Quoted: No, OBVIOUSLY, I never claimed Paul to be God or any other ordinary person who has God in them . . .

Maybe you didn't say that but it's the logical conclusion of the proof that you offered that Jesus is God. If you're going to apply simplistic logic to Jesus you have to be willing to accept the same conclusions when the "evidence" supports it elsewhere.

It is important to examine the Bible as a whole document. The Word of God is not a trick and though it has been translated into more languages and styles than any other book in the history of earth, it's message remains consistent.

I couldn't agree more. So, in that context I'll offer what I believe is the standard we should apply throughout the scriptures:

Ex 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Or stated another way:

Mt 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Quoted: The use of the word LORD proves nothing. First of all, there are no capital letters in Greek so can't put any stock in whether the word is capitalized. Beyond that, the same Greek word "lord" (Strong's # 2962) that you put so much stock into can be translated "master" or "sir" as well. For example, in Joh 12:21 that very same Greek word (in this case translated SIR) is used to address Phillip ("The same came therefore to Philip, which was of Bethsaida of Galilee, and desired him, saying, Sir, we would see Jesus.") You're not suggesting that Phillip is God, too, are you? You simply can't build a doctrine on the use of the word lord. For, as Paul tells us there be many lords — including the lord God and the lord Jesus. THat's two distinct souls.: 1Cor 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) 6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Quoted: You clearly missed my point. Please read the thread before posting Wasn't THIS your point: Now, why are these 106 verses calling Him "LORD" in the same context as "LORD" is used in reference to God the Father? I repeat: The common use of the word lord means nothing.

The context of the use of the word "lord" in almost all the verses I mentioned, used in conjunction with "Jesus Christ", shows that they are CLEARLY not referencing him as "lord" in the same way you address some random land owner or "lower-case" (in our English) "lord".

Again, IF YOU ACTUALLY READ THE CHAPTER and CONTEXT of these verses you keep sighting, you will see their meaning and intent!

Corinthians 8:1-12
1 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.

2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.

3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him.

4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.

5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.

8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.

9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.

10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols;

11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?

12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.


CLEARLY, this chapter is a warning against seeking other idols or gods or lords. (note the lower case in  verse 5) Yet, verse 6 has LORD, all caps in most English texts. Now, the original language it was written, there may not have been caps, but there was an obyious attempt to amplfy the "Lordship" of Jesus above all other lords.

Verse 12 says that when we sin against other Christians, we are sinning against Christ.  Now, why is the wording "Christ" and not "God"? Clearly, a sin against Christ is identified as being the result of sinning against other Chritians. That is the final offense. There is no other verse after 12 explaining that a sin against Christ is a sin against God, because they are the same!


1 Corinthians 1:30
God alone made it possible for you to be in Christ Jesus. For our benefit God made Christ to be wisdom itself. He is the one who made us acceptable to God. He made us pure and holy, and he gave himself to purchase our freedom.

Jesus is wisdom itself through God. Jesus made us pure and holy. How can a man make us holy? Only God is holy. Jesus must have deity to offer us holiness.

Jesus called out to Lazarus to come back form the dead. Who can do that, but God? Can man bring another back from the by simply calling out to them? No.  jJsus must have deity.

Quoted:Again, IF YOU ACTUALLY READ THE CHAPTER and CONTEXT of these verses you keep sighting, you will see their meaning and intent!

Oh, I see . . . by golly, you're right. It is right there:

1Cor 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.


One God: the father
Also, there is is the Christ, Jesus. That would be a different individual/soul. It is through Christ that we have a relationship with God. That would be in keeping with the other  verses that we've  seen that say he is the mediator between God and man.

Quoted: Jesus called out to Lazarus to come back form the dead. Who can do that, but God? Can man bring another back from the by simply calling out to them? No.  jJsus must have deity.

There are nine occasions in the Bible where someone was raised from the dead. I'll have to do some research to recall all the specifics but a couple of them were in the Old Testament. In the new testament I believe Paul raises someone from the dead (the guy who fell from the balcony) and think maybe Peter did (though I'm not positive about that one).

Of course, in each case, it was God who did the the raising but he worked through vessels.

Galatians 1

1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:

3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,

4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.



The verse of Galations 1:1 specifically references that Paul is an apostle, NOT of "man" or by "men", BUT by Jesus Christ and God the Father.

There is a "neither by men, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father"... Jesus and God are not considered only to be man or men.

This first chapter Galations then goes on, as you can see, to warn against perverting the gospel of Jesus.

Again, in verses 10, 11, and12 identifies the fact that the gospel is by the revelation of Jesus Christ, NOT man or men.

If Jesus is only man and not deity, why is there a distinct differenece expressed between man and Jesus Christ, if he is indeed only man himself?

Quoted: There is a "neither by men, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father"...

What part of "AND" do you not understand? These verses refer to TWO entities. You keep bringing this stuff up when it doesn't make your point. What you need is a verse that says something like:

God the father, even Jesus

or

God, who is Jesus

The problem for you is that no such phrasing exists.

Quoted: The verse of Galations 1:1 specifically references that Paul is an apostle, NOT of "man" or by "men", BUT by Jesus Christ and God the Father.

Other translations use "agency of man" such as governments, social organizations, etc... . You are making an inference of something that the scripture doesn't directly say.  This is lame from the start and lacks the simple force of :

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one intermediary between God and humanity, Christ Jesus, himself human,

(If he was both God and man, why didn't Paul take the time to explain it right here?)

Quoted: 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

So God revealed Jesus to Paul. What's your point.

Quoted: This first chapter Galations then goes on, as you can see, to warn against perverting the gospel of Jesus.

Yes. But it doesn't call not believing Jesus is God as part of that perversion. The specific perversion of Galatians had to do with substituting Law for Faith and is not in any way related to the Trinity.

Quoted: One God: the father Also, there is is the Christ, Jesus. That would be a different individual/soul. It is through Christ that we have a relationship with God. That would be in keeping with the other  verses that we've  seen that say he is the mediator between God and man.

Again, WE AGREE there is one God!


(I think we are having a good hard look into the texts of the Bible and how awesome is that!)


The discussion here is not if there is more than one God or not. There is one God.

What we disagree on is whether or not God manifests himself in more than just God the Father. Namely, Jesus Christ, but also the "Holy Ghost".

I know we have been discussing the deity (or not) of Jesus for a few pages now. Your argument has been that Jesus was a separate individual from God the Father and that Jesus is not deity.  If you believe God is ONLY the Father, how do you explain the fact that the Bible, even Jesus Christ himself, cites the "Holy Ghost" or the "Holy Spirit" 96 times?

These (English textual) references to the "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" are not about God the Father, right? Is the Holy Ghost just another individual, as you say Jesus Christ is?

So, what do you think is the Holy Ghost? It is not a man, is it? It is not God the Father, is it? So, how can you account for this!

Aerospace_Engineer,
 I noticed you never responded to my last post, but I've been reading your responsed to Ghenghis.  You have a habit of jumping to conclusions on what people say then using that mistaken assumption in your argument.   It only hurts your argument.   I'd recommend a modification of the carpenter's rule, one Jesus would probaby be familiar with given his upbringing.   Read twice, reply once.  

Ghengis is correct.  There is no smoking gun statement that leads to the concept of the trinity.  There are many smoking gun statements that say the trinity is wrong.  

The trinity is a matter of tradition, not something that can be proven from the Bible.  

Its an interesting bit of history that the Protestants, who go by Sola Scriptura and threw out so much of paganism that had crept into Catholicism, kept the trinity.

The trinity relates to the concept we were discussing.   Paul's concept of a heavenly Christ and resurrection needed to be melded with later concepts of an earthly Christ.   Jesus went from being a God-filled man to a God-man in the traditional pagan mode.   Have you read up on the development of the trinity concept?

p.s. someone posted that Jesus was no co-equal with the Father or the Holy Ghost.   This is not the traditional concept of the trinity.   The Athanasian Creed ( Athanasius was the man who argued against Arianism and won the day at the council of Nicea when the trinity was adpoted as canon) , each of these three divine Persons is said to be eternal, each almighty, none greater or less than another, each God, and yet together being but one God,

Quoted: Ghengis is correct.  There is no smoking gun statement that leads to the concept of the trinity.  There are many smoking gun statements that say the trinity is wrong.   The trinity is a matter of tradition, not something that can be proven from the Bible.

How about supporting your claims with evidence.

Quoted: Quoted: One God: the father Also, there is is the Christ, Jesus. That would be a different individual/soul. It is through Christ that we have a relationship with God. That would be in keeping with the other  verses that we've  seen that say he is the mediator between God and man. Again, WE AGREE there is one God! (I think we are having a good hard look into the texts of the Bible and how awesome is that!) The discussion here is not if there is more than one God or not. There is one God. What we disagree on is whether or not God manifests himself in more than just God the Father. Namely, Jesus Christ, but also the "Holy Ghost". I know we have been discussing the deity (or not) of Jesus for a few pages now, but if you believe God is ONLY the Father, how do you explain the fact that the Bible, even Jesus Christ himself, cites the "Holy Ghost" or the "Holy Spirit" 96 times? These (English textual) references to the "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" are not about God the Father, right? Is the Holy Ghost just another individual, as you say Jesus Christ is? So, what do you think is the Holy Ghost? It is not a man, is it? It is not God the Father, is it? So, how can you account for this!

God is also called Yawheh and Elohim in the Bible.  Is that a 4th and 5th aspect of God?   When you speak of Jesus, Christ, or Jesus Christ are you referring to 3 different aspects of the same trinitarian being or are you just using other names for one being?

The whole issue of the trinity is only important if you consider Jesus to be God.  This would conflict with the 2nd Commandment, unless you find some way to justify it.  They found a way to justify it.  I'm not passing judgement on whether they are correct or not.  They may very well be.   The simple fact is it was a hotly contested decision that relied more on the personal persuasion skills of the debators than it did on evidence from the Bible.

Arianism was widespread and it took many decades to convert them to the trinitarian view after the council decided things.    


eta more info from www.jewfaq.org/name.htm

I have often heard people refer to the Judeo-Christian God as "the nameless God" to contrast our God with the ancient pagan gods. I always found this odd, because Judaism clearly recognizes the existence of a Name for God; in fact, we have many Names for God. The most important of God's Names is the four-letter Name represented by the Hebrew letters Yod-Heh-Vav-Heh (YHVH). It is often referred to as the Ineffable Name, the Unutterable Name or the Distinctive Name. Linguistically, it is related to the Hebrew root Heh-Yod-Heh (to be), and reflects the fact that God's existence is eternal. In scripture, this Name is used when discussing God's relation with human beings, and when emphasizing his qualities of lovingkindness and mercy. It is frequently shortened to Yah (Yod-Heh), Yahu or Yeho (Yod-Heh-Vav), especially when used in combination with names or phrases, as in Yehoshua (Joshua, meaning "the Lord is my Salvation"), Eliyahu (Elijah, meaning "my God is the Lord"), and Halleluyah ("praise the Lord"). The first Name used for God in scripture is Elohim. In form, the word is a masculine plural of a word that looks feminine in the singular (Eloha). The same word (or, according to Rambam, a homonym of it) is used to refer to princes, judges, other gods, and other powerful beings. This Name is used in scripture when emphasizing God's might, His creative power, and his attributes of justice and rulership. Variations on this name include El, Eloha, Elohai (my God) and Elohaynu (our God). God is also known as El Shaddai. This Name is usually translated as "God Almighty," however, the derivation of the word "Shaddai" is not known. According to some views, it is derived from the root meaning "to heap benefits." According a Midrash, it means, "The One who said 'dai'" ("dai" meaning enough or sufficient) and comes from the fact that when God created the universe, it expanded until He said "DAI!" (perhaps the first recorded theory of an expanding universe?). The name Shaddai is the one written on the mezuzah scroll. Some note that Shaddai is an acronym of Shomer Daltot Yisrael, Guardian of the Doors of Israel. Another significant Name of God is YHVH Tzva'ot. This Name is normally translated as "Lord of Hosts." The word "tzva'ot" means "hosts" in the sense of a military grouping or an organized array. The Name refers to God's leadership and sovereignty. Interestingly, this Name is rarely used in scripture. It never appears in the Torah (i.e., the first five books). It appears primarily in the prophetic books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, as well as many times in the Psalms.

How many names are we up to now?   Thats a lot of people fit into one God.....

I'm not saying that the trinity is wrong.  I'm not saying you shouldn't believe it it.  I'm saying you should be aware that its not illogical or contrary to the Bible not to believe it.

Quoted: Quoted: Ghengis is correct.  There is no smoking gun statement that leads to the concept of the trinity.  There are many smoking gun statements that say the trinity is wrong.   The trinity is a matter of tradition, not something that can be proven from the Bible.   How about supporting your claims with evidence.

Ghengis has shown you a ton (and you could google any of the terms in my post as well) ,  you have misintepreted his statements almost at every turn and implied he said things he has never said.  Just as you did with me.

Have you read up on the Pauline Epistles yet?  

Most people feel it necessary to become educated on a subject before addressing apologetics.   Do you actually feel that you are making a defense of your faith?  

I'm not saying you have to stop believing in the trinity.  I just think you might want to be aware that the trinity isn't explicity outlined in the Bible and that saying it does is making you look foolish.   Most trinitarians will admit that the evidence is not the best and there is evidence on the other side as well.    It all comes down to how you interpret the information.    

If it were clearly outlined in scripture, there wouldn't be any reason for discussion.

Quoted: Aerospace_Engineer,  I noticed you never responded to my last post, but I've been reading your responsed to Ghenghis.

Sorry Dino, here is my response to that post you reference:

1)
I belive there is one God.
He manifests himself in God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.
One God.

I only pray to God the Father, in Christ's name. I never pray to the Holy Ghost.

Unitarians: Do you pray to God the Father, in Christ's name?

Dino, please show me EXACTLY where I violate any of the commandments in what I just stated.

2)
On the Pauline epistles, I apparently already know of them since I know of the books of the Bible you mentioned. So, what makes you beleiev the gospels are wrong? If the Pauline epistles speak to Christ, what possible reason do you have to believe he is not referencing Jesus Christ, as he is recorded in the gospels?

3)
What evidence do you have that Jesus Christ's sacrifice was any different than is recorded in the gospels? So, you actually think the gospels are false, because there was nobody named Jesus Christ who died on the cross? Is that what you're telling me?

4)
The Unitarians need to explain how Jesus Christ (only 100% man, and 0% God...if he even existed, as you think he never did, right Dino?) was born of a virgin, performed miracles, had a group of followers that KNEW he was the Son of God upon only seeing him, raised a man from the dead, lived a sinless life, died with the weight of all our sins upon his shoulders, came back to life, became the savior of the world, claimed to be the Alpha and Omega, commanded an angel, yet was not deity.

I am not in danger if I believe Jesus Christ was my personal savior and I pray to God in Jesus' name. There is no heresy in my belief, I simply follow the Biblical text and I know the truth in my heart.

5)
Parables are in the Bible, yes. Are they always LITERALLY true, no.
The dates are accurate roughly, yes. (roughly meaning 10-300 years, depending on the book)
Books were written with knowledge of other books, yes.
1st & 2nd centuries, yes.
(Hey, we agree on these points!!!)

6)
See number 3.

7)
Suppresion of other religions by so-called Christians? Yes, a HUGE amount of terrible violence, lies, false witness, and corruption has existed. Mostly by the Catholic Church after the Romans adopted it as their official religion. All who participated in these crimes, up to modern day history (little boys & Catholic leaders) give Christians a BAD, DISGUSTING reputation.

I have nothing against the 'Da Vinci Code', for its pure fictional story. I enjoyed reading it very much. I think Brown's 'Angels & Demons' was a much better novel. Fictional, again, but a great story. I do have a problem with blatantly ignorant people tempted by Brown's falsehoods who take them for truths.

8)
You get TOO technical, Dino, when you talk about "Paul's concept of Jesus". I think you over-analyze some ideas way too much. I mean who uses the word "pseudopegraphically"?. Follow the kiss method, man! I promise I won't think you're any less intelligent.

Trying to impress us with big words for no reason (or to make you look cool) might result in...

a Chuck Norris roundhouse-kick-to-the-face!

Quoted: Most people feel it necessary to become educated on a subject before addressing apologetics.   Do you actually feel that you are making a defense of your faith?

What a shallow and rude thing to say.

I have made it aware to all who read that I am a Christian who believes the Bible. What more can I say?

You have shared no such faith. What do you believe, Dino? Are you a Christian, a Jew, an atheist, a Unitarian, an agnostic, a Hindu? What do you, Dino, believe!?

You do not defend your faith, because you have not stated it. And that is the easiest thing in the world, cause all you have to do is criticize other people, yet you take no stand on anything.

You have not shared what you believe because you are afraid to make a stand. You keep giving these "oh, well, technically Paul's 'concept' of a Christ was pseudopegraphically implied with no real meaning" statements which really draw NO conclusion and demonstrate NO real knowledge of what you are talking about.

Read my posts in response to Bladeswitcher, before you accuse me of not knowing the Bible or not knowing my faith.

If you want to discuss matters of the Bible and Christianity, that's great, but don't make it a personal thing. I am here to discuss and have some online fellowship.

Quoted: If it were clearly outlined in scripture, there wouldn't be any reason for discussion.

Perhaps it IS clearly outlined in scripture, but you just feel the need to doubt it!

Quoted: Quoted: There is a "neither by men, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father"... What part of "AND" do you not understand? These verses refer to TWO entities. You keep bringing this stuff up when it doesn't make your point. What you need is a verse that says something like: God the father, even Jesus or God, who is Jesus The problem for you is that no such phrasing exists.

I understand the "AND". That is not the issue with this verse.  Jesus Christ and God the Father, they are both cited, I have no problem with that. But, you assumed (for some reason) that I was ignoring the God the Father part, I wasn't.

"not by man" "neither by men" --These two statements are clear, no? If it is by Jesus and God the Father...Jesus is a MAN! A man who happens to be the Son of God the Father, but ONLY a man! (As you so are trying to defend!) So, how can it be by Jesus, if he's a man? That was my point.

Dino,

Why can't you just believe the Bible MEANS what it says.

I think our disagreement stems from the fact that I take the Bible as completely the Word of God and you don't.

(Obviously, most parables are not literal and some specific verses of dreams and parts of Revelation are not literal.)

Why are you so afraid of taking all the Bible, but specifically the chapters about Jesus Christ, literally!?


Are you afraid it may not have been translated properly over time?
Do you think it is not the Word of God?
Do you think some books are not authentic?
Do you think some authors were misguided?
Do you think books are missing?
Do you think there is a problem with the English translations?
Do you think it is not possible that God would allow for the Bible to be protected so that almost 2000 years later, His Message to us would be complete and understandable?

PLEASE, tell me why you don't believe ALL the written words!!?? I really want to know!

OH, a bolt of lightning just struck my head and an earthquake swallowed my soapbox...


...I barely escaped alive.

Acts 11

19 ¶ Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only.
20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus.
21 And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.
22 Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.
23 Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.
24 For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord.
25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:
26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

Christians are disciples who are members of a local church who have been taught from the scriptures.

To say a "Christian" is a disciple who "follows Jesus" is not good enough.

The Bible warns against those who preach ANOTHER Jesus and have ANOTHER gospel.

Quoted: I know we have been discussing the deity (or not) of Jesus for a few pages now. Your argument has been that Jesus was a separate individual from God the Father and that Jesus is not deity.  If you believe God is ONLY the Father, how do you explain the fact that the Bible, even Jesus Christ himself, cites the "Holy Ghost" or the "Holy Spirit" 96 times? These (English textual) references to the "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" are not about God the Father, right? Is the Holy Ghost just another individual, as you say Jesus Christ is? So, what do you think is the Holy Ghost? It is not a man, is it? It is not God the Father, is it? So, how can you account for this!

The holy ghost is merely the spirit of God. The scriptures talk about many manifestations of this spirit: the spirit of mercy, the spirit of understanding, the spirit of wisdom, the spirit of jealousy, the spirit of might, etc. The Holy Ghost is not an individual or a soul or a being. It is God's spirit. In Proverbs the spirit of wisdom is personified in scripture (" I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions."). But that doesn't make wisdom a person. It is just spirit. And because it is God's spirit it is HOLY spirit.

I'm surprised you bring it up because it is one of the arguments usually made to knock down trinity doctrines. Are  you aware that with only like two or three exceptions there is only one Greek word translated both "spirit"  and "ghost" in the New Testament. Every time you see the word spirit or ghost in the New testament it's the same word. That's true whether it says HOLY spirit or not. That's even true when the word refers to EVIL spirit.

To put it simply things are either physical or they're spiritual. Thoughts are spirit. Obviously all of God's thoughts are HOLY. All of his spirit is holy. That's all Holy Ghost and Holy Spirit mean -- the non-physical "manifestation" of God. When we feel unperverted love, that's holy spirit. This could also be translated Holy Ghost.

THe Holy Ghost is the spirit of God — nothing more, nothing less. It is not a person and it is not a being or a soul or a person.

Also, for clarification I never said that Jesus was JUST another individual. I said he was not God almighty. I believe (and the scriptures support the idea) that Jesus was a man sent by God to do a particular work on the earth. He did exist pre-earthly in God's spiritual dimension. The scriptures tell us that he was in the image of God and that he had the fullness of the Godhead bodily. That means he had God's word and spirit fully grown in him. That does NOT make him God Almighty, though.

Somebody else tried exalting himself to the position of God and we know what became of him . . .

Quoted: "not by man" "neither by men" --These two statements are clear, no? If it is by Jesus and God the Father...Jesus is a MAN! A man who happens to be the Son of God the Father, but ONLY a man! (As you so are trying to defend!) So, how can it be by Jesus, if he's a man? That was my point.

OK. I admit, now I'm confused. Spare me the effort of reading back through all  your posts. When you bring up the "not by man but by Jesus" bit you're referring to Paul's statement about how he came to be an apostle, right?

You do know Paul's history, right? You do realize that he was Saul who persecuted the Christians but got a revelation — a revelation by Christ — on the road to Damascus. You do realize that the MAN Jesus was crucified and resurrected by that time, right? You do know that by this Christ his vast knowledge of the Law was quickened and he got the witness on what Jesus was all about?

So, no, it wasn't any man who convinced Paul and put this calling on his life. It was the Christ.

So, explain to me again how that means that Jesus is God Almighty?

By the way, I never claimed that Jesus was ONLY a man. You keep saying that but I've never implied that. He was clearly annointed by God. He was the SON of God. He had the fullness of the Godhead bodily the scriptures tell us. He was the image of the invisible God. He was not just Joe Blow on the street. But, the scriptures make it very plain that he was tempted in all manners like his brethern.

But NONE of that makes him God Almighty.

Quoted: I know we have been discussing the deity (or not) of Jesus for a few pages now. Your argument has been that Jesus was a separate individual from God the Father and that Jesus is not deity.  If you believe God is ONLY the Father, how do you explain the fact that the Bible, even Jesus Christ himself, cites the "Holy Ghost" or the "Holy Spirit" 96 times?

Yes. The Holy Ghost is throughout the bible from Genesis 1:2 (spirit moved on the face of the waters) to at least Rev 22:17 (And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!”).

Quoted: These (English textual) references to the "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" are not about God the Father, right? Is the Holy Ghost just another individual, as you say Jesus Christ is? So, what do you think is the Holy Ghost? It is not a man, is it? It is not God the Father, is it? So, how can you account for this!

"Ghost", "Spirit", and "Breath" are all the same word.  The Holy Ghost is God's breath (quite literally "set apart" "breath"). The same one used to form the world, give life to Adam, speak to the biblical authors, and concieve Jesus in Mary's womb.

In addition
-The words "God the Holy Ghost" or  "God the Holy Spirit" are not in the Bible. If they were, you would have found them, put them in your post and sent us packing with our tails between our legs.

-If the Holy Ghost was God, or a separate "person", wouldn't that make him the father of Jesus as opposed to the Father? (Matthew 1:18)


--- Edit  -- 2 posts generated while typing. Man that was fast.

Bladeswitcher, I do believe we are making progress here!

Quoted: The holy ghost is merely the spirit of God. The scriptures talk about many manifestations of this spirit: the spirit of mercy, the spirit of understanding, the spirit of wisdom, the spirit of jealousy, the spirit of might, etc. The Holy Ghost is not an individual or a soul or a being. It is God's spirit. In Proverbs the spirit of wisdom is personified in scripture (" I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions."). But that doesn't make wisdom a person. It is just spirit. And because it is God's spirit it is HOLY spirit. THe Holy Ghost is the spirit of God — nothing more, nothing less. It is not a person and it is not a being or a soul or a person.

I agree 100%.

This is what I believe the Holy Ghost/Spirit is.

I never claimed to pray to the Holy Ghost/Spirit and I never said the Holy Ghost/Spirit was anything but of (a part of) God himself.

I believe in one God. The God of the Bible.

I have used the words "manifest" and "individual" to identify the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost/Spirit. By "individual" in the context, I don't mean to imply that these 3 are seperate gods or that they have no "bond" between them. (perhaps there is a better word to express this) I intend that God is composed of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost/Spirit.

So, if I believe in the "Trinity", then does what you just stated mean you believe in the "Bivinity"? Because I agree with what you just said about the spirit of God COMPLETELY!

Quoted: Also, for clarification I never said that Jesus was JUST another individual. I said he was not God almighty. I believe (and the scriptures support the idea) that Jesus was a man sent by God to do a particular work on the earth. He did exist pre-earthly in God's spiritual dimension. The scriptures tell us that he was in the image of God and that he had the fullness of the Godhead bodily. That means he had God's word and spirit fully grown in him. That does NOT make him God Almighty, though.

I agree 100% with everything you said in this statement, except for your words I highlighted in red. How, if this is all true, is Jesus not a part of God Almighty?

Quoted: So, if I believe in the "Trinity", then does what you just stated mean you believe in the "Bivinity"? Because I agree with what you just said about the spirit of God COMPLETELY!

No, I'm not a "bivinitarian." The Bible says there is one God. The Jews believed there is one God (Jesus was a Jew, btw). I believe in one God.

One means one. It does not mean two. It does not mean three. I am my father's son. I am not my father. Jesus was God's son. Jesus is not his father.

You seem to be strugging with the question of if Jesus was more than "just" a man and he isn't God almighty then what could he be? You can't seem to imagine any other possibility. I'm not going to lay that out for you. But I might suggest this: When something doesn't make sense, question your assumptions.

Quoted: I agree 100% with everything you said in this statement, except for your words I highlighted in red. How, if this is all true, is Jesus not a part of God Almighty?

If YOU have God's word and spirit in you, aren't you "part" of God Almighty? Does that make you God?

Quoted: Quoted: "not by man" "neither by men" --These two statements are clear, no? If it is by Jesus and God the Father...Jesus is a MAN! A man who happens to be the Son of God the Father, but ONLY a man! (As you so are trying to defend!) So, how can it be by Jesus, if he's a man? That was my point. OK. I admit, now I'm confused. Spare me the effort of reading back through all  your posts. When you bring up the "not by man but by Jesus" bit you're referring to Paul's statement about how he came to be an apostle, right?

Yes.

Quoted: You do know Paul's history, right? You do realize that he was Saul who persecuted the Christians but got a revelation — a revelation by Christ — on the road to Damascus. You do realize that the MAN Jesus was crucified and resurrected by that time, right? You do know that by this Christ his vast knowledge of the Law was quickened and he got the witness on what Jesus was all about? So, no, it wasn't any man who convinced Paul and put this calling on his life. It was the Christ.

Yes.

Quoted: So, explain to me again how that means that Jesus is God Almighty?

It doesn't.

It does show that Christ is not a mere man.

Quoted: By the way, I never claimed that Jesus was ONLY a man. You keep saying that but I've never implied that. He was clearly annointed by God. He was the SON of God. He had the fullness of the Godhead bodily the scriptures tell us. He was the image of the invisible God. He was not just Joe Blow on the street. But, the scriptures make it very plain that he was tempted in all manners like his brethern. But NONE of that makes him God Almighty.

Again, I agree 100%, except in red. Why is he not God if he has the fullness of the Godhead in him and hangs out with God the Father in heaven before he came to earth?

Amazingly, we are so close to sharing the same belief here...

Quoted: No, I'm not a "bivinitarian." The Bible says there is one God. The Jews believed there is one God (Jesus was a Jew, btw). I believe in one God.

I believe in one God, too.

Quoted: One means one. It does not mean two. It does not mean three. I am my father's son. I am not my father. Jesus was God's son. Jesus is not his father.

Yes. Jesus is not the Father, I agree. Jesus is the Son.

Quoted: You seem to be strugging with the question of if Jesus was more than "just" a man and he isn't God almighty then what could he be?

Something like that, yeah, I am struggling with that.

Quoted: You can't seem to imagine any other possibility.

This is my struggle.

Quoted: I'm not going to lay that out for you.

Please do! You just may lead me to a better (complete?) understanding of God and God's word tonight!

Quoted: But I might suggest this: When something doesn't make sense, question your assumptions.

I am trying to eliminate my assumptions. You, Bladeswitcher, are helping me do that!

Quoted: Why is he not God if he has the fullness of the Godhead in him and hangs out with God the Father in heaven before he came to earth?

The short answer is: Because God is ONE!

The scriptures tell us:

Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Mt 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Joh 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

I think you'll agree that these three verses set a pretty high bar for us mere mortals, right? And yet, there it is in scripture. Paul said we could have the mind of Christ. Jesus said to be perfect like God. Jesus said that we would do GREATER works than he did? If Jesus is God Almighty because he had the fullness of God dwelling in him and we're to have the mind of Christ, what does that make us? Will we be God Almighty? I don't think so. But we can be like Christ. The scriptures tell us so on many occasions.

Quoted: If YOU have God's word and spirit in you, aren't you "part" of God Almighty?

Yes in a sense. My physical body becomes a temple for God, right?
If I sin against my own body, I am sinning directly against God.

I am a part of God Almighty in the sense that I have His spirit in me. I am a brother to Jesus Christ and I am a child of God.

Does that make sense?

Oh, a question I have is this: Do you suppose Jesus Christ prays to God the Father right now, as he is in heaven? Jesus Christ prayed to God the Father while on earth, right?

Quoted: Does that make you God?

Absolutely not. That does not make me God.

Hmmmm.

Quoted: Quoted: Why is he not God if he has the fullness of the Godhead in him and hangs out with God the Father in heaven before he came to earth? The short answer is: Because God is ONE! The scriptures tell us: Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Mt 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Joh 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. I think you'll agree that these three verses set a pretty high bar for us mere mortals, right? And yet, there it is in scripture. Paul said we could have the mind of Christ. Jesus said to be perfect like God. Jesus said that we would do GREATER works than he did? If Jesus is God Almighty because he had the fullness of God dwelling in him and we're to have the mind of Christ, what does that make us? Will we be God Almighty? I don't think so. But we can be like Christ. The scriptures tell us so on many occasions.

Are you suggesting it is possible for a Christian to be sinfree, perfect for the "rest of their physical life" from 'now' until he/she dies?

Quoted: Quoted: Why is he not God if he has the fullness of the Godhead in him and hangs out with God the Father in heaven before he came to earth? The short answer is: Because God is ONE! The scriptures tell us: Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Mt 5:48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Joh 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. I think you'll agree that these three verses set a pretty high bar for us mere mortals, right? And yet, there it is in scripture. Paul said we could have the mind of Christ. Jesus said to be perfect like God. Jesus said that we would do GREATER works than he did? If Jesus is God Almighty because he had the fullness of God dwelling in him and we're to have the mind of Christ, what does that make us? Will we be God Almighty? I don't think so. But we can be like Christ. The scriptures tell us so on many occasions.

Please read this ENTIRELY before posting about it!

I am curious about these verses meaning:

Phillipians 2:1-11:

King James Version on top,
New Living Translation on bottom:

1 If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies,
1 Is there any encouragement from belonging to Christ? Any comfort from his love? Any fellowship together in the Spirit? Are your hearts tender and sympathetic?


2 Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.
2 Then make me truly happy by agreeing wholeheartedly with each other, loving one another, and working together with one heart and purpose.


3 Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
3 Don't be selfish; don't live to make a good impression on others. Be humble, thinking of others as better than yourself.


4 Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
4 Don't think only about your own affairs, but be interested in others, too, and what they are doing.


5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
5 Your attitude should be the same that Christ Jesus had.


6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
6 Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God.


7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
7 He made himself nothing; he took the humble position of a slave and appeared in human form.


8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
8 And in human form he obediently humbled himself even further by dying a criminal's death on a cross.


9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
9 Because of this, God raised him up to the heights of heaven and gave him a name that is above every other name,


10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,


11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
11 and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.


Do you see what I see?

Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!?
Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God?

Quoted: Do you see what I see? Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!? Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God?

No.
No.
No.

Quoted: Quoted: Do you see what I see? Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!? Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God? No. No. No.

I do believe that Jesus is God.  I also believe that Jesus is a seperate being from God the Father and God the Holy Ghost.  Does that mean that I believe in three distinct beings who are each God?  Absolutely.  Are they also one God?  Yes, in purpose.  All three work together to bring to pass the salvation of mankind.

Quoted: I do believe that Jesus is God.  I also believe that Jesus is a seperate being from God the Father and God the Holy Ghost.  Does that mean that I believe in three distinct beings who are each God?  Absolutely.  Are they also one God?  Yes, in purpose.  All three work together to bring to pass the salvation of mankind.

As I understand it, this would be one of the two popular and competing views of a trinity. I don't know enough about it to put the right names with both but as I understand it -- and admittedly,  very simply put -- the two views are:

1.) Three manifestations of the same God (often compared to ice, water and steam)
2.) Three beings sharing an office

Interestingly, unlike Shane333, many casual Christians can't tell you which they believe.  

Quoted: Quoted: I do believe that Jesus is God.  I also believe that Jesus is a seperate being from God the Father and God the Holy Ghost.  Does that mean that I believe in three distinct beings who are each God?  Absolutely.  Are they also one God?  Yes, in purpose.  All three work together to bring to pass the salvation of mankind. As I understand it, this would be one of the two popular and competing views of a trinity. I don't know enough about it to put the right names with both but as I understand it -- and admittedly,  very simply put -- the two views are: 1.) Three manifestations of the same God (often compared to ice, water and steam) 2.) Three beings sharing an office Interestingly, unlike Shane333, many casual Christians can't tell you which they believe.

That's because stating a solid belief on the matter is almost a sure way to invite criticism.  I've literally had people yell at me with a bullhorn, insisting that I'm not Christian because I hold this particular view of the Trinity.

You've shown considerable tact and respect in your own response.

Quoted: That's because stating a solid belief on the matter is almost a sure way to invite criticism.  I've literally had people yell at me with a bullhorn, insisting that I'm not Christian because I hold this particular view of the Trinity. You've shown considerable tact and respect in your own response.

That's because I don't believe either version and I've made that perfectly clear. I understand, though, that non-trinitarians are a tiny minority of the Christian community. I'm in no position to express outrage over people who fit into either corner of the great majority . . .

Quoted: Again, the comments in the gay bishop thread got me thinking.  How do you define Christian?  What is the least common denominator?

Well, you see from this thread there are plenty of people who call themselves Christians, who are not.

Quoted: 1.) Three manifestations of the same God (often compared to ice, water and steam) 2.) Three beings sharing an office Interestingly, unlike Shane333, many casual Christians can't tell you which they believe.

Many Church leaders can't either.

Bladeswitcher,

Phillipians 2: 6-8 appear to very directly say the Jesus is God, but in human form.

Those verses are causing a problem for me, because until I read them, you had me almost completely convinced that Jesus may not have been God in the sense I originally thought at the beginning of this discussion. However, these verses reinforce my original thought.

Shane333, anyone else, what do you guys think about these verses?

Phillipians 2:6-8:

King James Version on top,
New Living Translation in middle,
New International Version on bottom:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
6 Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God.
6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
7 He made himself nothing; he took the humble position of a slave and appeared in human form.
7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
8 And in human form he obediently humbled himself even further by dying a criminal's death on a cross.
8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross!

Quoted: Quoted: Do you see what I see? Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!? Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God? No. No. No.

How can you honestly answer "No" to my 2nd question? The verses say this exactly.

Quoted: Phillipians 2:6-8:

Note: I'll ignore the NLT as it is a paraphrase, which is OK for easy reading, but I wouldn't try to reason from it.

This is probably one of the few passages that a Trinitiarian can use that say something close to what a Trinitarian needs it to say. But let us start a couple verses earlier.

3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves,
4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same attitude of mind Christ Jesus had:

This whole passage is talking about the attitude of mind we should have. We should be have the attitude of mind of Christ.

Quoted: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

"Who being in the form of God" (both NIV and KJV).
It doesn't say he was God. It says he was "being in the form of God". Note that word "being".  He was in the "form of God" while on the earth.

Note: The NIV even admits they have a questionable translation by having the footnote.

"thought it not robbery to be equal with God"
The KJV is acknowleged to have botched this and was corrcted in the RSV to "he did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (which the NIV got right). This passage is harkening back to the Garden where Eve aspired to be equal to God (Genesis 3:5) and ate the fruit from the tree. Jesus refused to do this when he was tempted (and just how would that have been temptation if Jesus was God).

So, we have a person who is "in the form of God" while on the earth (a.k.a. not God), who did not aspire to be equal to God, and did not yield to temptation (a.k.a. sin).

The only problems I have with passage is I often fall short.

Quoted: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

"form of a servant"
What does that mean? He washed others feet (John 13:14) He did what God told him to do and was obedient. He served God every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every week of every month of every year of his life. Now that is service.

Quoted: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death— even death on a cross!

Amen. Obedient unto death! If he was God, did he really die Who did he obey

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Do you see what I see? Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!? Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God? No. No. No. How can you honestly answer "No" to my 2nd question? The verses say this exactly.

Because your second question implies that Jesus was God. And, no, that is not said "exactly" or any other way in the scriptures. The scriptures make it clear there is only one God, not two, not three. Any other doctrine constitutes a division of worship, something that is not allowed under God's rules . . . . Don't blame me. I didn't make the rules.

Quoted: Well, you see from this thread there are plenty of people who call themselves Christians, who are not.

Was Jesus a Christian?

Quoted: Quoted: Well, you see from this thread there are plenty of people who call themselves Christians, who are not. Was Jesus a Christian?

Jesus was/is The Christ.  A Christian is one who follows Christ.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Do you see what I see? Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!? Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God? No. No. No. How can you honestly answer "No" to my 2nd question? The verses say this exactly. Because your second question implies that Jesus was God. And, no, that is not said "exactly" or any other way in the scriptures. The scriptures make it clear there is only one God, not two, not three. Any other doctrine constitutes a division of worship, something that is not allowed under God's rules . . . . Don't blame me. I didn't make the rules.

Once again, I have to repeat myself. I never said there is more than one God. I believe there is only one God.

You have said you believe in a "Holy Spirit" of God and that doesn't mean you believe in TWO Gods anymore than me believing in the Holy Spirit of God and the divinity of Jesus Christ means that I believe in THREE Gods.

There is only ONE God.

Quoted: Once again, I have to repeat myself. I never said there is more than one God. I believe there is only one God . . . There is only ONE God.

It would seem that you believe that Jesus is that one God. At least that's the impression I get from your questions ("Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!? Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God?").

Quoted: Quoted: Once again, I have to repeat myself. I never said there is more than one God. I believe there is only one God . . . There is only ONE God. It would seem that you believe that Jesus is that one God. At least that's the impression I get from your questions ("Do these verses not state the God was in human form, the form of a man, Jesus Christ!? Do these verses not state that Jesus Christ was, in fact, God?").

Jesus was/is Jehovah.  The New Testament makes that pretty obvious.

Quoted: Jesus was/is Jehovah.  The New Testament makes that pretty obvious.

We've been through this on this and several other threads. Maybe you can do better than some of the others in providing the scriptures that back this doctrine up . . .

Quoted: Jesus was/is The Christ.  A Christian is one who follows Christ.

Both statements are true. But, my "was Jesus a Christian?" question was intended to cause folks to consider whether Jesus would endorse or even recognize "Christianity" as it's taught today. In other words, is the Christianity of today the same as the Christianity of the first century?

We say we're Christians and we follow Christ, but when and where did Christ tell us to do the things that we do today?

Where in the Bible does it tell us to accept Jesus as our "personal savior"?
Where does it say we ONLY need to do anything?
Where is the trinity discussed?
Where does it say that followers of Christ should take up political causes like abortion or prayer in school?
What is our scriptural example for today's MEGA churches?
What scriptural justification do we have for celebrating Christmas? Is that holiday consistent with Jesus' teachings?

Please don't get hung up on these specific questions. They are just examples of areas where today's Christians MAY have embraced certain ideas or causes without much support from the scriptures. The question I'm asking is this: Would Jesus oppose or support today's Christianity? In other words: WWJD?

Quoted: Where in the Bible does it tell us to accept Jesus as our "personal savior"? Where does it say we ONLY need to do anything? Where is the trinity discussed? Where does it say that followers of Christ should take up political causes like abortion or prayer in school? What is our scriptural example for today's MEGA churches? What scriptural justification do we have for celebrating Christmas? Is that holiday consistent with Jesus' teachings? Please don't get hung up on these specific questions. They are just examples of areas where today's Christians MAY have embraced certain ideas or causes without much support from the scriptures. The question I'm asking is this: Would Jesus oppose or support today's Christianity? In other words: WWJD?

There is no need to include a disclaimer with questions such as these. They are all legitimate questions we all should be asking. It is because I cannot find answers to questions like these that I do not participate in, much less understand, many of the Catholic doctrines, beliefs, and practices.