I am on myspace profile 2.0,
i am trying to cross out something but <s> isn’t working i was just wondering if there is another way to do it?
<s> doesn’t work for me, eitherr.
try <strike>, it might work, but im not entirely suure.
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 22 2009 | Cross | 2 Comments »
What does the Bible teach about the Trinity?
Is the doctrine of the Trinity found in the Bible?
How is the trinity not tritheism?
The most difficult thing about the Christian concept of the Trinity is that there is no way to adequately explain it. The Trinity is a concept that is impossible for any human being to fully understand, let alone explain. God is infinitely greater than we are; therefore, we should not expect to be able to fully understand Him. The Bible teaches that the Father is God, that Jesus is God, and that the Holy Spirit is God. The Bible also teaches that there is only one God. Though we can understand some facts about the relationship of the different Persons of the Trinity to one another, ultimately, it is incomprehensible to the human mind. However, this does not mean the Trinity is not true or that it is not based on the teachings of the Bible.
The Trinity is one God existing in three Persons. Understand that this is not in any way suggesting three Gods. Keep in mind when studying this subject that the word “Trinity” is not found in Scripture. This is a term that is used to attempt to describe the triune God—three coexistent, co-eternal Persons who make up God. Of real importance is that the concept represented by the word “Trinity” does exist in Scripture. The following is what God’s Word says about the Trinity:
1) There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; 1 Corinthians 8:4; Galatians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:5).
2) The Trinity consists of three Persons (Genesis 1:1, 26; 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8, 48:16, 61:1; Matthew 3:16-17, 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14). In Genesis 1:1, the Hebrew plural noun Elohim is used. In Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, the plural pronoun for “us” is used. The word Elohim and the pronoun “us” are plural forms, definitely referring in the Hebrew language to more than two. While this is not an explicit argument for the Trinity, it does denote the aspect of plurality in God. The Hebrew word for God, Elohim, definitely allows for the Trinity.
In Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1, the Son is speaking while making reference to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Compare Isaiah 61:1 to Luke 4:14-19 to see that it is the Son speaking. Matthew 3:16-17 describes the event of Jesus’ baptism. Seen in this passage is God the Holy Spirit descending on God the Son while God the Father proclaims His pleasure in the Son. Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are examples of three distinct persons in the Trinity.
3) The members of the Trinity are distinguished one from another in various passages. In the Old Testament, “LORD” is distinguished from “Lord” (Genesis 19:24; Hosea 1:4). The LORD has a Son (Psalm 2:7, 12; Proverbs 30:2-4). The Spirit is distinguished from the “LORD” (Numbers 27:18) and from “God” (Psalm 51:10-12). God the Son is distinguished from God the Father (Psalm 45:6-7; Hebrews 1:8-9). In the New Testament, Jesus speaks to the Father about sending a Helper, the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17). This shows that Jesus did not consider Himself to be the Father or the Holy Spirit. Consider also all the other times in the Gospels where Jesus speaks to the Father. Was He speaking to Himself? No. He spoke to another person in the Trinity—the Father.
4) Each member of the Trinity is God. The Father is God (John 6:27; Romans 1:7; 1 Peter 1:2). The Son is God (John 1:1, 14; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8; 1 John 5:20). The Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4; 1 Corinthians 3:16).
5) There is subordination within the Trinity. Scripture shows that the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Father and the Son, and the Son is subordinate to the Father. This is an internal relationship and does not deny the deity of any person of the Trinity. This is simply an area which our finite minds cannot understand concerning the infinite God. Concerning the Son see Luke 22:42, John 5:36, John 20:21, and 1 John 4:14. Concerning the Holy Spirit see John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7, and especially John 16:13-14.
6) The individual members of the Trinity have different tasks. The Father is the ultimate source or cause of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; Revelation 4:11); divine revelation (Revelation 1:1); salvation (John 3:16-17); and Jesus’ human works (John 5:17, 14:10). The Father initiates all of these things.
The Son is the agent through whom the Father does the following works: the creation and maintenance of the universe (1 Corinthians 8:6; John 1:3; Colossians 1:16-17); divine revelation (John 1:1, 16:12-15; Matthew 11:27; Revelation 1:1); and salvation (2 Corinthians 5:19; Matthew 1:21; John 4:42). The Father does all these things through the Son, who functions as His agent.
The Holy Spirit is the means by whom the Father does the following works: creation and maintenance of the universe (Genesis 1:2; Job 26:13; Psalm 104:30); divine revelation (John 16:12-15; Ephesians 3:5; 2 Peter 1:21); salvation (John 3:6; Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 1:2); and Jesus’ works (Isaiah 61:1; Acts 10:38). Thus the Father does all these things by the power of the Holy Spirit.
There have been many attempts to develop illustrations of the Trinity. However, none of the popular illustrations are completely accurate. The egg (or apple) fails in that the shell, white, and yolk are parts of the egg, not the egg in themselves, just as the skin, flesh, and seeds of the apple are parts of it, not the apple itself. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not parts of God; each of them is God. The water illustration is somewhat better, but it still fails to adequately describe the Trinity. Liquid, vapor, and ice are forms of water. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not forms of God, each of them is God. So, while these illustrations may give us a picture of the Trinity, the picture is not entirely accurate. An infinite God cannot be fully described by a finite illustration.
The doctrine of the Trinity has been a divisive issue throughout the entire history of the Christian church. While the core aspects of the Trinity are clearly presented in God’s Word, some of the side issues are not as explicitly clear. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God—but there is only one God. That is the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Beyond that, the issues are, to a certain extent, debatable and non-essential. Rather than attempting to fully define the Trinity with our finite human minds, we would be better served by focusing on the fact of God’s greatness and His infinitely higher nature. “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?” (Romans 11:33-34).
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 13 2009 | Bible | 14 Comments »
What if someone agrees with some Catholic beleifs, and some protestant beleifs? Weather it’s more in one direction, or the other, is there anything that’s halfway between the two? What if you don’t agree 100% with any branch of Christianity?
Although I can appreciate the desire for peace in your answer, I think we have to explore the issue more deeply to find the right answer.
The divide between the two Christian categories isn’t simply a matter of Catholic-slash-Protestant, as if the Protestant side of the fence contains multiple denominations that all agree on and believe the same doctrines. They don’t. Every single Protestant sect exists because one side disagrees with the other. They each claim the Bible as their sole authority, but they ironically believe different things yet each one has God’s "true" teachings (because they were all inspired by the same Holy Spirit Who taught different doctrines to each one).
So if a person is trying to piece together different beliefs from each Protestant sect, and even from the Catholic Church, too, the only thing they would be accomplishing is setting up another different version of Christianity, the same thing that every other Protestant sect has done before them 30,000+ times since the Reformation.
The main issue between Catholics and Protestants is authority. Protestants stand by the Bible as their singular and only source of divine authority. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, operates on the authority given to Her by Christ. So for Protestants to leave their position, they would have to acknowledge, accept, and submit to the Pope; for Catholics to leave theirs, they would have to abandon 2,000 years of Sacred Tradition and Christian history by taking on the Lutheran doctrine of sola scriptura (Bible-alone), which in effect would make them #30,001+.
The fact remains, however – and the reason why I converted to Catholicism – is that the Bible-only doctrine is unscriptural, unhistorical, and illogical. It’s unscriptural because the Bible simply doesn’t teach it, nor did any of the early Christians believe or teach it either. It’s unhistorical for several reasons, one of which is the Church existed before the Bible, not the Bible before the Church. It’s illogical because it places interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures in the hands of the individual; when disputes arise, there is no definite way to resolve it because all attempts revert everything back to the opinion of the person, to what they think the scripture means; this causes denominational splits, which is concretely evidenced by the thousands of competing and conflicting Protestant denominations already described above.
The fact remains that Jesus founded one Church, taught one Gospel, and meant for all Christians to be one is everything: prayer, worship, belief, doctrine, etc. Protestantism contradicts His command.
I do keep in mind, however, that despite the differences between Catholics and non-Catholics, each and all are Christians. We are brothers and sisters in the faith, and should love each other as Christ commanded us to. Therefore, we should continue working and praying together and for each other so that one day, we can finally achieve the unity that our Lord intended at the beginning and still intends.
God bless.
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 13 2009 | Protestant | 29 Comments »
Are both Christen, what are the beliefs of Roman Catholic, life after death, absolute, Gods.
The "Roman" suffix is a post reformation tag that most latin rite Catholics still don’t accept.
I am a Catholic, I adhere to the precepts contained in the "Catechism of the Catholic Church"
(no Roman suffix) which are too numerous to mention in this forum, but are freely available to access on-line for the interested student of Catholicism. You may also want to consider enrolling in an RCIA program at your local Catholic church to learn more.
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 13 2009 | Catholic | 14 Comments »
I’m a senior deciding what college to go to and want to major in graphic design but also have the christian community. Any ideas?
http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2009/10/to-school-or-not-to-school/
http://www.oc.edu/
http://www.guidetoonlineschools.com/graphic_design_info.html
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 13 2009 | Christian | 1 Comment »
i caused a problem with my past girlfriend and her friend, which is now my girlfriend.(after several months of being single) and i was needing some bible verses that have to do with someone helping someone else that they hurt.
thanks, God Bless!
here’s a little advice from your bible and how your teachings contradict.
Deuteronomy 12:27
And thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, upon the altar of the LORD thy God: and the blood of thy sacrifices shall be poured out upon the altar of the LORD thy God, and thou shalt eat the flesh.
V Thou shalt not kill.
Jehova commits murder:
Exodus 23:27
I will send my fear before thee, and will destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come, and I will make all thine enemies turn their backs unto thee.
Jehova orders the murder of thousands:
Exodus 32:27-28
And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.
28 And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.
Jehova orders his people to commit more murder:
Leviticus 26:7-8
And ye shall chase your enemies, and they shall fall before you by the sword.
8 And five of you shall chase an hundred, and an hundred of you shall put ten thousand to flight: and your enemies shall fall before you by the sword.
It is more than obvious, the "lord" thinks nothing of murder or ordering others to commit murder:
Numbers 1:51
And when the tabernacle setteth forward, the Levites shall take it down: and when the tabernacle is to be pitched, the Levites shall set it up: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.
Murder is so important to jehova, he has to repeat himself:
Numbers 3:10 And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait on their priest’s office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.
More murder- The people were hungry and without food:
Numbers 11:1 And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.
11:2 And the people cried unto Moses; and when Moses prayed unto the LORD, the fire was quenched. More mass murder at the hands of the "lord:"
Numbers 21:3 And the LORD hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah. Now, we have cannibalism under the direction of jehova:
Numbers 23-24: Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion, and lift up himself as a young lion: he shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood of the slain.
Jehova orders more mass murder:
Numbers 25:16
And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 25:17 Vex the Midianites, and smite them:
Numbers 31:7 And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
31:8 And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.
31:9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.
31:10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.
31:11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.
Jehova commits more mass murder:
Deuteronomy 2:20
(That also was accounted a land of giants: giants dwelt therein in old time; and the Ammonites call them Zamzummims;
2:21 A people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; but the LORD destroyed them before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead:
2:22 As he did to the children of Esau, which dwelt in Seir, when he destroyed the Horims from before them; and they succeeded them, and dwelt in their stead even unto this day:
2:23 And the Avims which dwelt in Hazerim, even unto Azzah, the Caphtorims, which came forth out of Caphtor, destroyed them, and dwelt in their stead.)
2:30 But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day.
2:31 And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee: begin to possess, that thou mayest inherit his land.
2:32 Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz.
2:33 And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people.
2:34 And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain:
2:35 Only the cattle we took for a prey unto ourselves, and the spoil of the cities which we took.
2:36 From Aroer, which is
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 10 2009 | Bible | 2 Comments »
If so why? They were not technically part of the Protestant reformation, so why are they considered a Protestant church?
The Church of England and its international adherents ("The Anglican Communion" – including the Episcopal Church of the USA) are indeed Protestant. As the word "Protestant" comes from "protest," it refers to the separation of denominations which protested the central authority of the Roman Catholic Church (the Vatican and the pope). Thus "Protestant" refers to more than Luther’s separation based on liturgical practice and theory. Calvin, Hus, and others split with Rome on issues of liturgy, theology, freedom to disagree, etc., creating what became known as the Reformation.
The English "Reformation" came about because of primarily political issues, mainly the refusal of the pope to grant the king of England an annulment of his marriage. Although the annulment was sought on canonical grounds, it was not for purely canonical issues that the C of E departed from Roman authority. England had long been a force for advancing change in the Roman Catholic Church, and in fact the pope who refused any accommodation with Luther was elected pope by only one vote over an English cardinal who was a supporter of Lutheran-style reforms.
After the split from Rome, the C of E adopted many positions in common with the Lutheran and Calvinist reformed churches and stipulated doctrinally that "The Church of Rome hath erred."
Thus the Church of England and the Anglican Communion like to style themselves as "the only church that is both truly catholic and truly reformed."
Edit: Not all non-Roman Catholic churches are Protestant. The Eastern Churches (e.g., Orthodox and Coptic) are not Protestant. They retain many attributes of the R.C. church – for example, the Coptic Church has its own pope, Pope Shenouda, but disagree on basic issues of theology and doctrine. The term "Protestant" is usually reserved for those denominations which split from Rome after about 1500, and is applicable only to those churches which call themselves Protestant.
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 10 2009 | Protestant | 5 Comments »
What is the significance of this? Do "post-Easter" crosses have a place in your religious art and Jewelry too?
To Whom It May Concern: If you really want to completely lose my respect, post something anti-Catholic.
The significance is nearly as old as the faith itself — it is a constant reminder of what Jesus suffered for us. It was also a teaching tool to show converts (who were not literate, or where language barriers existed) in the form of paintings and sculpture — again, the horrible death Jesus suffered for us. It’s also a unifying symbol; a way to recognize a brother or sister in Christ on sight.
"Post Easter" crosses (I am assuming you mean the Risen Christ, or a plain cross) can also be worn, kept in the house, etc — but it really is the Crucifix that reminds us of His sacrifice.
Actually Priscilla, I read last year something from the Vatican about those Risen Christ crosses, and how they shouldn’t be used. It’ll be an easy internet search if you are interested.
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 10 2009 | Catholic | 7 Comments »
I’ve heard Christian, married, women on occasion say that their husbands provide a spiritual covering for them. I’ve always wondered what exactly that means. Any thoughts or insights?
I have heard this as well and not sure what they mean, none have explained to my satisfaction…my husband is a good man but not a Godly man…
1 Corinthians 11: 3-5
[3] But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
[4] Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
{"who is the mans head? verse 3 said its Christ…the man must not cover his head(Christ) while praying or prophesying or he will dishonor Christ"…}
[5] But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
{"who is the woman’s head? verse 3 said its the man…the woman must cover her head(man)while praying or prophesying or she will dishonor man…}
{a man praying or prophesying covering Christ is trying to get to the Father without the Son…a woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered is putting her husband(head) before or trying to go through her head/husband to get to Christ…}
1 Corinthians 7:12-15
[12] But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
[13] And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
[14] For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
[15] But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
{ I think sanctified and covered are the same or close to the same…we can not give our husband or wife salvation…we can be a tool, for Christ to use in their life to draw them close or to show them the way, thus helping Christ bring them into the flock…women are the weaker of the sexes that is shown throughout the scripture and in our lives as well…men are stronger and more able to make decision not based on emotion, we women tined to be lead by emotion…there are times we need our husbands strength and there are times our husband needs our softness, see we balance each other, just as God intended…}
always nosnod
if you see it in a different light please let me know, I am always open to learning what my Lord has in store for me…
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 10 2009 | Christian | 5 Comments »
I’m guessing Esther and those historical books.
Can you give me the bible books that are proven to be true? Or in other words, really happened in the past?
Genesis through Deuteronomy were written in the format of an ancient treaty. Much of the text is descriptive, but all that is narrative is historically accurate. Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, Nehemiah, Ezra are also historical and have been verified to be such. The Gospels have been strongly verified.
In fact, one of the greatest middle eastern archeologists of the 20th Century, WF Albright wrote, "there is nothing but prejudice against the documents of the Old and New Testaments."
powered by Yahoo Answers
December 08 2009 | Bible | 11 Comments »