View Single Post
Old 07-28-2008, 05:35 AM   #91
Cal
Member
 
Cal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 4,333
Default

Paul,

The the Son became flesh and suffered physically. If the Son is the Father, as Lee says, how can you say the Father did not suffer just as much physically as the Son did? If you make the bed of the Son being the Father you have to lie in it. You can't back off of any of the implications or else you make the belief a joke.


And did you just say that Christ did not die, but was replaced by a ram? The Lamb of God, not the Son of God died? The Son is the Lamb!

What do you mean that the Son was "replaced?" Do you even know what you mean? Or is it just some high-sounding bible talk?

You sound pretty confused here, Paul. And I might add, very herectical.
Cal is offline   Reply With Quote