XPost: alt.christnet.christianlife, alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox   
   From: none@none.net   
      
   On 6/7/2019 7:58 AM, duckgumbo32@cox.net wrote:   
   > On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 17:36:05 -0500, Surrender the Name  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 6/5/2019 7:11 AM, duckgumbo32@cox.net wrote:   
   >>> On Mon, 03 Jun 2019 11:55:23 -0700, Robert  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Jun 3, 2019, Percival P. Cassidy wrote   
   >>>> (in article ):   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 6/1/19 9:46 PM, Robert wrote:   
   >>>>>> Yeah I know, knock your socks off Duke, Pat, Servant, Nick, any   
   particular   
   >>>>>> reason that Jesus never mentioned it?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Historian and science fiction writer H.G. Wells, in his noted workThe   
   >>>>>> Outline   
   >>>>>> of History, points out, “There is no evidence that the apostles of   
   Jesus   
   >>>>>> ever heard of the trinity—at any rate from him” (1920, Vol. 2, p.   
   499).   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Killer, eh?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Martin Luther, the RC German priest who initiated the Protestant   
   >>>>>> Reformation,   
   >>>>>> conceded, “It is indeed true that the name ‘Trinity’ is nowhere   
   to be   
   >>>>>> found in the Holy Scriptures, but has been conceived and invented by   
   man”   
   >>>>>> (reproduced in The Sermons of Martin Luther, John Lenker, editor, Vol.   
   3,   
   >>>>>> 1988, p. 406)   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism states: “Today, how-   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> ever, scholars generally agree that there is no doctrine of the Trinity   
   as   
   >>>>>> such in either the OT[Old Testament] or the NT [New Testament] . . . It   
   >>>>>> would   
   >>>>>> go far beyond the intention and thought-forms of the OT to suppose that   
   a   
   >>>>>> late-fourth-century or thirteenth-century Christian doctrine can be   
   found   
   >>>>>> there . . . Likewise, the NT does not contain an explicit doctrine of   
   the   
   >>>>>> Trinity”(Richard McBrien, general editor, 1995, “God,” pp.   
   564-565).   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, in its article on the Trinity,   
   explains:   
   >>>>>> “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New   
   >>>>>> Testament . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several cen-   
   turies   
   >>>>>> and   
   >>>>>> through many controversies . . . It was not until the 4th century that   
   the   
   >>>>>> distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a   
   single   
   >>>>>> orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons” (1985 edition,   
   >>>>>> Micropaedia, Vol. 11, p. 928).   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theologypoints out   
   that   
   >>>>>> “primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the   
   Trinity   
   >>>>>> such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds of the early church”   
   >>>>>> (Colin Brown, editor, Vol. 2, 1976, “God,” p. 84).   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> *************************************************   
   >>>>>> All Greek to me?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Many historians and religious scholars note that the ideas of the Greek   
   >>>>>> philosopher Plato influenced the development and acceptance of the   
   doctrine   
   >>>>>> of the Trinity.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> **************************************************   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Have you any proof to the contrary?   
   >>>>>> —   
   >>>>>> Hebrews 11:6   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You do know what the word "explicit" means, I assume?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Perce   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Of course.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Now “primitive” I would take issue with since there is no difference   
   then   
   >>>> and now regarding Salvation, or the operating abilities of the Holy   
   Spirit.   
   >>>> There is no sophistication improvements in our relationships with God, if   
   >>>> anything the god of this world has dumbed down the understanding and   
   >>>> expectations of the believer.   
   >>>   
   >>> Another stupid comment.   
   >>   
   >>    I disagree.   
   >>> There was no salvation until after the cross of the NT.   
   >   
   >>    Elias. Taken into Heaven.   
   >   
   > We have more revelation than the people living before the resurrection of   
   > Christ; we know the full picture. “In the past God spoke to our forefathers   
   > through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last   
   days   
   > he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and   
   > through whom he made the universe” (Hebrews 1:1-2).   
      
      God has not stopped speaking to those who "listen" for His voice. What   
      I have never been able to figure out is why those that claim to "hear"   
      His "voice" lose their way so often!   
      
      
   >   
   > Our salvation is still based on the death of Christ,   
      
      No..it is based on our new life in Jesus. We are a new creature now   
      with a very good future, thanks to God.   
      
      
      
      
   > our faith is still the   
   > requirement for salvation, and the object of our faith is still God. Today,   
   for   
   > us, the content of our faith is that Jesus Christ died for our sins, He was   
   > buried, and He rose the third day (1 Corinthians 15:3-4).   
      
      There is more that needs to be "heard" from the LORD. For those that   
   don't understand, listen not with your ears but with your mind and heart   
   working as One.   
      
      
      
   >   
   >>> You really should take some good lessons on scripture.   
   >>    We all should...   
   >   
   > Yep.   
   >   
   >   
   > the dukester   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)