A Trail of Blood

[Marie]

Hi James,
Thats way wrong, Jesus did acknoweledge the Trinity and at his Baptism we see all three there.He said that when he left he would send the comforter the Holy Spirit to abide in us, and that he and his father are one.

[libby]

Originally Posted by Marie

By any chance did you listen to Bennits talk?

Uh, yeah. I'm going to bother listening to an ex-priest whose front page of his website says "abuse by papal AntiChrist". Think maybe he's got an ax to grind?

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by VoteJP

No, I said it correct.

The Jews had no trinity, and Jesus never taught any trinity, and the Apostle Paul had no trinity, and the early church had no trinity for a God.

The non-Trinitarians were the ones in the early Church.

Matthew 3:16; 28:19 - Trinity
John 10:30 - Trinity

1Cor 12:14 - Trinity (written by Paul)
Romans 1:4 - Trinity (written by Paul)
2Cor 13:14 - Trinity (written by Paul)
Ephesians 4:4 - Trinity (written by Paul)
1Peter 1:2 - Trinity (written by Peter)
Jude 20,21 - Trinity (written by Jude aka Thaddeus)

It requires a man with 1/2 a brain to see it, and I'm guessing you're not that.

Originally Posted by Marie

By any chance did you listen to Bennits talk?

I didn't, as it has absolutely nothing to do with the early church. I tell you what though, I'll listen to Bennett if you read the following articles:

The Protestant Ascendency in Ireland
Persecution of Catholics in England
The Protestant Inquisition (Reformation Intolerance & Persecution)
Catholic Persecution In The 13 Colonies and Forward
Anti-Catholicism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You DO realize the Protestants are guilty of their own inquisitions and persecutions don't you, and that in an "enlightened" age even?

Marie, please do cease and desist with your anti-Catholic crusade. You're leaving A Trail of [virtual] Blood behind you.

[VoteJP]

Originally Posted by Marie

Hi James,

I did not listen to Bennits either as the link was way to confusing with way to much anti-Catholic stuff and no way of finding the topic you were telling us to see.

I already know the Catholics do not represent the original Church, but I find the Catholics will be judged on Judgment Day by their own merits whether right or wrong.

The Catholics of today will not be condemned for the sins in its beginning.

Originally Posted by Marie

Thats way wrong, Jesus did acknoweledge the Trinity and at his Baptism we see all three there.

At the baptism we see all three (3) as distinct and separate and not as any mystical trinity.

The Father which art in Heaven and the Son down here on Earth and the Holy Spirit is not then given. And if one says that Jesus was given the Spirit at that time then that means He did not have it before that time so again they are all 3 separate.

Originally Posted by Marie

He said that when he left he would send the comforter the Holy Spirit to abide in us,

So clearly it was not already there, and Jesus leaving and the Spirit coming means two (2) separate entities traveling in 2 separate direction and 2 separate places. Not one trinity.

Originally Posted by Marie

and that he and his father are one.

They are one in agreement and one in harmony, and if He and the Father were literally one (1) then they forgot to add the Holy Spirit into that equation to make it 3 as in trinity.

The "Trinity" concept is a wrong interpretation being forced into scriptural text that do not say anything supporting the concept of a trinity.

A "trinity" is not in the Bible and it was never a message from the Bible.

In fact the "trinity" doctrine is a creation by the Catholic Church, as a way of explaining what they did not understand.

[VoteJP]

Originally Posted by Radiant1

Matthew 3:16; 28:19 - Trinity
John 10:30 - Trinity

1Cor 12:14 - Trinity (written by Paul)
Romans 1:4 - Trinity (written by Paul)
2Cor 13:14 - Trinity (written by Paul)
Ephesians 4:4 - Trinity (written by Paul)
1Peter 1:2 - Trinity (written by Peter)
Jude 20,21 - Trinity (written by Jude aka Thaddeus)

It requires a man with 1/2 a brain to see it, and I'm guessing you're not that.

The half-brain might see a Trinity in those text but with the full brain exposure then none of those say or show any "trinity" at all.

The claim of a "trinity" is simply not a Bible concept.

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by VoteJP

The half-brain might see a Trinity in those text but with the full brain exposure then none of those say or show any "trinity" at all.

The claim of a "trinity" is simply not a Bible concept.

Well if you think so, then I suggest you start wearing a yarmulke and phylactery or start praying toward Mecca and reciting the shahada.

[libby]

Originally Posted by VoteJP

I did not listen to Bennits either as the link was way to confusing with way to much anti-Catholic stuff and no way of finding the topic you were telling us to see.

I already know the Catholics do not represent the original Church, but I find the Catholics will be judged on Judgment Day by their own merits whether right or wrong.

The Catholics of today will not be condemned for the sins in its beginning.


At the baptism we see all three (3) as distinct and separate and not as any mystical trinity.

The Father which art in Heaven and the Son down here on Earth and the Holy Spirit is not then given. And if one says that Jesus was given the Spirit at that time then that means He did not have it before that time so again they are all 3 separate.


So clearly it was not already there, and Jesus leaving and the Spirit coming means two (2) separate entities traveling in 2 separate direction and 2 separate places. Not one trinity.


They are one in agreement and one in harmony, and if He and the Father were literally one (1) then they forgot to add the Holy Spirit into that equation to make it 3 as in trinity.

The "Trinity" concept is a wrong interpretation being forced into scriptural text that do not say anything supporting the concept of a trinity.

A "trinity" is not in the Bible and it was never a message from the Bible.

In fact the "trinity" doctrine is a creation by the Catholic Church, as a way of explaining what they did not understand.

Mormon theology I guess.

[Marie]

Originally Posted by libby

Uh, yeah. I'm going to bother listening to an ex-priest whose front page of his website says "abuse by papal AntiChrist". Think maybe he's got an ax to grind?

Hi Libby,
I never been to his website, and just the fact that’s he's an ex priest, there’s probably a reason, but does that mean he's wrong? Or wrong about every topic. I have to admit that if I were you I would be guarded and probably have some presuppositions in listening to it, but don’t you find it the least bit curious why someone who embraced a tradition so whole heartily to subscribe to celibacy and become a priest would then move away from it. Wouldn’t you be the least bit curious as to why? It’s been a long time since I heard the talk so I don’t know if he takes any cheap shots, but I do recall I was really surprised to learn about this group.
If I dont listen to what you say or believe, how could I ever evaluate it? I see it as educational. I did by the way read this web page to see what the RC position was on the Waldenses who assume they are the same as the Vaudios. Who Were the Waldenses?



Really it would be nice if there was a group that never went along with the Jones, but in reality it doesn’t matter. What matters is that there were those courageous enough to stand for what they believe and say enough and its time for the universal church to stand up and do it again as both sides of the isle are way to caught up in Man centered traditions and church growth strategies. It's time to get back to the sovereignty of God and his way of doing things and stand up against the culture overthrow of the church and reform it but one more time!
Its' time for the church to be a leader of the culture rather than being lead by it, and poisoned from it!

[Marie]

Originally Posted by VoteJP

The half-brain might see a Trinity in those text but with the full brain exposure then none of those say or show any "trinity" at all.

The claim of a "trinity" is simply not a Bible concept.

Hey whats with the insult? You can express yourself without resorting to that.
Think of the trinity as a demension a demension is something in and of itself but is comprised of three independant things that make it up Lenght, width and height. Just because the word isnt in scripture the concept clearly is.
Attached are some guildlines that may help you interact with others!

Guide to Quality Discussion

Forum postings are notoriously difficult to do. The temptation to pose questions that are
answered with a simple "yes" or "no" is very difficult to overcome. Moreover, it is all too easy to
fall into the trap of posting a simplistic reply along the lines of "I agree" or "That’s a good
point." At the same time, reading the tone of someone else’s post—particularly when they
disagree with your perspective—can and often does lead to finger pointing and sometimes anger
and name calling. In order to have a quality online education experience, my desire is for you to
avoid those pitfalls. Instead, you might be able to use some of these model questions to build off
someone else's posting or subsequent contribution.

General principles

1. Any question must be open ended. (It must not call for a binary (yes/no) answer.)
2. It must evidence additional thought and/or additional research on your part.
3. It must to invite continuing thought and/or research by the others unless it is a summary
statement posted to conclude a long discussion.
4. Point out apparent flaws in others thinking indirectly by asking them to explain
themselves, or by pointing out some possible contradiction.
5. All contributions must gracious and not hostile, even if you strongly disagree.

Call for a display of thinking or feeling:

1. To what extent would you agree that …?
2. What are some ways …?
3. What evidence do you have for …?
4. What are your reasons for …?
5. How would you answer the objection that …?
6. What examples would you cite to support your statement that …?
7. What sources would you cite to support your statement that …?
8. How do you see your idea about … working out in … situation?
9. How do you feel about …? [Name something in the readings, current events, or the class
postings.]
10. What reasons do you have for saying …?
11. Why do you agree (or disagree) on that point?
12. How are you defining the term "…" as you just used it?
13. What do you mean by that expression "…"?
14. How is what you are saying here consistent with what you said before?
15. Please clarify what you mean by "…".
16. What are you implying when you say "…"?
17. It appears that you and … are contradicting each other. Please expand your remarks to
show how you do agree, or explain the basis of you disagreement.
18. It seems to me like you are contradicting yourself on the issue of …. Please explain how
you are able to resolve the tension between … and ….

Extending or summarizing statements:

1. I think I would summarize our discussion here by saying ….

2. Another issue that we should probably discuss here is …. [Now make an opening
statement on that issue.]
3. Another resource I found helpful on this topic is …. [Now explain why and how it is
helpful.]
4. What we are discussing here seem to me to apply to [name some current event in your
church/area/country/world]. [Now state how you see it applying.]
5. I am wondering if the converse of this is also true/valid. It seems to me that ….
6. Another position that might be valid could be ….

Calls for clarification:

1. Will someone please help me understand the distinction between … and …?
2. I don't understand what you mean by …. Will you please explain?

[libby]

Originally Posted by Marie

Hi Libby,
I never been to his website, and just the fact that’s he's an ex priest, there’s probably a reason, but does that mean he's wrong? Or wrong about every topic. I have to admit that if I were you I would be guarded and probably have some presuppositions in listening to it, but don’t you find it the least bit curious why someone who embraced a tradition so whole heartily to subscribe to celibacy and become a priest would then move away from it. Wouldn’t you be the least bit curious as to why? It’s been a long time since I heard the talk so I don’t know if he takes any cheap shots, but I do recall I was really surprised to learn about this group.
If I dont listen to what you say or believe, how could I ever evaluate it? I see it as educational. I did by the way read this web page to see what the RC position was on the Waldenses who assume they are the same as the Vaudios. Who Were the Waldenses?



Really it would be nice if there was a group that never went along with the Jones, but in reality it doesn’t matter. What matters is that there were those courageous enough to stand for what they believe and say enough and its time for the universal church to stand up and do it again as both sides of the isle are way to caught up in Man centered traditions and church growth strategies. It's time to get back to the sovereignty of God and his way of doing things and stand up against the culture overthrow of the church and reform it but one more time!
Its' time for the church to be a leader of the culture rather than being lead by it, and poisoned from it!

Not a priest who enters into a discussion by calling the Church, the AntiChrist. No, he shows no respect so he gets none, end of story. There are plenty of ex-Catholics who had fundamental, and honest, disagreements with Church doctrine, disciplines, what-have-you. With them a dialogue can be had, as well as understanding.

but don’t you find it the least bit curious why someone who embraced a tradition so whole heartily to subscribe to celibacy and become a priest would then move away from it. Wouldn’t you be the least bit curious as to why?

No, because he was clearly to immature, selfish and mindless to enter into his vows with full understanding. We are each responsible for our own relationship with Jesus Christ, and he clearly did not fulfill his obligation before making his promises.
He was an adult and should have been more thoughtful in his discernment process.