Posted on 06/12/2018 11:40:41 AM PDT by Gamecock
??
If God refers to himself as the Father, I assume that’s his preference. I think to do otherwise is disrespectful to God. It’s also placing the feelings of the creation as more important than God’s preference.
On the basis, why is the word “Son” allowed?
The wide road to the wide gate is inclusive indeed.
Just another example when you stray from the scriptures to support your own traditions.
They might as well go full modalism, and refer to the creator, and the redeemer, and the sanctifies.
No sense doing heresy by half-measures.
Oh good grief!
Idiots.
It’s been good enough for most people since about 390 AD. But I guess these know-it-alls think it needs fixing up, and they’re just the ones who can get it right this time!
PS: Actually to be fair. In the NT whenever Father is mentioned it’s actually Creator. Just saying, however .....
"According to original and genuine Theosophy i.e. the writings and teachings of the Masters of the Wisdom and the one they called their Direct Agent and their Messenger, H.P. Blavatsky Christ is not a being or an entity of any kind. Christ is not another name for Maitreya. Christ is not the Master of the Masters. Christ is not the so-called World Teacher. And there is no such thing as the Second Coming or Reappearance of Christ. Christ never had a first coming and has never appeared, nor can ever appear. Why? Because Christ from the Greek Christos is simply a symbolic term and name for the purely impersonal and universal Divine Principle of Spirit which is present in everything in the Universe."
Accommodating their “itching ears”. . . not putting up with sound doctrine . . . it was foretold that this kind of thing would happen
The original idea the ass clowns thought of was “our Fabulous Father..”
I knew the butt pirates would come up with another sick idea to spit at our religion.
Psalm 103:13
Just as a father has compassion on his children, So the
Something tells me God is not impressed.
This is how communists work. They infiltrate and destroy from within.
The church is the bride of Christ, who is masculine, and the relationship is deliberately described as being like that of a bride.
Good luck changing that...
So they don’t know the Old Testament, eh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.