what I learned about oneness pentecostalism

[Lynx]

Please link to statement of faith for your church. thanks
Also links to those in your church is on a major Bible translation committee.
Links to your church'e Systematic Theology please.

Simple challenge: List what doctrines you believe, go to newadvent.org to find early church fathers really taught. After all they were taught by the Apostles.

I wouldn't do that if you paid me.

I am here on Christian chat forum to hang out and chat. I have no interest in debate and argument, as there is never any profit in them. But if I did as you requested, I would get nothing except arguments. There is no viable reason for me to do this, so I will not. Sorry..

But the OP for this thread stated some very wrong things, so I thought I should at least let y'all know that the initial premise for this whole conversation is incredibly off.

 

[TheLearner]

I skipped from p4 to p8, didn't miss a thing.
Are you guys done arguing yet, or are you gonna go another 8 pages?
This helps nobody.
The only thing I've learned is CC goes thru these fighting cycles every few months.
Who wants to be bothered with you after all this? I don't.

fighting? I only look for truth

 

[lrs68]

Jerome
“Seeing that a man, baptized in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, becomes a temple of the Lord, and that while the old abode is destroyed a new shrine is built for the Trinity, how can you say that sins can be remitted among the Arians without the coming of the Holy Ghost? How is a soul purged from its former stains which has not the Holy Ghost?” (Dialogue Against the Luciferians 6 [A.D. 382]).

I am merely pointing out that Jerome claims that the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew factually existed and he read it and documented it.

I am also pointing out that as the RCC CATECHISM claims, Jerome like the majority of others fall into the 4th century era when the singular baptism in the NAME was changed in the Church to the Titles.

 

[lrs68]

Jerome quotes passages from this Hebrew gospel in the following examples, in the first of which, attributed to Jesus, he adds a comment:

“A moment ago my mother, the Holy Spirit, took me up.” No one should be scandalized by this, since in Hebrew spirit is in the feminine gender, while in our language [Latin] it is masculine and in Greek it is neuter. There is no gender in the godhead. (Commentary on Isaiah, on 40:9)​

In the gospel according to the Hebrews…among the most grievous offences is this: “He who has grieved the spirit of his brother.” (Commentary on Ezekiel, on 18:7)​

The Lord says to his disciples: “Do not rejoice except when you look on your brother with love.” (Commentary on Ephesians, on 5:4)​

Theopolis actually was the first to make claim as the Spirit of God in the feminine recognition.

 

[lrs68]

18. Papias

Papias, the pupil of John, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia, wrote only five volumes, which he entitled Exposition of the words of our Lord, in which, when he had asserted in his preface that he did not follow various opinions but had the apostles for authority, he said I considered what Andrew and Peter said, what Philip, what Thomas, what James, what John, what Matthew or any one else among the disciples of our Lord, what also Aristion and the elder John, disciples of the Lord had said, not so much that I have their books to read, as that their living voice is heard until the present day in the authors themselves. It appears through this catalogue of names that the John who is placed among the disciples is not the same as the elder John whom he places after Aristion in his enumeration. This we say moreover because of the opinion mentioned above, where we record that it is declared by many that the last two epistles of John are the work not of the apostle but of the presbyter.

Papias is backed by Ireneaus in claiming the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was translated as best as others could.

They're making a claim that the Greek speaking leaders DID NOT KNOW Hebrew and just did their best translating to the Greek.

 

[Lynx]

See? Anything I might have said here would have been completely useless.

In fact what I have already said is proving to be completely useless...

 

[lrs68]

See? Anything I might have said here would have been completely useless.

In fact what I have already said is proving to be completely useless...

Depends!

I have connections to many theological seminars where the minutes are documented and turned into bullet statutes. And even though many of those participating in these seminars follow the triune concepts they still are well aware about their counterpart brothers who have purposely maligned and skewed idealism towards discounting what's evident in the Book of Acts and baptizing in the name of Jesus.

The one road block they cannot overcome is the historical accuracy of the RCC CATECHISM (which I've already presented).

So your claim is based upon fact.

 

[sevoldoG]

Well, it may be ancient doctrine, but I wholeheartedly follow the original doctrine of the New Testament, and that would be The Pauline Doctrine of Justification Solely by Faith.
You guys use many large words, and bring up subjects I’ve never heard of. Not to be a smart as, but I feel lucky that I haven’t.
But I will say that the spirit of God has changed my heart from preferring to see a human corpse hit on the side of the road instead of an animal, to I would die for a stranger without a second thought. I think I’m going to keep it simple and stick to my doctrine. You guys seem well informed, but, not all information is good information, but what is not good for some can be good for others if God so wills it to be worked that way.
When the divine truth is spoken you get a more precise dividing line between the children of God, and the “many”. And for God to use the term “many” the number turned away on the last day has got to be astronomical.
remember, there are two kinds of Christians: ones that believe that they are saved, and ones that believe and are saved.
You people are awesome and you will be in my prayers. God bless you and all you love.