Quote
This is (my) recap, comments... (and after this... it’s all I really can say.) I’ll read any rebuttals... but today at least, I can’t imagine what else I can say. My intention and desire is ONLY for the TRUTH. Disagree, of course, if you wish/will. It benefits no one for a circular ‘debate’ to ensue on this (either.)
None of us here believe you are purposely attempting to deceive us. The problem is one must first be able to discern between truth and error to express truth itself. Please don’t confuse the fact of attempting to be truthful, with truth itself.

Quote
the Denomination I am in is only one of other scattered believers (who knows how many... and where they’ve been, etc.) who have come to the same conclusion IN SPIRIT.... That Jesus Christ is FULLY and Completely God. ***
Does your Church have a web site? If not, PLEASE give us the DENOMINATIONAL name. It will assist us in determining the “philosophical” direction you are coming from and to more fully answer your concerns. At times you sound like a JW and others an Oneness. At times you embrace Modalism and at others you don’t. Then there is your Patripassianism. It is rather confusing to be honest. To add fuel to the fire there are some similarities you seem to have with SDA, Ellen G. White and others, as well.

Quote
You must understand the purpose/intent of the Athanasian Creed, in fact ALL of the Creeds and Confessions written by the Church (**** are you serious??? ****) and in doing so, that should satisfactorily answer your question.
Kathy, were Christians of yesteryear ever inspired by the Holy Spirit? Could they by the Spirit of all-mighty God even have been more educated in the things of Scripture then you or I? While their writings are “not” Scripture (and should not be held to the same level as Scripture), this does not mean that they are not truthful “at all.”

These men were NOT attempting to ADD to Scripture, but clearly interpret Scripture. Paul said there would not only be false doctrines of men (Eph 4:14; 1 Tim 6:3, etc.), but good doctrines (developed by man through the Holy Spirit; Deut 32:2; Job 11:4; Prov 4:2; Rom 16:17; 1 Tim 1:3, 1:10, 6:1; 2 Tim 4:3; Tit 1:9, 2:1, 7, 10; Heb 6:1) as well. In addition, there are good and necessary consequences developed from the study of Scripture, which are themselves “truth” as well.

To insinuate and attempt to justify that “every” Church confession and creed (etc.) that was ever developed is “heretical” (some are) is to deny that the Holy Spirit operated at all in the early Church. It literally denies God’s sovereignty in His Church. To think that ONLY Kathy has it all down right (?) is indeed puzzling; Have we had a period of silence from Christ to Kathy?

Quote
To deny that Jesus Christ IS Fully God... Completely God... Father/Son/Holy Spirit is Anti-Christ.
Jesus is also fully human. Is God the Father fully human? Is God the Holy Spirit fully human? Did God the Father DIE for you on Calvary? (A) If not, then there are different persons in the Godhead, (B) if so, then the universe was without "the God" of it for a period of time ("God is dead," Nitsch)? Which proposition is true, A or B? Pick one and defend it <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />

Quote
This is exactly what the Trinity doctrine does.
Where?

Quote
I asked “Is it possible to consider Jesus Christ too important in ‘the God-head’ ?” (Godhead, BTW is a mistranslation Greek/Platonic term that means ‘gods’... the correct translation IS ‘fully God.’)
The concept of the Godhead (Trinity) is evident in Scripture as early as the first chapter of the book of Genesis. The Hebrew word Elohim (translated "God" in Genesis 1:1) actually indicates more than one divine personality. This same plural form is used over 2,500 times in the OT. According to the Hebrew, in the account of creation recorded in the book of Genesis God speaks of the plurality of His own Person (Gen 1:26-27). Would you care to disprove the Hebrew plurality of the term? Which lexicon supports your view of the term?

Quote
Even though I know where you stand.. it would benefit your understanding, if you haven’t already done so, to read “The Two Babylons” by Alexander Hislop (who BTW was a Trinitarian)
Hislop’s articles have been discussed here before and found wanting. He exalts numerology above Scripture, etc.


Reformed and Always Reforming,