The Trinity

[Rosenritter]

Oh, so is Hosea. All you got is Job.

Hos 1:10 KJV
(10) Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Close, but not exactly the same term. You wouldn't suggest that the "Son of God" should be read in the same sense be the "sons of God" either, right? Job and Genesis are our Old Testament examples. And when Peter refers to the days of Noah in Genesis, he says that spirits that were disobedient. That would be the New Testament lending support to that consistent meaning in the Old.

 

[glorydaz]

It is stupid to question that "sons of God" means "true believers" when Satan is counted among the sons of God? Please help us out Glory.

So Satan is "counted among" them? You really should learn to read instead of make the verses fit your theories.

 

[glorydaz]

Thank you for your participation in this challenge!

A challenge you were to afraid to even address. :chuckle:

 

[Rosenritter]

Oh, so is Hosea. All you got is Job.

Hos 1:10 KJV
(10) Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Close, but not exactly the same term. You wouldn't suggest that the "Son of God" should be read in the same sense be the "sons of God" either, right? Job and Genesis are our Old Testament examples. And when Peter refers to the days of Noah in Genesis, he says that spirits that were disobedient. That would be the New Testament lending support to that consistent meaning in the Old.

 

[glorydaz]

Hos 1:10 KJV
(10) Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Oh, so sons of the living God is not the same as sons of God. Got it. :chuckle:

And when Peter refers to the days of Noah in Genesis, he says that spirits that were disobedient. That would be the New Testament lending support to that consistent meaning in the Old.

So you're claiming those "spirits" were angels? He preached to the disobedient "ANGELS". :chuckle:

1 Peter 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.​

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

So you do not believe in Father, Son, Holy Spirit?

Define believe in. :yawn:

 

[Bright Raven]

Define believe in. :yawn:

He is asking if you believe in the Trinity. If I remember correctly the answer is no.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Hos 1:10 KJV
(10) Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Close, but not exactly the same term. You wouldn't suggest that the "Son of God" should be read in the same sense be the "sons of God" either, right? Job and Genesis are our Old Testament examples. And when Peter refers to the days of Noah in Genesis, he says that spirits that were disobedient. That would be the New Testament lending support to that consistent meaning in the Old.

Are you sayin' that back when them morning stars, (Jesus and Lucifer) sang together that they were not sons and had no Father?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

He is asking if you believe in the Trinity. If I remember correctly the answer is no.

I can't tell.

 

[Rosenritter]

Oh, so sons of the living God is not the same as sons of God. Got it. :chuckle:



So you're claiming those "spirits" were angels? He preached to the disobedient "ANGELS". :chuckle:

1 Peter 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.​

"Ye are the sons of the living God" is not used in the same sense as "the sons of God." Likewise "the Son of God' is not one of the "sons of God." If you were making a case that Jesus was merely "a follower of God" you might be able to make that argument consistently that these were interchangeable, but I don't think that you are.

If you read the passage from Peter more precisely, it does not say that Jesus was preaching. It says that his death and quickening by the spirit preached onto those rebellious spirits. Not "bible-thumping soul saving preaching" but where preach is used in its fuller form of "proclaimed." And yes, I would count those as rebellious angels.

 

[Rosenritter]

Are you sayin' that back when them morning stars, (Jesus and Lucifer) sang together that they were not sons and had no Father?

"The morning stars" would not be the same as "the morning star" just as the "Son of God" is not the same as "sons of God."

Lucifer would be among those sons of God, and God would be the father of spirits. As for using the titles "the Father" and "the Son" ... God hadn't used those titles yet, they weren't applicable.

 

[God's Truth]

"Ye are the sons of the living God" is not used in the same sense as "the sons of God." Likewise "the Son of God' is not one of the "sons of God." If you were making a case that Jesus was merely "a follower of God" you might be able to make that argument consistently that these were interchangeable, but I don't think that you are.

If you read the passage from Peter more precisely, it does not say that Jesus was preaching. It says that his death and quickening by the spirit preached onto those rebellious spirits. Not "bible-thumping soul saving preaching" but where preach is used in its fuller form of "proclaimed." And yes, I would count those as rebellious angels.

Soul sleep believers falsely teach that the spirits in prison that Jesus preached the gospel to are not spirits of men, that they are fallen angels. 1 Peter 4:6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.

However, the scriptures say Jesus preached to those who are now dead. Angels do not die. Furthermore, why would those angels live according to God concerning the spirit? Do the angels who left their post have another chance at salvation? Salvation has been given to humans.

 

[glorydaz]

"Ye are the sons of the living God" is not used in the same sense as "the sons of God." Likewise "the Son of God' is not one of the "sons of God." If you were making a case that Jesus was merely "a follower of God" you might be able to make that argument consistently that these were interchangeable, but I don't think that you are.

If you read the passage from Peter more precisely, it does not say that Jesus was preaching. It says that his death and quickening by the spirit preached onto those rebellious spirits. Not "bible-thumping soul saving preaching" but where preach is used in its fuller form of "proclaimed." And yes, I would count those as rebellious angels.

It amazes me the lengths you will go to..... At this point, your scraping the bottom of the barrel is getting irritating. :nono:

 

[glorydaz]

"The morning stars" would not be the same as "the morning star" just as the "Son of God" is not the same as "sons of God."

Lucifer would be among those sons of God, and God would be the father of spirits. As for using the titles "the Father" and "the Son" ... God hadn't used those titles yet, they weren't applicable.

opcorn:

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Lucifer would be among those sons of God, and God would be the father of spirits. As for using the titles "the Father" and "the Son" ... God hadn't used those titles yet, they weren't applicable.

Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His son's name? Surely you know!

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

"The morning stars" would not be the same as "the morning star" just as the "Son of God" is not the same as "sons of God."

Okay.

If one fell that only leaves one.

 

[Rosenritter]

Okay.

If one fell that only leaves one.

I know that Luciferianism considers Jesus and Lucifer to be brothers.

* Edit * ... but we are told in the New Testament that Jesus created all things. That would include Lucifer. Therefore, Jesus is the "father of spirits" and certainly not one of the created "sons of God."

 

[Rosenritter]

Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His son's name? Surely you know!

One word answer to both questions: LORD

Or in other words, "Jesus is YHWH."

 

[Rosenritter]

Soul sleep believers falsely teach that the spirits in prison that Jesus preached the gospel to are not spirits of men, that they are fallen angels. 1 Peter 4:6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.

However, the scriptures say Jesus preached to those who are now dead. Angels do not die. Furthermore, why would those angels live according to God concerning the spirit? Do the angels who left their post have another chance at salvation? Salvation has been given to humans.

GE, if you would be a little more specific...

Care to attempt to apply context to 1 Peter 4:6 there?

Regardless, the word "preach" and "preached" is not limited to the narrow application of "attempting to persuade to salvation." It means proclaimed in its most base sense.

 

[Rosenritter]

It amazes me the lengths you will go to..... At this point, your scraping the bottom of the barrel is getting irritating. :nono:

Glorydaz, if you at any time are able to show me that I have been inconsistent with what I have said I believe, then please go ahead. This does not mean inconsistent with what you believe, but an internal inconsistency in practice or belief is more likely to be persuasive.