100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
|
|
Father, Son, Holy Spirit are three persons in One identity. they are persons?.....persons are of Flesh and Blood they are three ghosts...why play like they are people |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God could answer a question through someone on here, however, my point was He may Not. since it's three separate beings ...God can't be a "He" ...it's a "They" and not all those three separate beings know the answers to all the questions or will answer all the questions for example: What is the time of Judgement Day? 1: The Son doesn't know 2: The Holy Spirit doesn't have a mind 3: The Father might know but it's taboo for him to answer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seek and Ye shall find. There is no answer to a biblical question that God can not reveal to You if you are sincere in your search. Whether God revels it in his Word, from research or throu someone of Faith. God never leaves questions unanswered. If so, then it probably something is not necessary for us of Faith to know. God reveals only what he wants Us to know. Some one on Here/site, maynot be able to answer all the questions one may have. IMO as in the original post...these are questions that can't be answered, or are ignore or taboo and extends beyond faith ...so I doubt if God shows up to answer any of them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
funches
on
Tue 01/01/13 03:20 PM
|
|
There has been no contradiction, again just your twisting of words. jeez ..I guess I have to do this the hard way Cowboy...according to the belief and the question there are supposedly three seperate beings 1.The Father 2. The Son 3.The Holy Spirit do you consider any of the three not to be a "Being"? ??? All those are beings... where's the relevance? the relevancy is that in "post 6" you claim that The Holy Spirit is not a being .... POSTED BY COWBOY: The Holy Spirit isn't a being, see how you are playing contradiction games ..they won't work in this thread No games played, only your twisting of words and taking them out of context again. The Holy Spirit isn't a secluded being all in it's own. It is God's Holy Spirit, so with that it is God none the less. "isn't a secluded being"?.....it's either a seperate being or it's not....forget it cowboy..this thread isn't playing your games....skip this question and wait on the next Yes secluded being would mean separate being. The Holy Spirit is God's Holy Spirit, it is not a separate entity in it's own. It does not have a mind of it's own, it is God the father in a spiritual form. The Father is already in a spiritual form...therefore the Holy Spirit can't be The Spirit of The Father |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There has been no contradiction, again just your twisting of words. jeez ..I guess I have to do this the hard way Cowboy...according to the belief and the question there are supposedly three seperate beings 1.The Father 2. The Son 3.The Holy Spirit do you consider any of the three not to be a "Being"? ??? All those are beings... where's the relevance? the relevancy is that in "post 6" you claim that The Holy Spirit is not a being .... POSTED BY COWBOY: The Holy Spirit isn't a being, see how you are playing contradiction games ..they won't work in this thread No games played, only your twisting of words and taking them out of context again. The Holy Spirit isn't a secluded being all in it's own. It is God's Holy Spirit, so with that it is God none the less. "isn't a secluded being"?.....it's either a seperate being or it's not....forget it cowboy..this thread isn't playing your games....skip this question and wait on the next |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There has been no contradiction, again just your twisting of words. jeez ..I guess I have to do this the hard way Cowboy...according to the belief and the question there are supposedly three seperate beings 1.The Father 2. The Son 3.The Holy Spirit do you consider any of the three not to be a "Being"? ??? All those are beings... where's the relevance? the relevancy is that in "post 6" you claim that The Holy Spirit is not a being .... POSTED BY COWBOY: The Holy Spirit isn't a being, see how you are playing contradiction games ..they won't work in this thread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There has been no contradiction, again just your twisting of words. jeez ..I guess I have to do this the hard way Cowboy...according to the belief and the question there are supposedly three seperate beings 1.The Father 2. The Son 3.The Holy Spirit do you consider any of the three not to be a "Being"? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, Just your continual twisting of words Funches. The Holy Spirit isn't a being, it is God's spirit. It is only referred to in a very few select parts. Cowboy...the question pertains to the belief or claim that there are three seperate beings...since you claim that The Holy Spirit is not a "Being" ...therefore you must believe there are only "two beings" this is why you won't be able to answer the question without contradiction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To me the "three beings" are simply the parts of God, like you have two arms. Otherwise I will admit I don't understand you. the term God is only a title not one "Being", therefore the three seperate beings can not be parts my two arms are not separate beings but parts of one Being....two other beings besides myself would constitute as being three seperate Beings and would constitute as being a "Race of Beings" or from a "race of beings" wouldn't the same apply to the three seperate holy biblical beings are they not a race of beings...why and/or why not |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cowboy..according to your beliefs and what you have been posting in the forum the Holy Spirit isn't a "Being"..but in your response you're claiming that it is a "Being"
if you have to resort to contradictions and trickery...then skip the question because it will remain a fixture on a list if answered "convoluted-ally" ..don't worry more questions will come |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if the three seperate Beings that form the entity known as God are unique...then why are there three of them...one Being would be unique, two or three Beings would constitute as a race of "Beings" or from a race of "Beings"
so if the three "seperate" Beings known as God are not a race of Beings....then where did the other two "seperate Beings" come from? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a list of religious questions that may arise during a debate that are either ignored, pushed aside, tabooed and/or can not be explained away with faith or passages from the bible or the eternal phrase that "God works in mysterious ways" and the question generally collapses the bible
in layman's term.....these are questions that believers either can't answer or are not allowed to answer or forbidden to even think about answering so they play like the questions "don't exist" (no pun intended) if a "religious question" on the list can be answered (un-convoluted-ally of course) then it will be removed....if not... it will remain a fixture so if you have a "religious question" that never get answered then place it here |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Can mary save?
|
|
And no pact was violated Funches. Cowboy...if you use anything but the KJV then you violated the pact ... you tried to blame Satan for your sinning and now trying to make excuses for why you violated your word how can I teach you the ways of the force...oops...er.... I meant the ways of the bible if you are not willing to take responsibility for your own actions ..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Can mary save?
Edited by
funches
on
Tue 01/01/13 09:09 AM
|
|
Even with sticking to KJV, it says God made "man and woman". It does not say a man and a woman. Does not signify any singular meaning in the word "man" and "woman". Cowboy, you might be a tad bit confused...my point was that "Man" was a singular noun that referred to a race of people just as The Word" was a singular noun that referred to "all" those that has yet to come in the flesh ...and that this is why everyone was once "The Word" so I'm not disputing what you said about "Man" because it proves my point my disappointment was the fact that you violated the pact and "your word" to only use the KJV it wasn't even a need to violate the pact since I wasn't disputing that Man meant Mankind.....you became your own Judas Goat What are you talking about Funches? Man/Mankind is not a singular noun, it is a singular noun as it refers to a singular group of people, but man does not mean 1 man. It does not say God made A man, God made A woman. Says God made man and woman. In no possible can "Word" be ment in the same way. "Word" does not refer to a group of people. And no pact was violated Funches. That "agreement" was made in response to you using two different translations and taking their wording out of context trying to say their was a contradiction between the translations. That's where the "agreement" laid. But again, to truly understand the scriptures one can not limit the study to one translation. Takes all the translations. But again, that has absolutely nothing to do with the reason we chose to stick to the KJV, again we chose to do that because of your word twisting. And still regardless of all that, it says the same exact thing Funches. God created man, not A man. don't you get it, I'm not disputing that...because you are in fact proving my point ...that "Man" means many of the flesh just like "The Word" means many not yet of the flesh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where was God?
|
|
Pick one what? Jesus did't break any laws. breaking no laws means God's law and that God crucifed him which explains the phrase "God why hath thou forsaken me" Funches you're talking extremely weird today. This is my last post with you for a while till you clear your head and not coming up with this none sense. How can not breaking a law mean God's law and God crucified him? That doesn't even make sense Funches. They THOUGHT Jesus was breaking the law because they did not believe him to be who he was. They did not believe him to be the promised one. So they crucified him for blasphemy. But God revealed to them their error and is why the Father said while Jesus was on the cross "This is my son, in whom I'm well pleased". jeez Cowboy,God made that statement when Jesus was being baptized not when Jesus was on the cross,which is why your entire post is wrong ...and of course false gospel it's a little embarrassing and scary that a non-believer have to teach a believer about the crucifixion of their savior good thing believers don't have to pass a biblical knowledge test to get into Heaven, because the lake of fire wouldn't have enough room to burn and torture everyone for all eternity...give or take a day or two aye, yes I am sorry for that mistake. The father did not speak at the crucifixion. And is why Jesus said "why hast thou forsaken me". Because the sin separated him from the father. Jesus said I commend my spirit into your hands father. I apologize. nope can't accept the apology because you are still being deceptive by not giving the entire passage which is "Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth." I thought you said that Jesus is "Lord"...so why is Jesus calling The Father "Lord"? ....still with the false gospel I see And no Funches, not false gospel. I made a mistake, that's it. I am not continuing on with that error. If I was to try to continue on with that error is when it would be spreading false gospel. you sure do make a lot of mistakes ...perhaps if you bother picking up a bible and reading it you won't....but anyway good thing a non-believers is here to keep you on the path But I forget an absolute perfect man like you doesn't make mistakes, again my apologies. awww shucks, thanks Cowboy ...you too will not make mistakes if you follow me |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Can mary save?
|
|
Even with sticking to KJV, it says God made "man and woman". It does not say a man and a woman. Does not signify any singular meaning in the word "man" and "woman". Cowboy, you might be a tad bit confused...my point was that "Man" was a singular noun that referred to a race of people just as The Word" was a singular noun that referred to "all" those that has yet to come in the flesh ...and that this is why everyone was once "The Word" so I'm not disputing what you said about "Man" because it proves my point my disappointment was the fact that you violated the pact and "your word" to only use the KJV it wasn't even a need to violate the pact since I wasn't disputing that Man meant Mankind.....you became your own Judas Goat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where was God?
Edited by
funches
on
Mon 12/31/12 04:43 PM
|
|
Pick one what? Jesus did't break any laws. breaking no laws means God's law and that God crucifed him which explains the phrase "God why hath thou forsaken me" Funches you're talking extremely weird today. This is my last post with you for a while till you clear your head and not coming up with this none sense. How can not breaking a law mean God's law and God crucified him? That doesn't even make sense Funches. They THOUGHT Jesus was breaking the law because they did not believe him to be who he was. They did not believe him to be the promised one. So they crucified him for blasphemy. But God revealed to them their error and is why the Father said while Jesus was on the cross "This is my son, in whom I'm well pleased". jeez Cowboy,God made that statement when Jesus was being baptized not when Jesus was on the cross,which is why your entire post is wrong ...and of course false gospel it's a little embarrassing and scary that a non-believer have to teach a believer about the crucifixion of their savior good thing believers don't have to pass a biblical knowledge test to get into Heaven, because the lake of fire wouldn't have enough room to burn and torture everyone for all eternity...give or take a day or two |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Can mary save?
|
|
I did not violate anything. This was all brought up because you were taking things out of context using two different translations again taking them out of context trying to refute the other. For that time being we chose just to use the KJV, but that did not mean that was the ONLY one we were ever going to use. Cause again, you can not restrict yourself to just one translation. One should read multiple different translation and use a concordance to find out what is truly ment in the scriptures in question. And again, this was brought up, because one instant you would use one translation, then try to say their was a contradiction because it said this or that in a totally different location of a totally different translation with you again taking what was said out of context. because people jump from Bible to Bible is the very reason why we made the pact to only use the KJV if you wish to violate the pact...then that is your choice, but don't blame anyone but yourself for not sticking to your word |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where was God?
|
|
Pick one what? Jesus did't break any laws. breaking no laws means God's law and that God crucifed him which explains the phrase "God why hath thou forsaken me" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Where was God?
|
|
Incorrect Funches. An alien is a "being" in a foreign location. We only normally see an "alien" as being some creature from outter space. But people that like come here from mexico illegally, guess what? They are illegal aliens. Does that mean they are not of flesh and blood? Cowboy..I know you may not be up on current events...but the people in Mexico are Flesh and Blood ...wow..I'm hope people believing they are not of flesh and blood is why they are being deported but anyway....can you answer the questions about whether The Father is an alien THE QUESTION is The Father of flesh and blood The father is neither flesh and blood nor an alien. the first rules of the sci-fi channel...always find a weapon, always look upon and behind you...and if there is an entity not of flesh and blood...it's an alien .. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
