."
9"If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; "
10"Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me."
11"If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me."
12"Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee."
13"For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb."

The passage in Psalms is perhaps the most beautiful disply of God's omniprescence in the Bible. [/B]

* hmm... "... if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there..." wow, God is in hell... would you like to consider this one?

* God Himself is NOT omnipresent... but He can see everything because...

"The eyes of the Lord are in every place , beholding the evil and the good."
Proverbs 15:3

* His eyes or sight are everywhere... but the Father is in the heavens...

Originally posted by Punker69
[B]John 3:13

"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."

This signifies that Jesus could be on earth and in heaven at the same time. [/B]

* nope, He's not... the verse signifies that Christ came from heaven...

"He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all."
John 3:31

* Christ came from heaven...

Originally posted by Punker69
[B]Matthew 18:20

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

Signifies that he can be with two or three of his disciples at the same time. [/B]

* the verse signifies otherwise... if no one gathered together or if someone gathered together not in Christ's name, would Christ still be in the midst of them? nope... the Father and Christ are not omnipresent...

Originally posted by Punker69
These are beautiful descriptions of Gods omniprescenes. He can be everywhere at the same time. He is omnipresent. God can be in heaven speaking and on earth as well. There are ONE. God was on the earth and because of his omniprescenes he was in heaven as well.

* nope, if the Father is omnipresent, there is no need for Christ to pray and lift His eyes towards the heavens (John 17:1) if the Father is everywhere... you imply Christ is a damn good actor, well He isn't... 'coz the Father is really in heaven...

Originally posted by Punker69
But let me evaluate this passage of scripture for you further.

Lets first take not of verse 16 "and the spirit of God descended like a dove." For further proof the Holy Spirit and God are the same lets look at

[B]Luke 3:22

"And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."

What was that? The HOLY GHOST descended in a bodily shape like a dove. But in Matthew its says the "spirit of God descended like a dove".

The spirit of God and the Holy Ghost are the same. [/B]

* that is nowhere near my point...

Originally posted by Punker69
We next need to understand the purpose of Christ being baptized since he was without sin (1 Peter 2:22) and certainly did not need to be baptized for the remission of sin. He was baptized to full all righteousness (Matthew 3:15) and to set an example (1 Peter 2:21). Jesus was baptizd in means of making himself known to Israel (John 1:26-27,31). Jesus used the baptism to mark the beginning of his ministry and make a public declaration to the people of who he was and what he came to do. John the Baptist did not know Jesus was the Messiah until the baptism. After he got the assurance that Jesus Christ was the Messiah he was able to procliam the he was the Son of God and the Lamb of God. The Holy Spirit was also to annoint Jesus. In fact the word Messiah translated means " the annointed one".

The Dove was a sign for John the Baptist to assure him that the Messiah was Jesus.

[B]John 1:32-34

32"And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
33And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
34And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God."

The voice from heaven was a sign for the people. We see a similiar example of this in John 12:38-30. Alot of people where at this baptisism (Luke 3:21) and this was a sign for them. [/B]

* nope... read intensively...

"And Jesus, when he was baptized , went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove , and lighting upon him:
And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son , in whom I am well pleased."
Matthew 3:16-17

* Jesus was being baptized, the Holy Spirit was descending from heaven like a dove and the Father was in heaven saying, "This is my beloved Son..." the Father and Christ are obviously in different places...

Originally posted by Punker69
Lol, what exactly can't I swallow?

* that the Father and Christ are two different beings...

Originally posted by Punker69
So now the Father is a man? But I thought he was a spirit all this time....

* yes, the Father is a spirit... but Christ counted Him as His second witness...

Originally posted by Punker69
But why not go for three? When you're trying to prove yourself you'd bring out all the witnesses you can. wouldn't you?

* Christ proved Himself to the Pharisees... two was enough...

Originally posted by Punker69
Lol, I wasn't asking that question. I was asking how the Pharisees ever beared witness of this "second person".

Its it very much NOT the context of it, dude.

If there where two seperate persons that would be like me saying.

"If ye had known me ye would have known my brother also."

That wouldn't work because when you know me YOU KNOW ME. Not my brother as well.

* They are NOT separate, but They are different beings... and, of course, you can't compare yourself and your brother with God and Christ...

Originally posted by Punker69
But you just said seeing the image of God is equivalent to seeing God.

Is there two seperate persons in yourself? When you look at yourself in the mirror you see the image of yourself. Does that mean theres two of your something. If I see the image of someone I see that person. If I see the image of God I see God manifested. I see God. Though not the spirit but I see the visible manifestation.

* well, Christ is not a mirror of God... He is the image of God... i bear an image of my father, but my father is NOT me and vice-versa...

Originally posted by Punker69
The proper way to decipher these scriptures is to distinguish the deity of Jesus( The Father) and the humanity of Jesus (The Son). As a man Christ was subordinate to the spirit of God the dwelt in him. Jesus did not come to do the will to teach the commandments of His humanity but rather to teach the commandments from the spirit of God that dwelt inside of him.

* as a man? i thought you said God was made flesh to its entirety? not 1/3, but 100%, am i right? you sure are mixed up...

Originally posted by Punker69
Lets put this into simplier terms.

He that receiveth the apostles receiveth Jesus and he that receiveth Jesus receiveth the Father.

Ok hwo would that make the apostles Christ in my "logic"?

* you said earlier, believing in God is believing in Christ = Christ is God, right? receiving apostles is receiving Christ = apostles are what?

Originally posted by Punker69
Or they are one person. Ever think of that? "?

* nope, 'coz They are not....

Originally posted by Punker69
Maybe

* "maybe"?! you're not sure?

Originally posted by Punker69
Maybe the reason Jesus always said "one" and not "one in unity" was because he and the Father are in fact ONE in every way?

* nope... i already answered where They are one... John 17:11...

Originally posted by Punker69
How is it absurd? Jesus said baptize people in the name of the Father, the SON, AND THE HOLY GHOST. That name is Jesus (Acts 2:38). The name of the Father is Jesus. The name of the Son is Jesus. The name of the Holy Ghost is Jesus. Because in Jesus Christ dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Collosians 2:9). How does that not make sense to you?

* now that's funny, the name of the Father and the Holy Spirit is Jesus... now, where is that in the Bible? why don't you just admit that claiming the name of the Father and the Holy Spirit is Jesus, is a misinterpretation?

* if you carefully consult the Hebrew manuscript, the name of the Father is...

"And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am YHWH :"
Exodus 6:2

* the tetragrammaton YHWH is the holy name of the Father... not Jesus...

"And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS."
Matthew 1:25

* Jesus is the name of the flesh manifestation of Christ...

Originally posted by Punker69
You can twist scriptures around all you want but theres some things that are just so plain you cant twist them around. Like how to baptize. Its so easy to understand.

* puh-lease... i'm not twisting the Scriptures, i'm just reading it... you are the one who's murdering the Scriptures, just like you did with John 1:1 a while ago...

Originally posted by Punker69
Yes I do see. But unfortunately you dont. In the end the role of the Son will have completed its purpose. Then the Son will be submerged into God's plan so that God may be "all an all". Haven't I already explained this? Why are you repeating your answered questions?

* well, if the Son is also the Father, what's the point of the Son subjecting Himself to the Father for Him (the Father) to be God all in all? pretty absurd, subjecting Himself to Himself... hee-haw...

OMG! Longest post in history.

Originally posted by Alliance
OMG! Longest post in history.

It was a dp too though....

....waste of good genes.

and space...don't forget the space.

Peejayd, I've come to the conclusion that you are not human.....

Originally posted by Punker69
Theres a big difference between "Hostel" and "B M". And one is "B M" was getting way more attention, oscar hype, awards, box office, rave reviews and "Hostel" wasn't getting any of that. "B M" drew out the Christian fanatics because of all the hype.

I am not a "fanatic". I posted once on the subject in a thread. That doesn't make me a fanatic. If you think it does, your an idiot. I wasn't standing outside of the theater opening day of "Brokeback Mountain" waving protest signs. Neither was I doing it with "Hostel". I just felt compelled to post my thoughts on the movie seeing all the attention is was getting considering it's low budget and indie film style.

Im not part of an "anti-gay" movement. If a "movement" is posting one message on a forum then you need to gain a better grasp on the word.

You are a fanatic if you look up the word in a dictionary you'll see why.
I'm not saying you were one of the idiots with the protest signs, but you do share their ideology.

Now, if you think to be a part of a movement you need a membership card, you are most utterly wrong. Again, look up movement in a dictionary, the anti-gay christian movement is happening, and you are very much part of it. As much as I am part of the pro-gay movement.

And by the way, you completely ignored the most important part of my post. You are against Brokeback Mountain for one reason "the content is an abomination, yadda, yadda." well, ok, then as long as you are against Hostel and every single serial murder film, it's ok to think that way. But you're not. You're a hypocrite, don't feel too bad though... basically all Christians are hypocrites, you're not special.

Originally posted Punker69
Theres a big difference between "Hostel" and "B M". And one is "B M" was getting way more attention, oscar hype, awards, box office, rave reviews and "Hostel" wasn't getting any of that. "B M" drew out the Christian fanatics because of all the hype.

I am not a "fanatic". I posted once on the subject in a thread. That doesn't make me a fanatic. If you think it does, your an idiot. I wasn't standing outside of the theater opening day of "Brokeback Mountain" waving protest signs. Neither was I doing it with "Hostel". I just felt compelled to post my thoughts on the movie seeing all the attention is was getting considering it's low budget and indie film style.

Im not part of an "anti-gay" movement. If a "movement" is posting one message on a forum then you need to gain a better grasp on the word.

Punker, i just think that your opinion would be VALID if you actually SAW the movie.

The fact that you didn't even see it gives you no right to pass ANY judgement on it.

We already spoke about this, so I'm not going to go into a full argument or debate about this much further.

Anyways, Eis is right....you may not realize it but your thoughts indirectly contribute to fuel the Anti-Gay movement.

Your opinion was not just an opinion, it verged on PROPAGANDA..

Ne ways im going to stop.....I don't want to be accused of having the thread go off topic.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Punker I have a quick question for you, its in the Thread called "Bias Test" under general discussion, but I want your opinion:

Here's the question:

Two movies...you have to pick one to watch....which do you choose? And WHY?

BrokeBack Mountain Or Hostel ?

Originally posted by Eis
Right so ok, homosexual-themed films are ok as long as they don't win oscars. Logical...

You are a fanatic if you look up the word in a dictionary you'll see why.
I'm not saying you were one of the idiots with the protest signs, but you do share their ideology.

Now, if you think to be a part of a movement you need a membership card, you are most utterly wrong. Again, look up movement in a dictionary, the anti-gay christian movement is happening, and you are very much part of it. As much as I am part of the pro-gay movement.

And by the way, you completely ignored the most important part of my post. You are against Brokeback Mountain for one reason "the content is an abomination, yadda, yadda." well, ok, then as long as you are against Hostel and every single serial murder film, it's ok to think that way. But you're not. You're a hypocrite, don't feel too bad though... basically all Christians are hypocrites, you're not special.

Your twisting around my words. From the first paragraph you've done so. Im not going to bother discussing this with you anymore. I hate when people can't win an argument on their own so they result to this kind of approach.

Anyways, im not a hypocrite. I am against every other bad movie out there. I expressed in my previous post that I thought both where bad films. But im not going to express my beliefs on every innapropriate movie Hollywood pushes out there. That would get too overwhelming.

Ne ways im going to stop.....I don't want to be accused of having the thread go off topic.

Yes Storm, I'm sorry. That's why I am ending that discussion Now. 😉

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Punker, i just think that your opinion would be VALID if you actually SAW the movie.

The fact that you didn't even see it gives you no right to pass ANY judgement on it.

We already spoke about this, so I'm not going to go into a full argument or debate about this much further.

Anyways, Eis is right....you may not realize it but your thoughts indirectly contribute to fuel the Anti-Gay movement.

Your opinion was not just an opinion, it verged on PROPAGANDA..

Ne ways im going to stop.....I don't want to be accused of having the thread go off topic.

Why dont you tell me what exactly I missed then. Is not "Brokeback Mountain" a film about two men who cheat on their wifes to indulge in their own affair. And is not "Hostel" and movie about sadistic violence and torture sequences along with pornographic-like sex scenes?

Im not part of an anti-gay movement because im not against gays in any way.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
[B]Ne ways im going to stop.....I don't want to be accused of having the thread go off topic.

Yes Storm, I'm sorry. That's why I am ending that discussion Now. 😉 [/B]

Eis, will have to end the discussion.

Originally posted by Punker69
Your twisting around my words. From the first paragraph you've done so. Im not going to bother discussing this with you anymore. I hate when people can't win an argument on their own so they result to this kind of approach.

Anyways, im not a hypocrite. I am against every other bad movie out there. I expressed in my previous post that I thought both where bad films. But im not going to express my beliefs on every innapropriate movie Hollywood pushes out there. That would get too overwhelming.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Not Another Teen Movie, Leon: The Professional, American Pie. All these movies have strong non-christian morals. They all got a shitload of hype but none of this movies had Christian fanatics thumping bibles up their asses.

So you Christians don't give a tiny little rat's ass about immoral movies, as long as they don't have two dudes making out.

One of your favorite movies is Freddy vs. Jason... I mean do you truly not see the hypocricy? It's just... shocking.

EDIT -- Answer this in the "Is being gay a sin?" thread, please.

This is my thread. So I can answer where I please.

Is that really my fault? That I wasn't create anti-TCM threads all over the place and protesting out in front of the theater on opening day? How do you know Christians dont care about those movies. I know Christians that very much dislike TCM and AP.

"You Christians". I dont like any of those other movies you posted. Just because I made a post about "B M" and not them does not set grounds for hypocrisy.

Also, those movies where listed about two years ago. I had my KMC account blocked for about a year and half. During that time I stopped watching most movies all together because I didn't like the kinds of things they had in them. I have just never updated my list. I totally forgot those things where even on there.

Just make sure you know the all the facts before you can so openly call someone a hypocrite. I am not.

Originally posted by Punker69
This is my thread. So I can answer where I please.

Is that really my fault? That I wasn't create anti-TCM threads all over the place and protesting out in front of the theater on opening day? How do you know Christians dont care about those movies. I know Christians that very much dislike TCM and AP.

"You Christians". I dont like any of those other movies you posted. Just because I made a post about "B M" and not them does not set grounds for hypocrisy.

Also, those movies where listed about two years ago. I had my KMC account blocked for about a year and half. During that time I stopped watching most movies all together because I didn't like the kinds of things they had in them. I have just never updated my list. I totally forgot those things where even on there.

Just make sure you know the all the facts before you can so openly call someone a hypocrite. I am not.

You completely ignored the FACT that Freddy vs. Jason is one of your favorite movies, so please do reply. How could you possibly like a movie so... blasphemous, so immoral?

Guys sorry but we gotta take this discussion elsewhere. Storm already asked us to end it on this thread.

PM's, maybe another thread ?

Originally posted by Eis
Maybe the fact that they have not protested or made any significant demonstration of their intolerance of those movies.

You completely ignored the FACT that Freddy vs. Jason is one of your favorite movies, so please do reply. How could you possibly like a movie so... blasphemous, so immoral?

How do you know? Have you been in front of every movie theater across the nation of the opening day of any of those films? Do you know the family discussions that go on in peoples homes about those films? You dont have to protest to be against a movie.

I didn't completely ignore your statement. I actually devoted a whole paragraph to it. But allow me to explain it again.

I had my KMC account blocked for about a year and half. During that time I stopped watching alot of movies together because I realized some of the movies I was watching weren't good for me spiritually and in most cases made my hypocritical. "FvJ" and most of the other movies on my list where among the kind of movies I stopped watching. I told you I didn't even remember those movies where on my list until you brought it up just now.

Originally posted by Punker69
This is my thread. So I can answer where I please.

KillerMovies and its assigned agents reserves the right to remove a post which does not relate to the topic being discussed in the forum.

Then remove the post.