Is It True?

[roman]

What on earth are you forgiving me for?

Isn't that just a little over the top? If you are going to be fair and honest, and sincere, you should be asking for forgiveness as much as extending it, in that these little exchanges with you are always bilateral, you having started this one and just called me a liar. You act as if you have been harmed instead of just annoyed.

This is exactly why I'm praying for you-----that God enlighten you. Because you have no idea of what you project in your posting. The messages I get from others on this board about you and against you[some lds] are proof of that to me, and no I will never share them with you.

I forgive you of your anger and milicious character assasinations that you sling out . I am not harmed by them nor do I feel like any kind of victim------but others are hurt and have said so--even on this thread---and you missed that too I already ask God for my forgiveness---I did not ask for yours because ---at least right now you won't give it.

I pray Gods blessing upon you, snow and hope you give things at least a minute of reflextion---and no I'm not innocent---and neither are you-------

[Traveler]

Because of the fall Adan (man) was cast out of the Garden of G-d and can only come unto the Father by the Messiah, who is the mediator, between man and G-d the Father. Using the "Creed" please demonstrate a single instance in the Old Testament of the necessary mediator for anything between man and G-d.

The scriptures are clear that there was no mediator between man and God in OT times-----so what is your point?

The scriptures are also clear that before Christ, the gentiles were without hope or promise and outside of Godsredemtion.

Even though-----in OT times we see types of mediators---Moses and Abraham come to mind. And people did come to God and have relationships with him in OT times dispite your claims-----if not explain Job--Noah---Elijah--and many more

This is an obvious missunderstanding of scripture. If there was no mediator between man and G-d in OT times then Jesus did not tell the trueh when he said no man can come unto the father but by Me! Unless the G-d of the OT is not G-d the Father.

The point is that Jesus is the mediator and the only G-d that can bring man to the Father. Since man was cut off from the Father through the fall - Jesus is the only L-rd and G-d.

As I said the Trinity denies the fall - for because of the fall man must have a mediator with G-d the Father. According to the OT man does not need a mediator to come unto G-d. The reason is so simple. The G-d of the OT is Jesus and man needs no mediator to come unto G-d the Son who is Jesus Christ. The mediator is only needed for man to have relationship with the Father.

I know because of things in our past you look for every opportunity to widen the devide between us but I believe the truth is that for man to receive anything from the Father or for man to enjoy enything of the Father - it can only be by dirrect mediation of Jesus Christ - G-d the Son and it does not make any difference if it is a man of OT time or modern time - No man comes unto the Father except by the one and only mediator with the Father - Jesus Christ. The Scriptures to me clearly indicate that there exist G-d the Father, G-d the Son and G-d the Holy Ghost. I personally will not accept any Creed that denies that each is entitled to be addressed as G-d distinguished as an individual from the other and that the oneness is the same oneness that those the worship is truth we are as one as G-d the Father and G-d the Son.

The Traveler

<div class='quotemain'>

What on earth are you forgiving me for?

Isn't that just a little over the top? If you are going to be fair and honest, and sincere, you should be asking for forgiveness as much as extending it, in that these little exchanges with you are always bilateral, you having started this one and just called me a liar. You act as if you have been harmed instead of just annoyed.

This is exactly why I'm praying for you-----that God enlighten you. Because you have no idea of what you project in your posting. The messages I get from others on this board about you and against you[some lds] are proof of that to me, and no I will never share them with you.

I forgive you of your anger and milicious character assasinations that you sling out . I am not harmed by them nor do I feel like any kind of victim------but others are hurt and have said so--even on this thread---and you missed that too I already ask God for my forgiveness---I did not ask for yours because ---at least right now you won't give it.

I pray Gods blessing upon you, snow and hope you give things at least a minute of reflextion---and no I'm not innocent---and neither are you-------

I see two problems - One: I agree with all that say that a creed ought to be no more than someone's expression of belief. Two: I disagree that the creed of the Trinity in the year 325 was just some Christians expressing their belief. The council that produced the Creed declaired that the purpose of the creed was because the scriptures were not complete or sufficent and that the Creed was necessary not as a declarition of individual belief but as equal to scripture as defining doctrine and identifying heresy.

As a Christian I do not believe any Creed should be the measure for defining heresy or what is a Christian. I personally believe that those that do so - do so outside of scripture or any authority of G-d.

The Traveler

[Snow]

This is exactly why I'm praying for you-----that God enlighten you. Because you have no idea of what you project in your posting. The messages I get from others on this board about you and against you[some lds] are proof of that to me, and no I will never share them with you.

I forgive you of your anger and milicious character assasinations that you sling out . I am not harmed by them nor do I feel like any kind of victim------but others are hurt and have said so--even on this thread---and you missed that too I already ask God for my forgiveness---I did not ask for yours because ---at least right now you won't give it.

I pray Gods blessing upon you, snow and hope you give things at least a minute of reflextion---and no I'm not innocent---and neither are you-------

Oh pleeeasse,

You're really laying it on thick now and by the way, I know that you aren't serious. If you were sincere, you would first say that you apologize for your anti-Mormon bigotry, for your character slander, for your name calling and constant disception AND at the same time, you forgive anyone (me) who has traspassed against you.

Rather than asking God to work a change in someone else's heart, why not look within and pray that he make you a more honorable and honest poster? ... I've run across sincere posters before and they always start with making ammends for their own behavior before condescendingly putting it on the other person.

Give me a jingle when you're sincere.

[Outshined]

Rather than asking God to work a change in someone else's heart, why not look within and pray that he make you a more honorable and honest poster? ... I've run across sincere posters before and they always start with making ammends for their own behavior before condescendingly putting it on the other person.

Good observation...

[prisonchaplain]

The standard argument is that Mormons are Christian because, among other things but mostly this - they don't accept the Creeds.

My question for Christos was isn't accepting the Bible good enough for him or do we also have to accept extra-biblical doctrine. Obviously.

Sorry if I'm breaking in on this lovely dance, but a brainstorm recently hit me on this issue (maybe it was an annuerism (sp?)):

Forget the issue of who's Christian or not, for a moment. What rejection of the Nicene Creed tells me is that you are not:

1. Catholic

2. Mainline Protestant

3. Evangelical

Ergo, when you discuss teachings such as the Trinity, The deity of Christ, the nature of godhood and monotheism, the meaning of eternity (especially backwards 'before time'), etc. you'll encounter denominational "culture shock" linguistic misunderstandings, etc. Non-LDS Christians ASSUME the creedal understandings when we discuss these things. It was a great "lifting of the veil" to read Prof. Robinson's denunciation of these creeds as Greek philosophical corruptions. Not so much because I agreed, but it did help me to understand where LDS thinkers are coming from. As soon as I saw the title of this thread, I knew where it would head, and wondered how quickly it would get there. B)

[Lindy]

I think I should apologize for the boys and their "blood bath" behavior Christos...... you didn't start anything but ask a question..... I ask you not to judge all American "adult" males by the behavior of some.

I would like to add my two cents to your original post:

1) we DO believe in one God the Father Almighty

2) we DO believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, who was with God BEFORE the world was created.

And for us... and for our salvation, Jesus came down from heaven, was born of a virgin and lived a good life; He taught of the plan of God, and made many miracles happen with His hands...... He loved us and attoned for our sins... He was crucified; He suffered, died and was buried, where on the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and He sitteth on the right hand of the Father in heaven. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.

3) And we believe in the Holy Spirit

Gee, look at the things we have in common..... sure we may look at things a bit different...but the important things are there.

And yes Christos....we belive that we existed before we were born on earth... That we are all Sons (and Daughters) of God before earth.

"I'm not sure but do you believe that we have physical bodies before birth or is that something that comes with an earthly life?"

We believe we had spirit bodies before birth.....that we came to earth to gain a mortal body.

I'm out of time my young friend.... hope that helped a little for you :)

(edited for further thought)

[Serg]

It is bad doctrine in these aspects(just as the Athanasian Symbol)

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

WRONG: Jesus is the Creator of both visible and invisible things.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God,

WRONG: Jesus is not the Only Beggoten son of God, but the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh. We all are beggotten sons and daughters of God.

begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation,

WRONG: They are not of the same substance, they hasve separated bodies. Glorified phisical bodies.

came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.

TRUE

And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

TRUE: but even though, note that the same Holy Spirit in 1stNephi, worships the Father, and so does the Son. This of course, does not mean that we dont worship them TRHEE, but accept that the later two chose in some extent to draw a line between them and the Father. But we do wroship the Father and The Son, and the H.S..(if not, many of our hymns would not say "Let us sing unto the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit", etc..)

[Snow]

I think I should apologize for the boys and their "blood bath" behavior Christos..

You needn't apologize for me as it is me and not you who is responsible for my behavior nor is it necessary to apologize to Christo since no one did anything to him. Thanks for the lovely thought though.

[Douglas]

Interesting that one of the internet's largest (so-called) "Christian" forums bars LDS participation exactly because you do not subscribe to the Nicene Creed and in their eyes are therefore NOT Christian.

[Christos]

It is a very dangerous thing to claim that a person is not Christian. Too often in the Western world we analyse and evaluate things without looking at the heart of the matter.

Let God be the judge of who is and who isn't of his family.

[Douglas]

It is a very dangerous thing to claim that a person is not Christian. Too often in the Western world we analyse and evaluate things without looking at the heart of the matter.

Let God be the judge of who is and who isn't of his family.

AMEN!

[Maureen]

...however Christo thinks we ought to believe in them - but if Christo believes the Creeds are necessary, then he believes that the bible is not sufficient.

Seriously Maureen - do you really suppose that I don't know what a creed is?

Actually I wasn't sure how you were defining it which is why I put the definition in my post. You were obviously putting words or thoughts in Christo's post that he did not intend - hence the need to be clear.

My question for Christos was isn't accepting the Bible good enough for him or do we also have to accept extra-biblical doctrine. Obviously.

See, you are doing it again. A creed is paraphrasing an already biblical belief - therefore it is not outside of biblical doctrine, it is agreeing with biblical doctrine.

M.

[Snow]

<div class='quotemain'>

...however Christo thinks we ought to believe in them - but if Christo believes the Creeds are necessary, then he believes that the bible is not sufficient.

Seriously Maureen - do you really suppose that I don't know what a creed is?

Actually I wasn't sure how you were defining it which is why I put the definition in my post. You were obviously putting words or thoughts in Christo's post that he did not intend - hence the need to be clear.

If you think that I didn't not capture Christo's intent, let me restate it to sayt that Christo does not think that accepting the Creeds is essential/important.

Somehow I think that Christo would agree with my first characterization - but since he won't answer, I guess we'll never know.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

My question for Christos was isn't accepting the Bible good enough for him or do we also have to accept extra-biblical doctrine. Obviously.

See, you are doing it again. A creed is paraphrasing an already biblical belief - therefore it is not outside of biblical doctrine, it is agreeing with biblical doctrine.

M.

Well that's one argument but I'd say it's a very poor one. The creeds state the God (the Trinity) is ontologically one being. That is not a biblical affirmation. Mormons accept what the bible says about God. We reject the Creeds. The standard of orthodoxy provided by Chalcedon says things liek inconfusedly, unchanably, indivisibly, inseperably, subsistence, etc., all non-biblical language - paraphased on not.

The test of all this is if you ask someone, say like Christo, is it okay if Mormons accept teachings about God but reject the creeds (in order to be considered Christian) and the response is, no - you must also accept the creeds. At the most - the creeds are non or extra-biblical. At the least - they are a mandatory requirement of how one must interpret the bible.

[roman]

<div class='quotemain'>

This is exactly why I'm praying for you-----that God enlighten you. Because you have no idea of what you project in your posting. The messages I get from others on this board about you and against you[some lds] are proof of that to me, and no I will never share them with you.

I forgive you of your anger and milicious character assasinations that you sling out . I am not harmed by them nor do I feel like any kind of victim------but others are hurt and have said so--even on this thread---and you missed that too I already ask God for my forgiveness---I did not ask for yours because ---at least right now you won't give it.

I pray Gods blessing upon you, snow and hope you give things at least a minute of reflextion---and no I'm not innocent---and neither are you-------

Oh pleeeasse,

You're really laying it on thick now and by the way, I know that you aren't serious. If you were sincere, you would first say that you apologize for your anti-Mormon bigotry, for your character slander, for your name calling and constant disception AND at the same time, you forgive anyone (me) who has traspassed against you.

Rather than asking God to work a change in someone else's heart, why not look within and pray that he make you a more honorable and honest poster? ... I've run across sincere posters before and they always start with making ammends for their own behavior before condescendingly putting it on the other person.

Give me a jingle when you're sincere.

snow; see this is what is a matter with you----you openly deny what I say-------I said [see above]---i said I ask for my forgiveness and also said that I was not innocent. But you deny the obvious; to make your point.---so I did look within first-----------what I asked forgivenss for is my buisness, but since I didn't make a laundry list for you---you reject all.

I person who thinks they have no sin---is in the worst of all spots--------best take account of yourself

[Christos]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

...however Christo thinks we ought to believe in them - but if Christo believes the Creeds are necessary, then he believes that the bible is not sufficient.

Seriously Maureen - do you really suppose that I don't know what a creed is?

Actually I wasn't sure how you were defining it which is why I put the definition in my post. You were obviously putting words or thoughts in Christo's post that he did not intend - hence the need to be clear.

If you think that I didn't not capture Christo's intent, let me restate it to sayt that Christo does not think that accepting the Creeds is essential/important.

Somehow I think that Christo would agree with my first characterization - but since he won't answer, I guess we'll never know.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

My question for Christos was isn't accepting the Bible good enough for him or do we also have to accept extra-biblical doctrine. Obviously.

See, you are doing it again. A creed is paraphrasing an already biblical belief - therefore it is not outside of biblical doctrine, it is agreeing with biblical doctrine.

M.

Well that's one argument but I'd say it's a very poor one. The creeds state the God (the Trinity) is ontologically one being. That is not a biblical affirmation. Mormons accept what the bible says about God. We reject the Creeds. The standard of orthodoxy provided by Chalcedon says things liek inconfusedly, unchanably, indivisibly, inseperably, subsistence, etc., all non-biblical language - paraphased on not.

The test of all this is if you ask someone, say like Christo, is it okay if Mormons accept teachings about God but reject the creeds (in order to be considered Christian) and the response is, no - you must also accept the creeds. At the most - the creeds are non or extra-biblical. At the least - they are a mandatory requirement of how one must interpret the bible.

I would like to say that it is foolish to accept something without questioning it.

To accept a creed without understanding it has the same value of not knowing it at all.

Study the creed, if you do not understand something, ask your priest/vicar/pastor or other member of clergy about it. That is one of the great things about being Christian, you are allowed to question, you are even allowed to doubt. There are always people who will be willing to share wisdom with each other.

When I have a question about something I will first of all discuss it with my brethren, then with the Priest, if he doesn't know (and there is very little he doesn't) he will ask other people. An unanswered question is a terrible thing.

Yes, the Nicene creed is extra biblical but in another sense it isn't, it is a summary of belief. As I said earlier, Creed comes from the Greek meaning "I believe". The creed is in effect a model testimony.

Guess what verse comes to mind

James 1:5

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

[Snow]

snow; see this is what is a matter with you----you openly deny what I say-------I said [see above]---i said I ask for my forgiveness and also said that I was not innocent. But you deny the obvious; to make your point.---so I did look within first-----------what I asked forgivenss for is my buisness, but since I didn't make a laundry list for you---you reject all.

Same old Roman - same old refrain. It's always Snow, snow, snow or someone else, it's not about you, its about the other guy. You only mentioned that you were not innocent AFTER making a big deal about me and then me mention that a sincerity would direct one to first apologize for their own behavior before looking at others. And here you are doing it again - telling me that I should take account of myself - as if I am the one who goes on to other faith's message boards and denigrates their beliefs

I person who thinks they have no sin---is in the worst of all spots--------best take account of yourself

And there you go again with false accusations. I have repeatedly said in this forum that I am obnoxious and hot-headed and sometimes mean spirited, but not dishonest, also often wrong or sometimes wrong. You are the one that is saying otherwise. Then you complain when I say you are wrong. It never ends with you.

"Best take account of yourself" What a joke.

[Snow]

I would like to say that it is foolish to accept something without questioning it.

To accept a creed without understanding it has the same value of not knowing it at all.

Study the creed, if you do not understand something, ask your priest/vicar/pastor or other member of clergy about it. That is one of the great things about being Christian, you are allowed to question, you are even allowed to doubt. There are always people who will be willing to share wisdom with each other.

When I have a question about something I will first of all discuss it with my brethren, then with the Priest, if he doesn't know (and there is very little he doesn't) he will ask other people. An unanswered question is a terrible thing.

I don't question the creeds. I reject them because I think they are untrue. Asking my clergyman won't help as he rejects it also. He may not even know what it says.

But, I could ask you to explain the following:

We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;

Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.

For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.

Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.

The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.

The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.

The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.

And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.

As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.

So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.

And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.

So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;

And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.

So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;

And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.

For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;

So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.

I say it's hard to imagine one group of words so confusing or filled with contradiction.

Yes, the Nicene creed is extra biblical but in another sense it isn't, it is a summary of belief.

So back to my original question. Can I accept what the bible says but reject the creeds?

[Dr T]

Hello Snow,

You appear to have strong beliefs about the creeds. Will you help me understand what parts you see as confusing and filled with contradiction?

Thanks,

Dr. T

[Palerider]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

...however Christo thinks we ought to believe in them - but if Christo believes the Creeds are necessary, then he believes that the bible is not sufficient.

Seriously Maureen - do you really suppose that I don't know what a creed is?

Actually I wasn't sure how you were defining it which is why I put the definition in my post. You were obviously putting words or thoughts in Christo's post that he did not intend - hence the need to be clear.

If you think that I didn't not capture Christo's intent, let me restate it to sayt that Christo does not think that accepting the Creeds is essential/important.

Somehow I think that Christo would agree with my first characterization - but since he won't answer, I guess we'll never know.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

My question for Christos was isn't accepting the Bible good enough for him or do we also have to accept extra-biblical doctrine. Obviously.

See, you are doing it again. A creed is paraphrasing an already biblical belief - therefore it is not outside of biblical doctrine, it is agreeing with biblical doctrine.

M.

Well that's one argument but I'd say it's a very poor one. The creeds state the God (the Trinity) is ontologically one being. That is not a biblical affirmation. Mormons accept what the bible says about God. We reject the Creeds. The standard of orthodoxy provided by Chalcedon says things liek inconfusedly, unchanably, indivisibly, inseperably, subsistence, etc., all non-biblical language - paraphased on not.

The test of all this is if you ask someone, say like Christo, is it okay if Mormons accept teachings about God but reject the creeds (in order to be considered Christian) and the response is, no - you must also accept the creeds. At the most - the creeds are non or extra-biblical. At the least - they are a mandatory requirement of how one must interpret the bible.

I would like to say that it is foolish to accept something without questioning it.

To accept a creed without understanding it has the same value of not knowing it at all.

Study the creed, if you do not understand something, ask your priest/vicar/pastor or other member of clergy about it. That is one of the great things about being Christian, you are allowed to question, you are even allowed to doubt. There are always people who will be willing to share wisdom with each other.

When I have a question about something I will first of all discuss it with my brethren, then with the Priest, if he doesn't know (and there is very little he doesn't) he will ask other people. An unanswered question is a terrible thing.

Yes, the Nicene creed is extra biblical but in another sense it isn't, it is a summary of belief. As I said earlier, Creed comes from the Greek meaning "I believe". The creed is in effect a model testimony.

Guess what verse comes to mind

James 1:5

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

Sure is funny you would come in here quoting that scripture....seems to me you became disgusted with me for quoting that very scripture to you.......

[Snow]

Hello Snow,

You appear to have strong beliefs about the creeds. Will you help me understand what parts you see as confusing and filled with contradiction?

Thanks,

Dr. T

See post #42.

[Christos]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

...however Christo thinks we ought to believe in them - but if Christo believes the Creeds are necessary, then he believes that the bible is not sufficient.

Seriously Maureen - do you really suppose that I don't know what a creed is?

Actually I wasn't sure how you were defining it which is why I put the definition in my post. You were obviously putting words or thoughts in Christo's post that he did not intend - hence the need to be clear.

If you think that I didn't not capture Christo's intent, let me restate it to sayt that Christo does not think that accepting the Creeds is essential/important.

Somehow I think that Christo would agree with my first characterization - but since he won't answer, I guess we'll never know.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

My question for Christos was isn't accepting the Bible good enough for him or do we also have to accept extra-biblical doctrine. Obviously.

See, you are doing it again. A creed is paraphrasing an already biblical belief - therefore it is not outside of biblical doctrine, it is agreeing with biblical doctrine.

M.

Well that's one argument but I'd say it's a very poor one. The creeds state the God (the Trinity) is ontologically one being. That is not a biblical affirmation. Mormons accept what the bible says about God. We reject the Creeds. The standard of orthodoxy provided by Chalcedon says things liek inconfusedly, unchanably, indivisibly, inseperably, subsistence, etc., all non-biblical language - paraphased on not.

The test of all this is if you ask someone, say like Christo, is it okay if Mormons accept teachings about God but reject the creeds (in order to be considered Christian) and the response is, no - you must also accept the creeds. At the most - the creeds are non or extra-biblical. At the least - they are a mandatory requirement of how one must interpret the bible.

I would like to say that it is foolish to accept something without questioning it.

To accept a creed without understanding it has the same value of not knowing it at all.

Study the creed, if you do not understand something, ask your priest/vicar/pastor or other member of clergy about it. That is one of the great things about being Christian, you are allowed to question, you are even allowed to doubt. There are always people who will be willing to share wisdom with each other.

When I have a question about something I will first of all discuss it with my brethren, then with the Priest, if he doesn't know (and there is very little he doesn't) he will ask other people. An unanswered question is a terrible thing.

Yes, the Nicene creed is extra biblical but in another sense it isn't, it is a summary of belief. As I said earlier, Creed comes from the Greek meaning "I believe". The creed is in effect a model testimony.

Guess what verse comes to mind

James 1:5

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

Sure is funny you would come in here quoting that scripture....seems to me you became disgusted with me for quoting that very scripture to you.......

Thats the irony

[Palerider]

hhhhmmmm....The irony as in.....you don't want to be given that as an answer for you,,,,but its ok for you to give that scripture to others....HHHmmm.....I think I see can see it now..........

[Dr T]

Hello Snow,

Sorry; I read post #42 and did not recognize it as the Nicene Creed-thus my confusion. I didn't see a reference for what you posted there. What you posted seems something to do with the concept of the trinity in general.

Thanks,

Dr. T

[Christos]

The irony is that I used a verse that I was sick of in one of my own posts.

I'm not going to bicker on a forum.

[roman]

<div class='quotemain'>

snow; see this is what is a matter with you----you openly deny what I say-------I said [see above]---i said I ask for my forgiveness and also said that I was not innocent. But you deny the obvious; to make your point.---so I did look within first-----------what I asked forgivenss for is my buisness, but since I didn't make a laundry list for you---you reject all.

Same old Roman - same old refrain. It's always Snow, snow, snow or someone else, it's not about you, its about the other guy. You only mentioned that you were not innocent AFTER making a big deal about me and then me mention that a sincerity would direct one to first apologize for their own behavior before looking at others. And here you are doing it again - telling me that I should take account of myself - as if I am the one who goes on to other faith's message boards and denigrates their beliefs

snow---see your obviously not reading what I'm posting---because your wrong---I said in my first post on this that I did ask for my forgiveness. So you see its is about me--some but mostly about you.

I person who thinks they have no sin---is in the worst of all spots--------best take account of yourself

And there you go again with false accusations. I have repeatedly said in this forum that I am obnoxious and hot-headed and sometimes mean spirited, but not dishonest, also often wrong or sometimes wrong. You are the one that is saying otherwise. Then you complain when I say you are wrong. It never ends with you.

snow--so you think you can be like that as you discribe yourself and no one is harmed? You think you can be like that--as you describe yourself---and there be no consequences? You think you can claim not to be dishonest--when I could say different. But in reality who cares what you persceve as what the truth of the matter is------the truth is your style. Hardly even addressing the topic and going after the poster---avoiding all contact with the subject matter. Well you know where I stand. The resecc bell rang 20 years ago and I left the first grade play ground----as you don't hear what is being said to you---you never heard the school beel and hence you are still on the playground---playing first grade tricks. You and you alone are the reason this board is almost dead--a mear faction of what it once was. I have tried to get others here inclusing lds from other sites and they won't come because of you. I have no way of proving that, but I do get along with alot of other lds and exchange ideas all the time---but you are the only one with something up where the sun don't shine---I remember you being banned in past time for your hatefull posting-----well nuff said