(Hebrews 1:8-9) is about the incarnation Michael(a blogger of trinitarin persuasion) is denying that here. It is clear the text continues in that thought and includes the son as the eternal deity because he was made YHWH. Of course the only part he sees is the YHWH so that he must have always existed as "God the son" but that is not what is being stated at all otherwise God would have fellow God's there(he does not see his inconsistency either in using the passage all the way to verse 10 as the context continues the thought from verses 8-9-10 Also we have a clear denial by Michael concerning Jesus humanity(Which is the doctrine of Antichrist) Michael contends Jesus had no real human spirit(thus it was one third God animating a dead shell) and could not have really died as a shell cannot die neither can God experience death..... Enjoy!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell:" Maybe you would not mind showing me where the scriptures or any writer of the NT said such a thing?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:Hebrews 1:10 And,(speaking of the SON the Father says) “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: We have already went over this! (Hebrews 1:8-9) But unto the son he saith they throne oh God is forever. It says the same thing as (verse 10) and this is a continuation of the context it is dealing with his deity and is including his son-ship or humanity as God because of the incarnation not as some fictitious nonsense that you misunderstand of "god the son".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Micahel:Psalm 102:25 (speaking of YHWH the psalmist says) Of old you laid the foundation of the earth,and the heavens are the work of your hands.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: I also Believe Jesus is the creator because he was made the creator, as humanity had a beginning. You have proven nothing by repeating your worn-out shallow argument!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:The author of Hebrews clearly identified the SON as YHWH.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell; The son Is YHWH because he was made YHWH I gave the passages that say so but I do not blame you for ignoring them everytime!
(Acts 2:36) Jesus was made both Lord and Christ.
Now the Lord is that spirit(2nd. Cor.3:17)
(John 3;34) Jesus was *given* the spirit by no measure.
Jesus was *made* the Life giving spirit.(1st.Cor.15:45-46)
"Your version of the incarnation is of a god animating a puppet body and God the son went back to the comfort of heaven not dying at all or experiencing death how does God experience death?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:God animating a puppet? That is exactly what you believe.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: What other real man can you name that does not have a human spirit as does your ridiculous version of Jesus does? So that you have a god puppet faking everyone out and not a real man!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:So far as the eternal Son going back to heaven, that is exactly what the text says.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: No it does not say any such thing! Your doctrine is foolishness and can be proven nonsense! You deny Jesus was a real man as you have a man with no human spirit but a hybrid Mix you simply deny it! You have a Hercules Demi god! Neither man nor god but a hybird new species.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Micahel:He says "Father, into your hands." No, He did die and remember, the atonement was finished on the cross. Your ridiculous question "how does God experience death?" doesn't even deserve an answer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: Because you cannot answer it! God cannot die so you have a fake atonement also. Your doctrine is a total sham.
By man came sin ad by man came also the resurrection.(1st.Cor.15:21) God the son cannot redeem us as he would not be our kinsmen redeemer! He is not like us but a Hercules hybrid bunch of nonsense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:As I said, you can affirm the deity in the Son but not the deity of the Son;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: I can affirm both because his deity was given him by no measure(John 3:34) so that it was the deity of the son that of God the father(John 14:10) as the real son had no power of his own and could do no works or miracles as a real man(John 5:30)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:which is a denile of the deity of Jesus Christ. Oneness theology is essentially cloaked Arianism.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: LOL! We are the Only ones with One God and Jesus is that One God! Arian's do not make that claim. We do deny your false polytheism and denial of Jesus real humanity having only a puppet or shell animated by deity!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell:"natures do not die people die!"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:Who died on the cross? Was it not the Son? You contend that the Son is simply the flesh of God indwelt. Would this not be God's real human nature? You are indeed engaging in a little hipocrisy. You have to make Jesus Christ out to be two persons.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: I am afraid not! We do not have "two persons of God" as that is false doctrine! We do have one real man with a real human will, and One real God with a superior will and mind but it is not two persons of God, because a real man is not another person of God. That is how I know you do not believe Jesus is a real man and you only think of him in terms of your fake deity known as God the son. A man without a human spirit is no real man at all but dead(James 2:26) You have a dead body animated as a puppet by "god the sons deity spirit" and deity spirit cannot experience death or he would have already!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael: Natures cannot communicate. His flesh could not communicate with the indwelling deity.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: LOL! Where I have said such foolishness concerning natures? I believe a real man communicated with his real God that was both indwelling him and in heaven. His real human will mind, will, and emotion communicated as a lessor human being to the deity Given him as the superior being of God it was not two human beings or two God beings but One real man and one real God all in Jesus!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:I do not contend that the dual natures of Christ were mixed. The divine nature and human nature were both real and full, and they were held by one person. Your "hybrid mix" idea has no application with me or any Trinitarian.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: Of course it does! that is all I get from you guys is a denial but there is no way for you to deny it as your version of Jesus denies his real humanity in not having a real human spirit the only men that do not have human spirits are dead men per 9James 2:26, and Eccl.3:21 which says all human spirits return to God at death)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael: Our own confesssion (Council of Chalcedon) refutes your accusation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: My Bible refutes your man-made creed! Keep your creed which is on the same level as the book of Mormon!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael: The oneness position and the Trinitarian position, in regards to the hypostatic union are actually very similar (not totally). This is why Bernard said in "the oneness of God" that at some point the oneness churches may adopt Chalcedon. But let us stay on topic.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: This Oneness person will not adopt any creed! I could care less What Bernard adopts because I will not adopt any man-made creed that is why and how all your trinity churches fell away from the truth and accepted the false doctrine of the trinity! If Bernard does that, then he has fell into the same false doctrine the same exact way your folks did! I( do not believe he would such a stupid thing!)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell:"The Omni present God went to be with the omni present God"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:Remember, the eternal Son emptied Himself (phil 2) prior to the incarnation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: Remember, this is why I said your doctrine was polytheism? because you have God(The son) equal to God. nothing is said in that passage about two persons but rather the term God is used and you have Jesus in that passage as God equal to God(As another God) not person
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell said...
"Jesus soul was not left in hell"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:Oh really? This is rich! So, are you saying that Jesus went to hell, as in the afterlife, or that He went to hell as in the place where the rich man went to?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: Your ignorance is showing and has throughout this entire discussion.
"That was his human spirit that went back to God"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:So, Jesus' human spirit eh? Ridiculous. HE WAS GOD! HE DID NOT HAVE A HUMAN SPIRIT.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell; Here again we have a clear denial of his real humanity which is just as bad as denying his real deity(That of God the Father John 14:10, 2nd.Cor.5:19) To not have a human spirit is to deny his real humanity! You do have a fakery and God animating a shell.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael: Human spirits are created, His spirit was not created.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: You have the doctrine of Apollonarinism and I have dealt with you about this before, here on this blog!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:He is God and He took on human flesh. Jesus, as the Son, claimed to be God and eternal: John 8:58.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: Of Course he did! But he was standing before them as a real man claiming to be the I am because of the incarnation... He never made any claim about "God the son" Ancient false prophet made that false doctrine up and you bought into it hook line and sinker you have been duped by false prophets to believe false doctrine.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:Heb 2:14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise PARTOOK OF THE SAME THINGS, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: I use this same passage and it does not deny the incarnation but rather affirms it and there are only two scriptures that clearly tell us who incarnated the son. You do not have a single passage!
2nd Cor.5:19 God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. Which God?
John 14:10 *The Father* that dwelleth *in me* he doeth the works.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:
Nowhere does the scripture speak of a human spirit. That is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard of in my life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: That is why you have no real human man and your doctrine is antichrist and the old heresy of Apollanarianism.
Michael: You make Jesus Christ out to be TWO people.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: I explained that above but let's go ahead and say I do! Do (I have two persons of God,) as One real man and one real God? absolutely not! I do not believe God is a person out side the person of the son anyhow! Persons die God does not! when I say the word person am I speaking of God or man? You have forced your false definition for God upon the scriptures
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael: NATURES CANNOT COMMUNICATE. Is this suppost to be comedy? Am I on film? I need an Advil.You have got to be kidding.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: I said nothing about natures communicating! You better take that Advil.
"But it was his own eternal deity because it was given him!"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael:This statement is a contradiction in the most basic way. You should proof read your comments. How could something be eternal, and at the same time have a beginning? The Son is eternal: Heb 7:3, John 8:58, John 17:5, John 1:1-2 etc...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlculwell: I think you better take your own advice because as you see i will contradict everything you have to say. none of the passages you submit proves anything you have to say!
John 17:5 does not prove anything for you as in verse 24 Jesus says the Apostles or disciples were about to witness the glory he had with the father (Which was his passion) Jesus was no more literally back there with the father then he was literally slain but that is what he was talking about! Read Revelation 13:8 as the lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
John 1:1 proves nothing for you either as that is refuted in psalm 33:6 as the word/logos came from the breath of God's mouth as his creative power the day you can make the breath of Gods mouth another person of God known as the son is the day you will have an argument from (John 1:1
Friday, October 23, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Tongues,TurretinFan, and Trinity versus Oneness
A Reformed Blogger that goes By the pseudonym *TurreTinfan* was recently on an internet radio program called Iron sharpens Iron and tried install a fellow by the name of Harold Camping into the Oneness camp(Dishonestly so) by taking half of his confesssion. Here is my reply to him after listening.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
At the end of the discussion you can clearly hear Camping say: "God is three persons." I listened very Closely and I am getting tired of James Whites lying! He does not seem to care that he blatantly sins against God But I do.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
I recall how much you exploded when Dr. White used the term "Unitarian" to describe you (because, apparently, you wish to have that considered as a different heresy), and now you seem to be exploding because you feel that the term "modalism" should be applied only to your particular heresy.
I didn't call him a Oneness Pentecostal - and if I did, I would be wrong to do so. His theology is more orthodox than that.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF,You are being dishonest! Both of those terms(Modalist's and Unitarain's) you use for Oneness were given to Oneness folks by Trinitarian's!
We do not use either term. But you do dishonestly teach folks that is what we are! You tried to lump us with the "Unitarians" By using that term who happen to not believe that Jesus is God. We do!
You have been telling everyone Oneness are "Modalist's" because of the use of a descriptive term(mode) ancient Oneness used for God in the incarnation.
Now you want to dishonestly distance yourself from Harold Camping Because he is of your fellow Reformed teachers that does not teach your trinity in the way you like!
The fact of the matter is; Camping is not Oneness whom you term Modalist. You say he is because he says Jesus is the Father that does not make anyone Oneness! especially when they say;" God is three persons." Stop with your dishonesty! he could very well be termed a trinitarain with your shallow reasoning if you are only taking half of what he says to determine what he is.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Your group is not the only modalistic group out there. I realize that may serve as a certain amount of rain on your parade, but c'est la vie.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
My group is not is not "Modalist" at all TF as we reject the name you have given us and your dishonesty and lying is seen from 1oo miles away! Again, Camping is more trinitarian than Oneness. but since you are picking only one part of his confession you choose that which is farthest away from your ilk to distance yourself, but that does not work since he is Reformed...LOL!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
ROFL Manuel. You are inimitable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
I would not think you would not have a comeback Because
my arguments was "inimitable"! Glad I could make you laugh though. but was serious as a heart attack.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Whoops double negatives...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
One rarely ends "serious as a heart attack" comments with "LOL"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh I am serious as a heart attack! but it seems you are not. Thus my LOL(Laughing at you) You are still trying to push your nonsense that Camping was Oneness(Or what you term as Modalist.) You are hiding in plain sight. Camping Taught Reformed Doctrine and God is three persons there is no way for him to be Modalist! Pure dishonesty on your(AOMIN) part!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Are you under the impression that Camping uses the term "persons" in the standard Trinitarian sense?
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh Please? The term anyhow in the way you impose your definition of "person" for God upon scripture is not found anywhere in any passage of scripture. You argue from silence.
I could care less How he uses that un-scriptural definition for God. What matters is that he said it, just like you would... No Oneness would even allude to such nonsense.
Let me ask you a question? When I use the term person what determines if I am speaking of God or men? Your made up term your rules you cannot do that with God's word.
Hasta La bye bye.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
If there was anyone who still thought that you were seriously concerned that Camping had been misrepresented, I think they see from your response above that such a thought was mistaken.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Why don't you deal with what was stated instead of running away.Why would waste my time with 15 posts if I were not concerned with your out right lies and deceit .
Harold Camping is a Reformed teacher who does not teach your version of the trinity the way in which you like so you dishonestly pawn him off...
He cannot teach Oneness or what you have termed Modalism with his "three persons of God"..
He definitely teaches the doctrine of the trinity but Just a little differently than you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh, I was never concerned at all that "Camping was misrepresented"!
You are trying to Lump him with Oneness by lying and saying he is a "Modalist" A term Trinitarian's have named contemporary and ancient Oneness. I concerned you have lied on God's people (Christian's, Oneness believers)
Here is one for ya? "Persons die", God does not! when I use the term person am I speaking of God or men?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Imagine that? TF and the Reformed to whom he represents is playing it safe?? Guess what TF? I also believe (Acts 20:28.) Jesus was given the Spirit by no measure(John 20:23)
How many beings do you have? Is Jesus a new being? Is he a real human being?( Or A hybrid New species?) Or was he made both Lord and Christ like (Acts 2:36) states because his humanity had a beginning. there was a real distinction that you do not make and only Oneness makes! we do not have God Dying! You want to debate that? Bring it on! I know what I believe and I can defend it..
Once more, stop with your trying to lump one of your own Reformed us.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
I meant to put John 3:34 but wrongly wrote John 20:23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Pro 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
It does not help you much to throw out a prophetic passage of the coming son in the incarnation's name and that of the Father that would be the same name and the father is that which incarnated the real man or son (John 14:10 KJB) The Father that dwelleth in me(The son) He doeth the works. Read (Zechariah 14:90 In that day there shall be one LORD and his name One("That day" was the incarnation.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Dan 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
"The form of the fourth is LIKE the son of God" is not saying; "it is the son of God".
"The son of God" refers to the flesh. that born of Mary(Math.1:19-20) Deny that or tell us God has two sons one flesh, and One in name only as spirit?
The son of man is That which God referred to in the plural pronouns and was included in creation when God said: "let us make man in image after our likeness" he was referring to the coming incarnation( Romans 5:14)Tell us so as one of the single greatest creation passages that exist in scripture! (Adam) who was the figure of him that was to come. Meaning he was not back there! We have a clear passage in the New testament tell us Jesus was not there!
The Daniel passage of the four men in the fire was also prophetic and alluding to the time of the coming incarnation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
What are you trying to do TurretinFan? It is not me versus the scriptures! I love everyone of these passages you have given... what not a one of them has said though is anything about your "God the son" or the false doctrine of the "trinity."
Let me remind you, we were speaking of your dishonesty in lying about the Reformed trinitarian *Harold Camping* and how you were trying to make him Oneness with his three persons of God.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TurretinFan writes:
Joh 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
First of all, Jesus slain flesh(Not "god the son")purchased our right to have his spirit in our Hearts. or sending it too us from the Father by buying it for us.
We do not see "three persons" from the above passage, we see three ways in which God deals with mankind that absolutely had to be!
First, as God who gives grace in choosing mankind through election in him not as individuals willy nilly bypassing preaching and grace apart from our response.
Second, as slain flesh that was sacrificed to atone the sins of mankind that a holy God as spirit could not do as that holy spirit(God the Father's title in dealing with man) was not our kinsmen redeemer, we needed our own kind, but with no sin. If he could then he should have done it immediately.
Third, God as Holy lawgiver would be in us.
For the Holy Ghost was not yet Given for Jesus was not yet Glorified (or slain in his flesh. John 7:38-39)
By man came sin and by man came also the resurrection from the dead.(1st.Cor.15:21) God the son could not purchase anything for us as he would not be our kinsmen redeemer.
Jesus was made both Lord and Christ.(Acts 2:36)
So that now, the Lord is that spirit (2nd Cor. 3:17)
He was the first comforter in the flesh and would Be the other Comforter in the spirit.
That He might abide with you Forever even the spirit of truth: Whom the world cannot receive,because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him.: BUT YOU KNOW HIM: FOR HE DWELLETH WITH YOU (NOW IN FLESH) AND SHALL BE IN YOU.(AS SPIRIT)
I (Jesus) will not leave you comfortless(or as Fatherless Orphans),I(Jesus) will come to you.(As the father or Spirit of God)(John 14:17-18)
(1st. Cor.15:45-46) The Last man Adam(Jesus) was made the quickening (Life giving) Spirit. because his humanity had a beginning.
How-be-it that was not first which was spirtual?(Adam came before Jesus) But that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual.(God came to us as Jesus in the incarnation) or the second man.
from Robert Sabin:
"He shall not speak of himself," is a common Johanine
phrase, most often applied to Jesus Christ as a sort of hallmark of
his ministry. It was Jesus while on earth who did "not speak of
himself," who in all things that he spoke attributed his words to an
enabler, to the Father, who enabled him to speak and gave him the words".
(John 14:10) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father
in me? the words that I speak unto you I SPEAK NOT OF MYSELF: but the
Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine,
whether I speak God, or WHETHER I SPEAK OF MYSELF.
John 7:28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both
know me, and ye know whence I am: and I AM NOT COME OF MYSELF, but he
that sent me is true, whom ye know not.
John 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him
not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 He
that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth
him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last
day. 49 For I HAVE NOT SPOKEN OF MYSELF; but the Father which sent me,
he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
Jesus did not even know the time of his own second coming but the Father Only(Mark 13:32) Because the Father only was that divine one spirit that knew all things and gave his spirit to the son by no measure(John 3:34) and made him the one true God and spirit but did not reveal all things to the limited in knowledge real man.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delete
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Psa 74:2 Remember thy congregation, which thou hast purchased of old; the rod of thine inheritance, which thou hast redeemed; this mount Zion, wherein thou hast dwelt.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
LOL! You better read Hebrews 9::17-24 again!
Then read Romans 10:13-17
Again, you bypass grace and say you are worthy by God choosing you willy nilly not in him but randomly as an individual not by the grace he has given.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Lest we forget, Harold Camping is a Reformed Trinitarian.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel then: "He teaches Calvinism and some hybrid Mix between Oneness and trinity doctrine."
Manuel now: "Harold Camping is a Reformed Trinitarian."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Blogger Turretinfan said... Manuel then: "He teaches Calvinism and some hybrid Mix between Oneness and trinity doctrine."
Manuel now: "Harold Camping is a Reformed Trinitarian."
Manuel: That is what this whole thing is about! I have been trying to get you stop with your nonsense about calling Harold Camping Oneness or what you also term as Modalist. You would not do that, you continued to dishonestly call him a Modalist to distance yourself! I was giving you a taste of your own medicine!
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
Manuel: Of Course the father is greater that the son! The father Only knew the time of the second coming and not the son.(Mark 13:32) The father was the deity that Incarnated the son and did the works and miracles(John 14:10) The son could do no works or miracles of Himself(John 5:30)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Mar 5:7 And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.
Luk 8:28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Mar 5:7 And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.
Luk 8:28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.
(John 5:30) I can of mine ownself(as the son of God) DO NOTHING!
The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works(John 14:10)
Mark 13:32 But that day and that hour knoweth no man,no not the Angels which are in heaven,neither the son, but the Father.
"Son of God" does not mean: deity as God the son and they are not inter-changable terms! God the son does not exist and neither does the son of God as either a separate or a distinct person of God.. You add that false doctrine to scripture "son of God" is that which includes God the Father as his Deity in the incarnation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
1 John 5:7-8
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
2:08 PM, October 02, 2009
Blogger mlculwell said...
TurretinFan:"Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
1 John 5:7-8
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one".
Mlculwell: Come on at least try? Anybody can give passages they think that are on their side with no commentary. There are two reasons you do this 1.) is to play it safe.
2.) Is to make it look as though you have scripture on your.
since I already know what you teach concerning these passages(Very much in error of Course) do not need for you to give me your commentary therefor making it look as though the truth of the scriptures are yours which is not the truth.... LOL!
Anyhow neither of those passages are trinitarian. (1st John 5:7) is supposed to be suspect for authenticity but I do not need that argument as it does no harm to the truth of God's word or his Oneness!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Once again, TF dishonestly attempts to pawn Harold camping off on Oneness folks by calling him a "Modalist"(A name that Trinitarian's have given Oneness.) Because of half of his confession that: "Jesus was the Father." but somehow conveniently forgets about the other half of his confession: "that God is three persons." He ignores the Both quotes and takes the half that fits his need.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Mr. Culwell,
We already exposed the facts that (1) I fully agree that Mr. Camping is not Oneness and (2) you are not really interested in what Mr. Camping believes.
Why do you continue to slander?
Jeremiah 50:36 A sword is upon the liars; and they shall dote: a sword is upon her mighty men; and they shall be dismayed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Sir, the Sword is Upon you and James White for your Lying, slanderous, dishonesty and I aim to expose the both of you..It was Mr. White that has put you up to it, starting with his debate with Camping! You have been trying to turn this around on us.
You dishonestly have been telling everyone Camping is a "Modalist" a name you have given both ancient and contemporary Oneness. It seems now, you have also added a new category and lump him in with us as Oneness(I do not want to hear you lie again about it!) You take part of what he has said and throw away what you do not need just like you do in scripture to come up with your false doctrines.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Ancient oneness? LOL! There were ancient unitarians, there were ancient modalists, but oneness pentacostalism there was not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF writes:"Ancient oneness? LOL! There were ancient unitarians, there were ancient modalists, but oneness pentacostalism there was not".
Yeah, Ancient Oneness! "Modalism" is a term you gave the ancient Oneness! Just because you deny the experience does not mean it did not exist or that it somehow cahnged over into your false doctrine.
We get our jaded history from their enemies who hated truth, Because of men through History who fell from truth.
You make a claim of men who also could be claimed of us, who made no "trinitarain confession" in history. History is not that which determines truth, the scriptures alone are.
LOL! You crack me up!~ Look at (Acts 19:2) Paul destroys your false doctrine and establishes mine By asking the following question! Paul Asks:"Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed"?
He did not ask; have you believed on Jesus? Of these Jews to whom the door was already opened in (Acts 2:4) Belief that God gives you or otherwise(*Rolling of eyes*) does not get you the Holy Ghost! It does not matter that they were followers of John, they were still Jews and the door was already Opened for them to receive the spirit ...
Otherwise Paul would not have asked the question (to these of whom he did not know who they were) your false doctrine would have been understood!
"Ancient Modalists" get a clue man. There were only ancient Modalists because that is what you named them like you falsely named God a "trinity"! You sir continue in your lies and deceit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Have you noticed that you seem to think that any time we use the term "modalist" we are referring to your group, even though we actually just view your group as one of a number of different groups?
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF Writes:"Manuel:
Have you noticed that you seem to think that any time we use the term "modalist" we are referring to your group, even though we actually just view your group as one of a number of different groups?"
What I have noticed is that what you are trying to tell everyone and pull off are two different things!
Ask Anyone what a so called "Modalist" is? They will then refer to us,(Oneness Ancient and contemporary) not the New designation you have given Harold Camping to try and distance yourself pull your dishonest Okie Doke!
You do not give up and neither do I!
Once more, you have taken half of his quote where states: "Jesus is the Father." All the While ignoring where states: "God is three persons."
If half of His statement makes Him a Oneness or what you term "Modalist" then the Other half makes him a Trinitarain but that is as ridiculous as what you are trying to do!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
You may be shocked, but I didn't have your particular group in mind when I described Camping's errant view of God. I was simply using the appropriate label to describe his errant view of God. That label also applies to you, which apparently is what set off this volcano of irrationality that we have observed in the comments above and elsewhere on the net.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
"Manuel:
You may be shocked, but I didn't have your particular group in mind when I described Camping's errant view of God."
mlculwell: I was not shocked as Know what you are doing. Which is distancing yourself from someone who is clearly Trinitarain otherwise you would not be trying so hard.
TF: "I was simply using the appropriate label to describe his errant view of God."
mlculwell: If you are somehow basing that from half of what he said which your clearly are then "The appropriate label to describe his errant view of God." Could just as well be Trinitarain. It is the most errant view of God.
TF:"That label also applies to you, which apparently is what set off this volcano of irrationality that we have observed in the comments above and elsewhere on the net.
mlculwell: I believe the label also belongs to you! "Irrationality" would be your thinking, as you are the one who takes half of what he says and makes him a "Modalist" when he said: "God is three persons." No Oneness or who you term "Modalist" would ever say such thing!
If he would Denonunce the "three persons of God" and stop with his date setting Etc. we Might take him into our fold..LOL!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Oh? Are you taking into the fold those who can't speak in tongues now?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF writes: Oh? Are you taking into the fold those who can't speak in tongues now?
mlculwell: You better believe it! That is how we all come "into the fold"! God can even fill you and James White with the Holy Ghost!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Let me ask you bluntly: have you taken the position that the gift of tongues is not necessary for salvation?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"Let me ask you bluntly: have you taken the position that the gift of tongues is not necessary for salvation"?
mlculwell: Yeah, I can tell you without batting an eye, there is not Oneness person anywhere that believes the "GIFT OF TONGUES is necessary for salvation!" LOL!
This shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Just like every other Reformed person I speak with.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delete
Blogger Turretinfan said...
So you are quibbling over the term "gift of tongues" then? What would you call it instead?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"So you are quibbling over the term "gift of tongues" then? What would you call it instead"?
mlculwell: Yeah, of course I am quibbling over "the gift of tongues"! This tells me much, for one thing you do not have any understanding of scripture and I will be spending my time trying to teach you something you will not accept.
This started out about you dishonestly, trying to somehow connect Harold Camping to the Oneness view, or to those you term "Modalist."
That was not working well so then you wanted to go toe to toe concerning our two views of God(Trinity Versus Oneness.)
Now you want to talk about receiving of the Holy Ghost.
(Acts 19:2) Paul destroys your doctrine By asking the following question! "Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed"?
Once more he did not ask; "have you believed on Jesus"? Of these Jews to whom the door was already opened in (Acts 2:4) It does not matter that they were followers of John, they were still Jews and the door was already Opened for them to receive the spirit ...
Otherwise Paul would not have asked the question (to these of whom he did not know whom they were) your doctrine would have been understood and he would not have asked have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed!
They then spoke in tongues as evidence they received the spirit(Acts 19:6) They spoke in tongues first as that evidence(Not as the gift of tongues) there was no interpretation in (Acts 2:4) or in (Acts 11:15 it fell on Cornelius household as on us(the 120 not just the twelve) in the begging which referred to Acts 10:46)
in (Acts 19:6) This is not the gift of tongues! This is the gift of the spirit!(the Holy Ghost)
There are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased...
Please give the passage that says it changed to silent(Mental assent "faith") especially when Paul refutes that doctrine in Acts 19:2 with his question... For sure reception is by faith but not your but not your version of it which bypasses Grace, faith, the blood and preaching.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
So, who are these ancient people who were modalistic or unitarian and *also* believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
(Obviously, you'd assert the Apostles, but between them and the 21st century, what's the earliest evidence you can find of this view.)
-TurretinFan
N.B. I'm asking because you claimed that there were ancient Oneness folks, and that I called them modalists. I am not suggesting that for something to be right it has to have ancient folks attesting it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF writes:"So, who are these ancient people who were modalistic or unitarian and *also* believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
mlculwell:What difference does that make?
Historical figures do not determine my doctrine unless those historical figures are the writers of the NT and the Lord Jesus Christ(The Author.)
where am I told in scripture (alone) to look to historical figures? What if those historical figures (in the majority) were wrong? Am I going to be wrong by lining up with Jesus and those writers of the NT?(John 17:17)
I do not concern my self with those historical writers, not even the Ancient Oneness who were referred to by their enemies. (What good would that do anyhow?) I do not believe their enemies ever ever told the truth about them or their doctrines and we only get a small taste of what they were about.
TF:(Obviously, you'd assert the Apostles, but between them and the 21st century, what's the earliest evidence you can find of this view.)
-TurretinFan
mlculwell: I see folks who believed like me from history but I take that with a grain of salt. If there were small groups throughout each century that were not in the majority, either in your view or in mine it proves nothing one way or the other for either of us.
TF: N.B. I'm asking because you claimed that there were ancient Oneness folks, and that I called them modalists. I am not suggesting that for something to be right it has to have ancient folks attesting it.
mlculwell: I do believe there were anceint folks Sabelius, Praxeas, Noetus.
Where did Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, ever describe God as a Trinity or as three persons? Can you give me the quote?
There were many groups through out history that believed the biblical infilling of the spirit but that is nothing to the biblical witness.
Whatever their experience is between them and their and God and they are all long Gone but for sure today we remain and we have the truth of His word and it should not and cannot be ignored!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
So you think Sabelius, Praxeas, and Noetus each believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"So you think Sabelius, Praxeas, and Noetus each believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
mlculwell: It does not make a thimbles worth difference to me (at all!) what they or anyone else believed about it!
The truth is no historical figure you can prop up, or that I would not even bother anyhow, holds any weight to the truth.
You are deflecting. Nor does it matter what any other historical figures believed...
I think I have made that perfectly clear and yet you still want to harp on your belief about it because that is all you a have.
Give me the transition where it has all changed? You would think a doctrine so important would clearly be found in scripture.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Allow me to make this a little simpler for you? I believe all those historical figures (You bring up and the ones I do) and the creeds, hold about as much weight toward our salvation as the Book of Mormon. So in my view that holds zero weight toward anything we are discussing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
No, Manuel. I was just exposing the fact that *even you* have to admit that you don't know of any ancient Oneness folks. This contradicts your prior claims that we mislabel ancient modalists, and feeds into the general theme here that you are complaining about us labeling Camping without a proper reason for doing so. Calling someone "modalist" is not the same as calling "oneness" as you ought to realize by now.
You should repent of your slander of me and my brother Dr. White and get on with your life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"No, Manuel. I was just exposing the fact that *even you* have to admit that you don't know of any ancient Oneness folks".
mlculwell:Once more: "Knowing" or not knowing someone from history has no bearing on truth for either of us.(The scriptures alone are truth. )
TF: "This contradicts your prior claims that we mislabel ancient modalists, and feeds into the general theme here that you are complaining about us labeling Camping without a proper reason for doing so".
mlculwell: You are the One contradicting yourself! Oneness has to do with the belief in Monotheism (One God, Jesus being that One God and a denial of three persons) LOL!
I can find all kinds of beliefs from so called ancient folks you would consider to be trinitarain's you would have no part of, some even recanted and became Arian.
"Modalism" as I have explained numerous times now, was a name that was given to us by you and the Enemies of the ancient Oneness. The term "Oneness" has to do with our belief in One God. Jesus being that One God! You have given us the name "Modalist"
You try and wrangle all these terms and now you are wrangling with a term you have given us, so you can distance yourself from your Brother Camping.
Again you lie and are dishonest. I want no part of a group that spends all their time lying and hiding truth and facts!(That would be you and Dr. White) That fact is obvious to me from this conversation with your folks.
TF:It does not contradict anything! Ancient Oneness does
Calling someone "modalist" is not the same as calling "oneness" as you ought to realize by now".
mlculwell; Then don't you ever call us a "Modalist" again! What have I been arguing with you guys about all this time? Oneness is a belief of Jesus being the One God and a flat out denial of the un-scriptural doctrine of "three persons of God." The folks of ancient times fit that description perfectly you just happened to take their term "mode" and call them "Modalists" but they were definitely Oneness! You are trying so hard.
Where did Harold Camping ever say: "there were three Modes of being" I guess that makes you a Modalist then! He(Camping) said: "God was/is three persons." Be consistent!
Again, I don't want to hear you, or anyone else use it for Oneness folks ever again. The fact is, you have spent so much time in calling us the (so called) ancient heresy of "Modalism"(Which does not exist) trying to get your folks to keep away from us in your lying to them about the jaded history, you do not know what right or wrong is!
The term "Mode" was used in describing God in his dealings with mankind by ancient and some contemporary Oneness folks. You grabbed onto that and used that term!
I am going to post your dishonesty on my blog for all to see your wrangling over this
TF:"You should repent of your slander of me and my brother Dr. White and get on with your life".
mlculwell: It is you that should repent of all of your false doctrines and your lying! Your Calvinism does not allow for that nor does it do any good. LOL!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel wrote: "'Knowing' or not knowing someone from history has no bearing on truth for either of us.(The scriptures alone are truth. ) "
Yet you keep trying to appeal to "ancient Oneness" folks, even though they would consider you heretics and you them (over the issue of tongues).
Your historical arguments are just like those of the equally unitarian (though not modalistic) Muslims. And unless you repent, you will find yourself with the Muslims on the day of judgment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:Yet you keep trying to appeal to "ancient Oneness" folks, even though they would consider you heretics and you them (over the issue of tongues).
mlculwell: That is exactly what I am not doing!
How, and why, would I appeal to historical figures outside the writers of the NT when I do not believe that it has any relevance to truth what soever? (I have been clear.)
It does no good when you do it, or anyone else. I think you would like to make it about that nonsense so that you can continue in your false arguments from history. Sorry I am not biting..LOL!
TF:Your historical arguments are just like those of the equally unitarian (though not modalistic) Muslims.
mlculwell: I have made none. The only thing I have done, is pointed to ancient Oneness folks. You are trying to make this about *tongues* in history(My appeal is to scripture alone.)
You have no bible for your false doctrine of the trinity(No Apostle taught it!) So you must appeal to men outside the NT to try and argue.
You and the Muslims teach false doctrine. You at least teach Jesus is God and the Grace of God albeit a very bad understanding of both.
Your doctrine of God is flat out polytheism. (There is no way around it when you are put on the spot) Even James White revealed it on His DL program concerning his view of the pre-incarnate God the son concerning (Philippians 2:6) where he had God equal to God. You can say what you like about the Muslim's being wrong as they are wrong but we are Monotheists and believe Jesus is the One real God, and at the same time the one real sinless man.(Not a hybrid mix)
TF: And unless you repent, you will find yourself with the Muslims on the day of judgment.
mlculwell: LOL! Why would you ask me to do something you do not do nor even believe you can do?
I am sure you saying that looks pretty Good in front of all your Reformed Folks(He sure told him) Your real belief Bypasses grace preaching and the blood and you were chosen willy nilly in spite of all that, even repentance.. Preaching is no good, to you that is... LOL!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh Yeah, Harold camping belongs to reformed crowd as he Believes Calvinism and *God is three persons* there is not a Oneness or what you term "Modalist" anywhere that would make such an outrageous confession. It amazes how you folks can blatantly lie and twist things. i cannot believe anything you say anymore.
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Your slander is fully addressed above.
-TurretinFan
Blogger mlculwell said...
You have not addressed anything. I have also been part of this discussion and you continue to lie and twist things and then call me a
"slanderer"? Against your false doctrines and untruths? LOL!
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
What other Oneness person whom you term "Modalist" has ever said:"God is three persons," As has Harold Camping?
This clearly shows us your lies and deceit! There is not Oneness person anywhere that would claim such an un-scriptural bunch of nonsense
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
At the end of the discussion you can clearly hear Camping say: "God is three persons." I listened very Closely and I am getting tired of James Whites lying! He does not seem to care that he blatantly sins against God But I do.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
I recall how much you exploded when Dr. White used the term "Unitarian" to describe you (because, apparently, you wish to have that considered as a different heresy), and now you seem to be exploding because you feel that the term "modalism" should be applied only to your particular heresy.
I didn't call him a Oneness Pentecostal - and if I did, I would be wrong to do so. His theology is more orthodox than that.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF,You are being dishonest! Both of those terms(Modalist's and Unitarain's) you use for Oneness were given to Oneness folks by Trinitarian's!
We do not use either term. But you do dishonestly teach folks that is what we are! You tried to lump us with the "Unitarians" By using that term who happen to not believe that Jesus is God. We do!
You have been telling everyone Oneness are "Modalist's" because of the use of a descriptive term(mode) ancient Oneness used for God in the incarnation.
Now you want to dishonestly distance yourself from Harold Camping Because he is of your fellow Reformed teachers that does not teach your trinity in the way you like!
The fact of the matter is; Camping is not Oneness whom you term Modalist. You say he is because he says Jesus is the Father that does not make anyone Oneness! especially when they say;" God is three persons." Stop with your dishonesty! he could very well be termed a trinitarain with your shallow reasoning if you are only taking half of what he says to determine what he is.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Your group is not the only modalistic group out there. I realize that may serve as a certain amount of rain on your parade, but c'est la vie.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
My group is not is not "Modalist" at all TF as we reject the name you have given us and your dishonesty and lying is seen from 1oo miles away! Again, Camping is more trinitarian than Oneness. but since you are picking only one part of his confession you choose that which is farthest away from your ilk to distance yourself, but that does not work since he is Reformed...LOL!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
ROFL Manuel. You are inimitable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
I would not think you would not have a comeback Because
my arguments was "inimitable"! Glad I could make you laugh though. but was serious as a heart attack.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Whoops double negatives...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
One rarely ends "serious as a heart attack" comments with "LOL"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh I am serious as a heart attack! but it seems you are not. Thus my LOL(Laughing at you) You are still trying to push your nonsense that Camping was Oneness(Or what you term as Modalist.) You are hiding in plain sight. Camping Taught Reformed Doctrine and God is three persons there is no way for him to be Modalist! Pure dishonesty on your(AOMIN) part!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Are you under the impression that Camping uses the term "persons" in the standard Trinitarian sense?
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh Please? The term anyhow in the way you impose your definition of "person" for God upon scripture is not found anywhere in any passage of scripture. You argue from silence.
I could care less How he uses that un-scriptural definition for God. What matters is that he said it, just like you would... No Oneness would even allude to such nonsense.
Let me ask you a question? When I use the term person what determines if I am speaking of God or men? Your made up term your rules you cannot do that with God's word.
Hasta La bye bye.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
If there was anyone who still thought that you were seriously concerned that Camping had been misrepresented, I think they see from your response above that such a thought was mistaken.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Why don't you deal with what was stated instead of running away.Why would waste my time with 15 posts if I were not concerned with your out right lies and deceit .
Harold Camping is a Reformed teacher who does not teach your version of the trinity the way in which you like so you dishonestly pawn him off...
He cannot teach Oneness or what you have termed Modalism with his "three persons of God"..
He definitely teaches the doctrine of the trinity but Just a little differently than you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh, I was never concerned at all that "Camping was misrepresented"!
You are trying to Lump him with Oneness by lying and saying he is a "Modalist" A term Trinitarian's have named contemporary and ancient Oneness. I concerned you have lied on God's people (Christian's, Oneness believers)
Here is one for ya? "Persons die", God does not! when I use the term person am I speaking of God or men?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Imagine that? TF and the Reformed to whom he represents is playing it safe?? Guess what TF? I also believe (Acts 20:28.) Jesus was given the Spirit by no measure(John 20:23)
How many beings do you have? Is Jesus a new being? Is he a real human being?( Or A hybrid New species?) Or was he made both Lord and Christ like (Acts 2:36) states because his humanity had a beginning. there was a real distinction that you do not make and only Oneness makes! we do not have God Dying! You want to debate that? Bring it on! I know what I believe and I can defend it..
Once more, stop with your trying to lump one of your own Reformed us.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
I meant to put John 3:34 but wrongly wrote John 20:23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Pro 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
It does not help you much to throw out a prophetic passage of the coming son in the incarnation's name and that of the Father that would be the same name and the father is that which incarnated the real man or son (John 14:10 KJB) The Father that dwelleth in me(The son) He doeth the works. Read (Zechariah 14:90 In that day there shall be one LORD and his name One("That day" was the incarnation.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Dan 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
"The form of the fourth is LIKE the son of God" is not saying; "it is the son of God".
"The son of God" refers to the flesh. that born of Mary(Math.1:19-20) Deny that or tell us God has two sons one flesh, and One in name only as spirit?
The son of man is That which God referred to in the plural pronouns and was included in creation when God said: "let us make man in image after our likeness" he was referring to the coming incarnation( Romans 5:14)Tell us so as one of the single greatest creation passages that exist in scripture! (Adam) who was the figure of him that was to come. Meaning he was not back there! We have a clear passage in the New testament tell us Jesus was not there!
The Daniel passage of the four men in the fire was also prophetic and alluding to the time of the coming incarnation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
What are you trying to do TurretinFan? It is not me versus the scriptures! I love everyone of these passages you have given... what not a one of them has said though is anything about your "God the son" or the false doctrine of the "trinity."
Let me remind you, we were speaking of your dishonesty in lying about the Reformed trinitarian *Harold Camping* and how you were trying to make him Oneness with his three persons of God.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TurretinFan writes:
Joh 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
First of all, Jesus slain flesh(Not "god the son")purchased our right to have his spirit in our Hearts. or sending it too us from the Father by buying it for us.
We do not see "three persons" from the above passage, we see three ways in which God deals with mankind that absolutely had to be!
First, as God who gives grace in choosing mankind through election in him not as individuals willy nilly bypassing preaching and grace apart from our response.
Second, as slain flesh that was sacrificed to atone the sins of mankind that a holy God as spirit could not do as that holy spirit(God the Father's title in dealing with man) was not our kinsmen redeemer, we needed our own kind, but with no sin. If he could then he should have done it immediately.
Third, God as Holy lawgiver would be in us.
For the Holy Ghost was not yet Given for Jesus was not yet Glorified (or slain in his flesh. John 7:38-39)
By man came sin and by man came also the resurrection from the dead.(1st.Cor.15:21) God the son could not purchase anything for us as he would not be our kinsmen redeemer.
Jesus was made both Lord and Christ.(Acts 2:36)
So that now, the Lord is that spirit (2nd Cor. 3:17)
He was the first comforter in the flesh and would Be the other Comforter in the spirit.
That He might abide with you Forever even the spirit of truth: Whom the world cannot receive,because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him.: BUT YOU KNOW HIM: FOR HE DWELLETH WITH YOU (NOW IN FLESH) AND SHALL BE IN YOU.(AS SPIRIT)
I (Jesus) will not leave you comfortless(or as Fatherless Orphans),I(Jesus) will come to you.(As the father or Spirit of God)(John 14:17-18)
(1st. Cor.15:45-46) The Last man Adam(Jesus) was made the quickening (Life giving) Spirit. because his humanity had a beginning.
How-be-it that was not first which was spirtual?(Adam came before Jesus) But that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual.(God came to us as Jesus in the incarnation) or the second man.
from Robert Sabin:
"He shall not speak of himself," is a common Johanine
phrase, most often applied to Jesus Christ as a sort of hallmark of
his ministry. It was Jesus while on earth who did "not speak of
himself," who in all things that he spoke attributed his words to an
enabler, to the Father, who enabled him to speak and gave him the words".
(John 14:10) Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father
in me? the words that I speak unto you I SPEAK NOT OF MYSELF: but the
Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine,
whether I speak God, or WHETHER I SPEAK OF MYSELF.
John 7:28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both
know me, and ye know whence I am: and I AM NOT COME OF MYSELF, but he
that sent me is true, whom ye know not.
John 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him
not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 He
that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth
him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last
day. 49 For I HAVE NOT SPOKEN OF MYSELF; but the Father which sent me,
he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
Jesus did not even know the time of his own second coming but the Father Only(Mark 13:32) Because the Father only was that divine one spirit that knew all things and gave his spirit to the son by no measure(John 3:34) and made him the one true God and spirit but did not reveal all things to the limited in knowledge real man.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delete
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Psa 74:2 Remember thy congregation, which thou hast purchased of old; the rod of thine inheritance, which thou hast redeemed; this mount Zion, wherein thou hast dwelt.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
LOL! You better read Hebrews 9::17-24 again!
Then read Romans 10:13-17
Again, you bypass grace and say you are worthy by God choosing you willy nilly not in him but randomly as an individual not by the grace he has given.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Lest we forget, Harold Camping is a Reformed Trinitarian.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel then: "He teaches Calvinism and some hybrid Mix between Oneness and trinity doctrine."
Manuel now: "Harold Camping is a Reformed Trinitarian."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Blogger Turretinfan said... Manuel then: "He teaches Calvinism and some hybrid Mix between Oneness and trinity doctrine."
Manuel now: "Harold Camping is a Reformed Trinitarian."
Manuel: That is what this whole thing is about! I have been trying to get you stop with your nonsense about calling Harold Camping Oneness or what you also term as Modalist. You would not do that, you continued to dishonestly call him a Modalist to distance yourself! I was giving you a taste of your own medicine!
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Joh 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
Manuel: Of Course the father is greater that the son! The father Only knew the time of the second coming and not the son.(Mark 13:32) The father was the deity that Incarnated the son and did the works and miracles(John 14:10) The son could do no works or miracles of Himself(John 5:30)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Mar 5:7 And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.
Luk 8:28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Mar 5:7 And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.
Luk 8:28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not.
(John 5:30) I can of mine ownself(as the son of God) DO NOTHING!
The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works(John 14:10)
Mark 13:32 But that day and that hour knoweth no man,no not the Angels which are in heaven,neither the son, but the Father.
"Son of God" does not mean: deity as God the son and they are not inter-changable terms! God the son does not exist and neither does the son of God as either a separate or a distinct person of God.. You add that false doctrine to scripture "son of God" is that which includes God the Father as his Deity in the incarnation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
1 John 5:7-8
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
2:08 PM, October 02, 2009
Blogger mlculwell said...
TurretinFan:"Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
1 John 5:7-8
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one".
Mlculwell: Come on at least try? Anybody can give passages they think that are on their side with no commentary. There are two reasons you do this 1.) is to play it safe.
2.) Is to make it look as though you have scripture on your.
since I already know what you teach concerning these passages(Very much in error of Course) do not need for you to give me your commentary therefor making it look as though the truth of the scriptures are yours which is not the truth.... LOL!
Anyhow neither of those passages are trinitarian. (1st John 5:7) is supposed to be suspect for authenticity but I do not need that argument as it does no harm to the truth of God's word or his Oneness!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Once again, TF dishonestly attempts to pawn Harold camping off on Oneness folks by calling him a "Modalist"(A name that Trinitarian's have given Oneness.) Because of half of his confession that: "Jesus was the Father." but somehow conveniently forgets about the other half of his confession: "that God is three persons." He ignores the Both quotes and takes the half that fits his need.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Mr. Culwell,
We already exposed the facts that (1) I fully agree that Mr. Camping is not Oneness and (2) you are not really interested in what Mr. Camping believes.
Why do you continue to slander?
Jeremiah 50:36 A sword is upon the liars; and they shall dote: a sword is upon her mighty men; and they shall be dismayed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Sir, the Sword is Upon you and James White for your Lying, slanderous, dishonesty and I aim to expose the both of you..It was Mr. White that has put you up to it, starting with his debate with Camping! You have been trying to turn this around on us.
You dishonestly have been telling everyone Camping is a "Modalist" a name you have given both ancient and contemporary Oneness. It seems now, you have also added a new category and lump him in with us as Oneness(I do not want to hear you lie again about it!) You take part of what he has said and throw away what you do not need just like you do in scripture to come up with your false doctrines.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Ancient oneness? LOL! There were ancient unitarians, there were ancient modalists, but oneness pentacostalism there was not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF writes:"Ancient oneness? LOL! There were ancient unitarians, there were ancient modalists, but oneness pentacostalism there was not".
Yeah, Ancient Oneness! "Modalism" is a term you gave the ancient Oneness! Just because you deny the experience does not mean it did not exist or that it somehow cahnged over into your false doctrine.
We get our jaded history from their enemies who hated truth, Because of men through History who fell from truth.
You make a claim of men who also could be claimed of us, who made no "trinitarain confession" in history. History is not that which determines truth, the scriptures alone are.
LOL! You crack me up!~ Look at (Acts 19:2) Paul destroys your false doctrine and establishes mine By asking the following question! Paul Asks:"Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed"?
He did not ask; have you believed on Jesus? Of these Jews to whom the door was already opened in (Acts 2:4) Belief that God gives you or otherwise(*Rolling of eyes*) does not get you the Holy Ghost! It does not matter that they were followers of John, they were still Jews and the door was already Opened for them to receive the spirit ...
Otherwise Paul would not have asked the question (to these of whom he did not know who they were) your false doctrine would have been understood!
"Ancient Modalists" get a clue man. There were only ancient Modalists because that is what you named them like you falsely named God a "trinity"! You sir continue in your lies and deceit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Have you noticed that you seem to think that any time we use the term "modalist" we are referring to your group, even though we actually just view your group as one of a number of different groups?
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF Writes:"Manuel:
Have you noticed that you seem to think that any time we use the term "modalist" we are referring to your group, even though we actually just view your group as one of a number of different groups?"
What I have noticed is that what you are trying to tell everyone and pull off are two different things!
Ask Anyone what a so called "Modalist" is? They will then refer to us,(Oneness Ancient and contemporary) not the New designation you have given Harold Camping to try and distance yourself pull your dishonest Okie Doke!
You do not give up and neither do I!
Once more, you have taken half of his quote where states: "Jesus is the Father." All the While ignoring where states: "God is three persons."
If half of His statement makes Him a Oneness or what you term "Modalist" then the Other half makes him a Trinitarain but that is as ridiculous as what you are trying to do!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
You may be shocked, but I didn't have your particular group in mind when I described Camping's errant view of God. I was simply using the appropriate label to describe his errant view of God. That label also applies to you, which apparently is what set off this volcano of irrationality that we have observed in the comments above and elsewhere on the net.
-TurretinFan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
"Manuel:
You may be shocked, but I didn't have your particular group in mind when I described Camping's errant view of God."
mlculwell: I was not shocked as Know what you are doing. Which is distancing yourself from someone who is clearly Trinitarain otherwise you would not be trying so hard.
TF: "I was simply using the appropriate label to describe his errant view of God."
mlculwell: If you are somehow basing that from half of what he said which your clearly are then "The appropriate label to describe his errant view of God." Could just as well be Trinitarain. It is the most errant view of God.
TF:"That label also applies to you, which apparently is what set off this volcano of irrationality that we have observed in the comments above and elsewhere on the net.
mlculwell: I believe the label also belongs to you! "Irrationality" would be your thinking, as you are the one who takes half of what he says and makes him a "Modalist" when he said: "God is three persons." No Oneness or who you term "Modalist" would ever say such thing!
If he would Denonunce the "three persons of God" and stop with his date setting Etc. we Might take him into our fold..LOL!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Oh? Are you taking into the fold those who can't speak in tongues now?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF writes: Oh? Are you taking into the fold those who can't speak in tongues now?
mlculwell: You better believe it! That is how we all come "into the fold"! God can even fill you and James White with the Holy Ghost!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Let me ask you bluntly: have you taken the position that the gift of tongues is not necessary for salvation?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"Let me ask you bluntly: have you taken the position that the gift of tongues is not necessary for salvation"?
mlculwell: Yeah, I can tell you without batting an eye, there is not Oneness person anywhere that believes the "GIFT OF TONGUES is necessary for salvation!" LOL!
This shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Just like every other Reformed person I speak with.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delete
Blogger Turretinfan said...
So you are quibbling over the term "gift of tongues" then? What would you call it instead?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"So you are quibbling over the term "gift of tongues" then? What would you call it instead"?
mlculwell: Yeah, of course I am quibbling over "the gift of tongues"! This tells me much, for one thing you do not have any understanding of scripture and I will be spending my time trying to teach you something you will not accept.
This started out about you dishonestly, trying to somehow connect Harold Camping to the Oneness view, or to those you term "Modalist."
That was not working well so then you wanted to go toe to toe concerning our two views of God(Trinity Versus Oneness.)
Now you want to talk about receiving of the Holy Ghost.
(Acts 19:2) Paul destroys your doctrine By asking the following question! "Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed"?
Once more he did not ask; "have you believed on Jesus"? Of these Jews to whom the door was already opened in (Acts 2:4) It does not matter that they were followers of John, they were still Jews and the door was already Opened for them to receive the spirit ...
Otherwise Paul would not have asked the question (to these of whom he did not know whom they were) your doctrine would have been understood and he would not have asked have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed!
They then spoke in tongues as evidence they received the spirit(Acts 19:6) They spoke in tongues first as that evidence(Not as the gift of tongues) there was no interpretation in (Acts 2:4) or in (Acts 11:15 it fell on Cornelius household as on us(the 120 not just the twelve) in the begging which referred to Acts 10:46)
in (Acts 19:6) This is not the gift of tongues! This is the gift of the spirit!(the Holy Ghost)
There are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased...
Please give the passage that says it changed to silent(Mental assent "faith") especially when Paul refutes that doctrine in Acts 19:2 with his question... For sure reception is by faith but not your but not your version of it which bypasses Grace, faith, the blood and preaching.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
So, who are these ancient people who were modalistic or unitarian and *also* believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
(Obviously, you'd assert the Apostles, but between them and the 21st century, what's the earliest evidence you can find of this view.)
-TurretinFan
N.B. I'm asking because you claimed that there were ancient Oneness folks, and that I called them modalists. I am not suggesting that for something to be right it has to have ancient folks attesting it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF writes:"So, who are these ancient people who were modalistic or unitarian and *also* believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
mlculwell:What difference does that make?
Historical figures do not determine my doctrine unless those historical figures are the writers of the NT and the Lord Jesus Christ(The Author.)
where am I told in scripture (alone) to look to historical figures? What if those historical figures (in the majority) were wrong? Am I going to be wrong by lining up with Jesus and those writers of the NT?(John 17:17)
I do not concern my self with those historical writers, not even the Ancient Oneness who were referred to by their enemies. (What good would that do anyhow?) I do not believe their enemies ever ever told the truth about them or their doctrines and we only get a small taste of what they were about.
TF:(Obviously, you'd assert the Apostles, but between them and the 21st century, what's the earliest evidence you can find of this view.)
-TurretinFan
mlculwell: I see folks who believed like me from history but I take that with a grain of salt. If there were small groups throughout each century that were not in the majority, either in your view or in mine it proves nothing one way or the other for either of us.
TF: N.B. I'm asking because you claimed that there were ancient Oneness folks, and that I called them modalists. I am not suggesting that for something to be right it has to have ancient folks attesting it.
mlculwell: I do believe there were anceint folks Sabelius, Praxeas, Noetus.
Where did Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, ever describe God as a Trinity or as three persons? Can you give me the quote?
There were many groups through out history that believed the biblical infilling of the spirit but that is nothing to the biblical witness.
Whatever their experience is between them and their and God and they are all long Gone but for sure today we remain and we have the truth of His word and it should not and cannot be ignored!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
So you think Sabelius, Praxeas, and Noetus each believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"So you think Sabelius, Praxeas, and Noetus each believed that there "are three ways tongues are used in the believers and they have not ceased"?
mlculwell: It does not make a thimbles worth difference to me (at all!) what they or anyone else believed about it!
The truth is no historical figure you can prop up, or that I would not even bother anyhow, holds any weight to the truth.
You are deflecting. Nor does it matter what any other historical figures believed...
I think I have made that perfectly clear and yet you still want to harp on your belief about it because that is all you a have.
Give me the transition where it has all changed? You would think a doctrine so important would clearly be found in scripture.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Allow me to make this a little simpler for you? I believe all those historical figures (You bring up and the ones I do) and the creeds, hold about as much weight toward our salvation as the Book of Mormon. So in my view that holds zero weight toward anything we are discussing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
No, Manuel. I was just exposing the fact that *even you* have to admit that you don't know of any ancient Oneness folks. This contradicts your prior claims that we mislabel ancient modalists, and feeds into the general theme here that you are complaining about us labeling Camping without a proper reason for doing so. Calling someone "modalist" is not the same as calling "oneness" as you ought to realize by now.
You should repent of your slander of me and my brother Dr. White and get on with your life.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:"No, Manuel. I was just exposing the fact that *even you* have to admit that you don't know of any ancient Oneness folks".
mlculwell:Once more: "Knowing" or not knowing someone from history has no bearing on truth for either of us.(The scriptures alone are truth. )
TF: "This contradicts your prior claims that we mislabel ancient modalists, and feeds into the general theme here that you are complaining about us labeling Camping without a proper reason for doing so".
mlculwell: You are the One contradicting yourself! Oneness has to do with the belief in Monotheism (One God, Jesus being that One God and a denial of three persons) LOL!
I can find all kinds of beliefs from so called ancient folks you would consider to be trinitarain's you would have no part of, some even recanted and became Arian.
"Modalism" as I have explained numerous times now, was a name that was given to us by you and the Enemies of the ancient Oneness. The term "Oneness" has to do with our belief in One God. Jesus being that One God! You have given us the name "Modalist"
You try and wrangle all these terms and now you are wrangling with a term you have given us, so you can distance yourself from your Brother Camping.
Again you lie and are dishonest. I want no part of a group that spends all their time lying and hiding truth and facts!(That would be you and Dr. White) That fact is obvious to me from this conversation with your folks.
TF:It does not contradict anything! Ancient Oneness does
Calling someone "modalist" is not the same as calling "oneness" as you ought to realize by now".
mlculwell; Then don't you ever call us a "Modalist" again! What have I been arguing with you guys about all this time? Oneness is a belief of Jesus being the One God and a flat out denial of the un-scriptural doctrine of "three persons of God." The folks of ancient times fit that description perfectly you just happened to take their term "mode" and call them "Modalists" but they were definitely Oneness! You are trying so hard.
Where did Harold Camping ever say: "there were three Modes of being" I guess that makes you a Modalist then! He(Camping) said: "God was/is three persons." Be consistent!
Again, I don't want to hear you, or anyone else use it for Oneness folks ever again. The fact is, you have spent so much time in calling us the (so called) ancient heresy of "Modalism"(Which does not exist) trying to get your folks to keep away from us in your lying to them about the jaded history, you do not know what right or wrong is!
The term "Mode" was used in describing God in his dealings with mankind by ancient and some contemporary Oneness folks. You grabbed onto that and used that term!
I am going to post your dishonesty on my blog for all to see your wrangling over this
TF:"You should repent of your slander of me and my brother Dr. White and get on with your life".
mlculwell: It is you that should repent of all of your false doctrines and your lying! Your Calvinism does not allow for that nor does it do any good. LOL!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel wrote: "'Knowing' or not knowing someone from history has no bearing on truth for either of us.(The scriptures alone are truth. ) "
Yet you keep trying to appeal to "ancient Oneness" folks, even though they would consider you heretics and you them (over the issue of tongues).
Your historical arguments are just like those of the equally unitarian (though not modalistic) Muslims. And unless you repent, you will find yourself with the Muslims on the day of judgment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
TF:Yet you keep trying to appeal to "ancient Oneness" folks, even though they would consider you heretics and you them (over the issue of tongues).
mlculwell: That is exactly what I am not doing!
How, and why, would I appeal to historical figures outside the writers of the NT when I do not believe that it has any relevance to truth what soever? (I have been clear.)
It does no good when you do it, or anyone else. I think you would like to make it about that nonsense so that you can continue in your false arguments from history. Sorry I am not biting..LOL!
TF:Your historical arguments are just like those of the equally unitarian (though not modalistic) Muslims.
mlculwell: I have made none. The only thing I have done, is pointed to ancient Oneness folks. You are trying to make this about *tongues* in history(My appeal is to scripture alone.)
You have no bible for your false doctrine of the trinity(No Apostle taught it!) So you must appeal to men outside the NT to try and argue.
You and the Muslims teach false doctrine. You at least teach Jesus is God and the Grace of God albeit a very bad understanding of both.
Your doctrine of God is flat out polytheism. (There is no way around it when you are put on the spot) Even James White revealed it on His DL program concerning his view of the pre-incarnate God the son concerning (Philippians 2:6) where he had God equal to God. You can say what you like about the Muslim's being wrong as they are wrong but we are Monotheists and believe Jesus is the One real God, and at the same time the one real sinless man.(Not a hybrid mix)
TF: And unless you repent, you will find yourself with the Muslims on the day of judgment.
mlculwell: LOL! Why would you ask me to do something you do not do nor even believe you can do?
I am sure you saying that looks pretty Good in front of all your Reformed Folks(He sure told him) Your real belief Bypasses grace preaching and the blood and you were chosen willy nilly in spite of all that, even repentance.. Preaching is no good, to you that is... LOL!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
Oh Yeah, Harold camping belongs to reformed crowd as he Believes Calvinism and *God is three persons* there is not a Oneness or what you term "Modalist" anywhere that would make such an outrageous confession. It amazes how you folks can blatantly lie and twist things. i cannot believe anything you say anymore.
Blogger Turretinfan said...
Manuel:
Your slander is fully addressed above.
-TurretinFan
Blogger mlculwell said...
You have not addressed anything. I have also been part of this discussion and you continue to lie and twist things and then call me a
"slanderer"? Against your false doctrines and untruths? LOL!
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger mlculwell said...
What other Oneness person whom you term "Modalist" has ever said:"God is three persons," As has Harold Camping?
This clearly shows us your lies and deceit! There is not Oneness person anywhere that would claim such an un-scriptural bunch of nonsense
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)