[continued from previous message]   
      
   Liar. There is only a single, solitary God Being. To contend otherwise   
   is to promote idolatry. Three distinct persons, one God. You struggle   
   with that because you insist that God must not exceed your comprehension.   
      
      
   > They are ‘as one’.   
      
      
   Notice that he is the one who now pretends to quote when he's actually   
   just citing his own words, not Scripture. The Bible does not God is "as"   
   one, but just that He is "one". There is no other God beside Him. You   
   promote idolatry.   
      
      
   > Unified. Like a husband and wife are ‘one’.   
      
      
   Again, you try to reduce God to something you can understand and can   
   explain. You are trying to confuse relational unity with singularity of   
   essence or Being. There is only One God Being, not three united God   
   beings. To contend otherwise is to promote idolatry.   
      
      
   > And that is what the word of   
   > God speaks to their relationship,   
      
      
   Now you admit you're talking about the relationship of the three   
   persons, not the essence or Being. You're trying to confuse relationship   
   with essence.   
      
      
   > yet the Husband is the one in authority or   
   > the ‘head’ of the family. And Yes, this is established by God. It is   
   > indeed His understanding and specified as such.   
      
      
   This is relational unity, not unity of Being. The Father, Son, and   
   Spirit have relational unity, but they also have singularity of essence.   
   There is only one single, solitary Being in existence, who is God. There   
   are not three relationally united God Beings. You promote idolatry.   
      
      
   >> They are One Spirit, One Lord, and One God, but God placed separation in   
   >> Himself to allow us to become One with Him. Think of the Red Sea   
   >> parting, One Sea, but God opened the way for the Israelites, but at no   
   >> point did it ever change from being One Red Sea.   
   >   
   > That is what you call human understanding, for which you criticize me if I do   
   > so.   
      
      
   Notice how quickly and easily you recognize human understanding when   
   someone else uses it, but you are completely blind to your own human   
   understanding and reasoning in this matter.   
      
   • You've said "as One", when the Bible says "one". That's your reasoning   
   and understanding, not what Scripture reveals.   
      
   • You've tried to limit God's Being to what you understand about human   
   relationships.   
      
   • You've tried to claim to the effect that God promised you all   
   knowledge about Himself, when it actually says knowledge about the   
   "things" that God freely gives us to understand.   
      
   • Most idolatrously, you appear to flat out claim there is not only a   
   single God Being, but three God Beings who are simply relationallly   
   united. That's your reasoning, not what the Bible teaches.   
      
      
   > And to cover what you missed here, there was dry land between the two,   
   > thus separating the waters. The barrier was in place as real and fixed as if   
   > their was a mountain separating the two waters.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> Why then did Jesus, after he was resurrected tell Mary I go to see My God   
   >>> and Your God?   
   >>   
   >> You are too caught up in the materialism, in the idea you can contain   
   >> God in your mind.   
      
      
   That statement is correct.   
      
      
   > Not at all.   
      
      
   Yes, entirely.   
      
   > You are trying to rationalize with your mind, things that are   
   > spiritual, and then have confusion because you are unfamiliar with the things   
   > of the spirit, which all men are are limited because we see through a glass   
   > darkly.   
      
      
   No. It's you in this case. See above.   
      
      
   > “Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my   
   > Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father,   
   > and your Father; and to my God, and your God.” (Jhn 20:17, KJV)   
   >   
   > That scripture is as true now as the last time it was pointed out to you.   
      
      
   Yes. And it doesn't teach what you're claiming. It appears you believe   
   in three God Beings who are simply relationally united like a husband   
   and wife. The Bible says there is only one God Being, and none beside   
   Him. There are not three God Beings. Only one.   
      
      
   >> The Red Sea was simply coming back together.   
   >   
   > It was rejoined and in doing so it judged the Egyptians.   
   > Like Jesus, it was the path, the way, Through which Salvation to the   
   > Israelites was provided, yet many which were saved returned to their old ways   
   > and so they died, never receiving the Promised Land. Jesus is also the one   
   > who judges all men. As those people fell, that were saved Via doubt and   
   > disbelief, so it is with many in the church today, and for that reason Jesus   
   > said, ...   
   >   
   > Luk 21:34 (KJV) And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be   
   > overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and   
   > sothat day come upon you unawares.   
   >   
   > Luk 21:35 (KJV) For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the   
   > face of the whole earth.   
   >   
   > Luk 21:36 (KJV) Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted   
   > worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand   
   > before the Son of man.   
   >   
   >>   
   >>> Who was the ‘US’, in “let us make man in ‘our’ image?   
   >>   
   >> One God.   
      
   Correct.   
      
   >> You are trying to capture God in material terms; you can't, it   
   >> is impossible because He is more than material terms. Why do you need   
   >> the scriptures to mean what you want them to mean to walk with God?   
      
      
   In this case, that is correct.   
      
      
   > Gen 1:26 (KJV) And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our   
   > likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the   
   > fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every   
   > creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.   
   >   
   > Notice the “ in and our ” statements that Jesus made. Not man, Did God   
   > really not mean to say that? Is that what you are suggesting?   
      
      
   Three persons, one Being. Not three God Beings who are but relationally   
   united.   
      
      
   > Perhaps this is a good time to again say, what does the word God mean, how   
   > many meanings are there to the word. And when does it mean Master, Elohim,   
   > YHWH, Satan, a JUDGE, At one time Elohim was used loosely in a generic sense   
   > by man who worshipped what they called gods and called them Elohim. This is a   
   > topic you should study.   
      
      
   There are things about God which we only know of from the Old Testament   
   to be sure. But the New Testament gives us the fuller picture and the   
   more detailed information on God's nature. Any time someone flees from   
   New Testament Revelation to Old Testament revelation to make a case   
   about God which He cannot make from the more progressive revelation of   
   the New Testament, it is a red flag pointing to error. The fact you're   
   trying to make your case from the Old Testament, rather than the light   
   of the New Testament, is a sign that you're trying to read your own   
   theology about God into the Bible, contrary to what the New Testament says.   
      
      
   >> Was there two Gods in the garden with Adam and Eve?   
   >   
   > There was the God of this earth, Who walked with them, and there was also the   
   > Heavenly Father, the “Ancient One” as written in the OT. But it was only   
   > Jesus who walked with them.   
      
   [...]   
      
      
   >>> Is it necessary that the Holy Spirit repeat all that resides in Scripture   
   to   
   >>> your in order for you to believe them?   
   >>   
   >> Perhaps you don't, as yet, have the understanding the Lord would have   
   >> you have?   
   >   
   > If you knew all things then there would be nothing new to reveal to you.   
      
      
   • If you could see everything, there would be nothing left to show you.   
      
   • If you understood every language, there would be nothing you couldn’t   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)