Greatest Sect of Christianity

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, it doesn't. John 1 refers entirely to attributes of Christ Himself, with no reference to scripture unless you choose to interpret "The Word" that way. Which would be an incorrect interpretation; "the Word" refers to Christ's place in the early Christian conceptual model of the Trinity, IIR/UC. What you're saying is astonishingly blasphemous and has me scratching my head.

Indeed. Kid is basically promoting heresy as you and Loin have pointed out. God is a Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; not a Quadinity.

[Kidlicious]

Yes you are. You believe in a Conservative interpretation of Scripture and go to a Baptist Church. QED.

It is amusing that you want someone else to have dignity and integrity when the plank in your eye is so large.

Well I do believe in the earl church. If that makes me conservative so be it, but you act like it's a bad thing.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes the Word is Scripture. The Scripture is eternal. It existed in the beginning in it's complete form. That is exactly what the verse says.

Likely in King James form as well, right? Thank you for putting God in a box.

I'm curious - do you believe in glossolalia, prophecy, and healing exist today? Or did they end back with the old apostles?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well I do believe in the earl church. If that makes me conservative so be it, but you act like it's a bad thing.

But you really don't. Origin, Clement, Athanasius, Irenaeus of Lyon are all part of the early church. But you consider them "tradition" and thus not to be trusted.

[Barnabas]

Well I have to admit I just googled it, and you should do the same. Google sola scriptura and early church. Church fathers to research are Irenaeus and Tertullian to name a couple.

First there was the oral tradition and the church believed as I do that God's truth was revealed by the apostles. The oral tradition ended when the Scripture was cannonized. After that anyone who believed that truth was revealed by oral tradition was considered a heretic. For example the gnostics still believed in oral tradition instead of sola scriptura. It stayed that way until the council of Trent when the Catholic church went against its own tradition and declared that the oral tradition had never ended. That was in the 16th century.

It may be hard for you to believe but its true. In John 1:1 The Bible is the Word is Christ.

You mean the Irenaeus who wrote this?

"As I said before, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She likewise believes these things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but one mouth. For, while the languages of the world are diverse, nevertheless, the authority of the tradition is one and the same" (Against Heresies 1:10:2 [A.D. 189]).

"That is why it is surely necessary to avoid them [heretics], while cherishing with the utmost diligence the things pertaining to the Church, and to lay hold of the tradition of truth. . . . What if the apostles had not in fact left writings to us? Would it not be necessary to follow the order of tradition, which was handed down to those to whom they entrusted the churches?" (ibid., 3:4:1).

"It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors to our own times—men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about.

"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the successions of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles.

"With this church, because of its superior origin, all churches must agree—that is, all the faithful in the whole world—and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition" (ibid., 3:3:1–2).

[Kidlicious]

Lol, no. Elok is just making stuff up. Word doesnn't have anything to do with the trinity. What is the origin of that anyway. Word means teaching. If you believe in oral tradition it can mean that and not scripture, but that wouldn't be the original meaning. It means Scripture. But Elok is just making **** up.

[Kidlicious]

Barnabas,

That's it. There you go Elok.

[Kidlicious]

But you really don't. Origin, Clement, Athanasius, Irenaeus of Lyon are all part of the early church. But you consider them "tradition" and thus not to be trusted.

Don't tell me what I believe and then attack Albe for doing it to you, you hypocrite.

[loinburger]

Lol, no. Elok is just making stuff up. Word doesnn't have anything to do with the trinity. What is the origin of that anyway. Word means teaching. If you believe in oral tradition it can mean that and not scripture, but that wouldn't be the original meaning. It means Scripture. But Elok is just making **** up.

"Hey, it says Word, right? And there are words in the bible, right? QED!"

You're basing your entire heresy on an inability to understand metaphor.

[loinburger]

Don't tell me what I believe and then attack Albe for doing it to you, you hypocrite.

So you don't believe in sola scriptura? Because if you do, then why do you care what Clement et al wrote? And if you don't care what Clement et al wrote, then why are you getting all bent out of shape?

[Kidlicious]

Likely in King James form as well, right? Thank you for putting God in a box.

I'm curious - do you believe in glossolalia, prophecy, and healing exist today? Or did they end back with the old apostles?

The issue is what did the early church believe. I'm not going to get in your car and go for a ride.

[Kidlicious]

So you don't believe in sola scriptura? Because if you do, then why do you care what Clement et al wrote? And if you don't care what Clement et al wrote, then why are you getting all bent out of shape?

The answers to all of those questions are obvious.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Barnabas,

That's it. There you go Elok.

Barnabas just destroyed your point by showing you Irenaeus was HUGE into tradition.

Don't tell me what I believe and then attack Albe for doing it to you, you hypocrite.

I'm just telling you what you, by your own mouth, have said. Albe is saying you should believe X. Quite different, but you wouldn't know.

[loinburger]

The answers to all of those questions are obvious.

"Kidicious is a cretin"? Why avoid answering such "obvious" questions unless you just don't want to admit the contradictions in your own beliefs?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Btw, on this hold John 1 "Word" thing. The ORIGINAL Greek was Logos, which means:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

In ordinary, non-technical Greek, logos had a semantic field extending beyond "word" to notions such as, on the one hand, language, talk, statement, speech, conversation, tale, story, prose, proposition, and principle; and on the other hand, thought, reason, account, consideration, esteem, due relation, proportion, and analogy.[1]

Despite the conventional translation as "word", it is not used for a word in the grammatical sense; instead, the term lexis (λέξις) was used.[8] However, both logos and lexis derive from the same verb legō (λέγω), meaning "to count, tell, say, speak".[1][8][9]

Philo distinguished between logos prophorikos (the uttered word) and the logos endiathetos (the word remaining within).[10] The Stoics also spoke of the logos spermatikos (the generative principle of the Universe), which is not important in the Biblical tradition, but is relevant in Neoplatonism.[11] Early translators from Greek, like Jerome in the 4th century, were frustrated by the inadequacy of any single Latin word to convey the Logos expressed in the Gospel of John. The Vulgate Bible usage of in principium erat verbum was thus constrained to use the perhaps inadequate noun verbum for word, but later romance language translations had the advantage of nouns such as le mot in French. Reformation translators took another approach. Martin Luther rejected Zeitwort (verb) in favor of Wort (word), for instance, although later commentators repeatedly turned to a more dynamic use involving the living word as felt by Jerome and Augustine.[12]

In English, logos is the root of "logic," and of the "-logy" suffix (e.g., geology).[13]

So not exactly "word". That's just English's flawed way of translating it - Living Word would likely be better (God is the living word - that's not all that controversial).

Had nothing to do with written words.