Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

#125 Oct 19, 2012
[QUOTE}Trinity is thre gods in one.
Follow the words above.[/QUOTE]If you had actually read what was found in Wiki you would have seen that the Trinity is NOT three gods in one.

According to this doctrine, there is only one God in three persons.... Trinitarianism (one deity in three persons)... " from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
Lay Worker

Jerilderie, Australia

#126 Oct 19, 2012
djconklin wrote:
<quoted text>If you had actually read what was found in Wiki you would have seen that the Trinity is NOT three gods in one.
According to this doctrine, there is only one God in three persons.... Trinitarianism (one deity in three persons)... " from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
All that has been confirmed is the usual papal rendition

No genuine Bible student uses "Wiki" to prove the Godhead

These days, sleeping SDAs do though !
ROBERT TWO

Adelaide, Australia

#127 Oct 19, 2012
djconklin wrote:
<quoted text>If you had actually read what was found in Wiki you would have seen that the Trinity is NOT three gods in one.
According to this doctrine, there is only one God in three persons.... Trinitarianism (one deity in three persons)... " from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
Your wording here is more correct than FB is.
Lay Worker

Jerilderie, Australia

#128 Oct 20, 2012
ROBERT TWO wrote:
<quoted text>
Your wording here is more correct than FB is.
Another LITTLE HORN sympathiser
Earthcaller

Apopka, FL

#129 Oct 20, 2012
One in three three in one? Whatever became of two in the beginning and two at the end see Revelation 22:1
birdman

Shelbyville, IL

#130 Oct 20, 2012
Earthcaller wrote:
One in three three in one? Whatever became of two in the beginning and two at the end see Revelation 22:1
False interpretation here.

Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

#131 Oct 20, 2012
djconklin wrote:
<quoted text>If you had actually read what was found in Wiki you would have seen that the Trinity is NOT three gods in one.
According to this doctrine, there is only one God in three persons.... Trinitarianism (one deity in three persons)... " from Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

R2: Your wording here is more correct than FB is.
I'm really shocked that you'd say such a thing!

From FB:

"There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons." online at http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/...
ROBERT TWO

Australia

#132 Oct 20, 2012
Lay Worker wrote:
<quoted text>
Another LITTLE HORN sympathiser
Yopu are disagreeing with yourself here ?
ROBERT TWO

Australia

#133 Oct 20, 2012
Earthcaller wrote:
One in three three in one? Whatever became of two in the beginning and two at the end see Revelation 22:1
At the end 2 is already incorrect.
In heaven sharing the throne there must be more than 200 counting the first fruits.
Little children go out to play !!!!
ROBERT TWO

Australia

#134 Oct 20, 2012
djconklin wrote:
<quoted text>I'm really shocked that you'd say such a thing!
From FB:
"There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons." online at http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/...
Just do the thinking FIRST !!!

Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

#135 Oct 20, 2012
I always think R2; that's how I can catch the liars--how many have the 264 lies told about EGW have you caught?
ROBERT TWO

Australia

#136 Oct 20, 2012
djconklin wrote:
I always think R2; that's how I can catch the liars--how many have the 264 lies told about EGW have you caught?
EGW was wrong in regard to MARRIAGE, DIVORCE & REMARRIASGE according to her in 1909.
The SDA stand on the subject is still open for questiuons.
Collect all BIBLE texts on each subject then sift through it the answer is amazing.

Even JEANINS SAUTRON got it right LOL.
ROBERT TWO

Australia

#137 Oct 20, 2012
djconklin wrote:
I always think R2; that's how I can catch the liars--how many have the 264 lies told about EGW have you caught?
David I would rather you modified your words and did not say LIAR or LIES just say in error as it is more GODLY to be mild.

Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

#138 Oct 20, 2012
djconklin wrote:
I always think R2; that's how I can catch the liars--how many have the 264 lies told about EGW have you caught?

EGW was wrong in regard to MARRIAGE, DIVORCE & REMARRIASGE according to her in 1909.
1) I don't appreciate the bait-and-switch tactic of the CON man.

2) You have not produced ANY evidence, altho' you've repeated the claim a number of times.

If you'd check closely she had multiple positions. In one case, people were trying to get a divorced couple back together and sought EGW's help. She wrote that the "child bride" (because she was childish) should be sent back to her mother. Have you read her "Testimonies on Sexual Behavior, Adultery, and Divorce"?( http://egwtext.whiteestate.org/publicationtoc... ))

See also: http://egwtext.whiteestate.org/publication.ph...

"Every marriage engagement should be carefully considered; for marriage is a step taken for life. Both the man and the woman should carefully consider whether they can cleave to each other through the vicissitudes of life as long as they both shall live. Letter 17, 1896, p. 4.(To W. F. Caldwell, May 10, 1896.)"

Quite biblical, NO error here.

Likewise here:

"A woman may be legally divorced from her husband by the laws of the land, and yet not divorced in the sight of God and according to the higher law. There is only one sin, which is adultery, which can place the husband or wife in a position where they can be free from the marriage vow in the sight of God. Although the laws of the land may grant a divorce, yet they are husband and wife still in the Bible light, according to the laws of God.

I saw that Sister _____, as yet, has no right to marry another man, but if she, or any other woman, should obtain a divorce legally on the ground that her husband was guilty of adultery, then she is free to be married to whom she chooses.—Manuscript 2, 1863, 4.(“Testimony to Monterey Church,” June 6, 1863.)"

>it is more GODLY to be mild.

Where does it say that in the Bible?
DANNO

London, UK

#139 Oct 20, 2012
djconklin wrote:
I always think R2; that's how I can catch the liars--how many have the 264 lies told about EGW have you caught?
The evidence of a FAKE Christian click here> http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/seventh-d...

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#140 Oct 22, 2012
yoyo wrote:
They are inept, irrelavent, Laodicean promoting, non inspirational, cliche loaded, non practical, superficial, superstitious, shallow soteriology, overpaid fanatics who need to be fired ASAP to save the denomination from total collapse.
So, you have listened and watched each and every SDA pastor in the world? What a complete idiotic statement you made.

Since: Aug 10

Pacific Northwest USA

#141 Oct 22, 2012
Earthcaller wrote:
One in three three in one? Whatever became of two in the beginning and two at the end see Revelation 22:1
We'll NEVER fully understand this, so quit trying to explain it, y'all! If we were meant to understand it, God would have given us an explanation. Our human minds cannot grasp the concept, and what difference does it make, anyway? God is God - He is very big and very good, and He's in charge - that's all we need to understand. There is much about Him we cannot understand this side of heaven.

Since: Aug 10

Pacific Northwest USA

#142 Oct 22, 2012
djconklin wrote:
I always think R2; that's how I can catch the liars--how many have the 264 lies told about EGW have you caught?
Is it YOUR job/responsibility to publicly identify everyone whom you deem to be untruthful?
ROBERT TWO

Adelaide, Australia

#143 Oct 22, 2012
GrammyJoanne wrote:
<quoted text>We'll NEVER fully understand this, so quit trying to explain it, y'all! If we were meant to understand it, God would have given us an explanation. Our human minds cannot grasp the concept, and what difference does it make, anyway? God is God - He is very big and very good, and He's in charge - that's all we need to understand. There is much about Him we cannot understand this side of heaven.
Granny you are correct in talking SINGULAR but they are not even on that road. What the BIBLE states is TRUE and as far as we go.
These people are WEIRD. THey have CONTRADICTORY SCRIPTURE.
ROBERT TWO

Adelaide, Australia

#144 Oct 22, 2012
GrammyJoanne wrote:
<quoted text>Is it YOUR job/responsibility to publicly identify everyone whom you deem to be untruthful?
To some people it is just a game that passes the time.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Seventh-day Adventist Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Closing work 6 min birdman 66
For SDA's to see [Christ having a SINLESS NATURE] 8 min birdman 58
Did Jesus have a sinful nature ? NO [revisited] 13 min birdman 347
DENVER Airport 22 min DANNO 1
walls 3 feet thick 23 min DANNO 1
GREEK isLAND 25 min DANNO 2
The GREENBRIER 28 min DANNO 1
ONLY ADVENTISTS in HEAVEN for 1000 YEARS? 3 hr DANNO 1,513
More from around the web