The Trinity

Rosenritter · Aug 13, 2016

daqq said:
Whether or not you consider Eusebius and Jerome apocrypha has no bearing on what was said and you either know it or are too blind to see what was just posted again right in front of your eyes. I clearly said that your church fathers, (three times now), freely admitted that they had Hebrew or Aramaic versions of Matthew and that they themselves claimed that they translated what they had into Greek. It is exactly as I said it was and you simply have no argument against the FACTS that are right in front of you. In addition all one needs to do is look at the KJV of the Mark and Luke passages to see that even though Christos is not in any manuscripts the KJV translators took the liberty of inserting it in italics. This goes beyond the pale and reveals that what they did was INTENTIONAL misdirection so as to uphold the "I AM God-Man" dogma which you and most of modern Christianity worship.

Ye olde king James adulterated version:

Mark 13:5-6 KJV
5 And Jesus answering them began to say, Take heed lest any man deceive you:
6 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

Luke 21:8 KJV
8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.

Christos is not even in the Textus Receptus which the KJV is essentially rendered from. It is inserted so as to protect the "I AM" dogma that "Jesus is God" in John 8:58 without any regard for what is upright, honest, and truthful. The Young's Literal Bible is rendered from the same text as the KJV and it shows nothing of the sort even though Young, like the KJV, still did not translate "hoti" in either of the passages:

Mark 13:5-6 YLT
5 And Jesus answering them, began to say, 'Take heed lest any one may lead you astray,
6 for many shall come in my name, saying--I am he, and many they shall lead astray;

Luke 21:8 YLT
8 And he said, 'See--ye may not be led astray, for many shall come in my name, saying--I am he, and the time hath come nigh; go not on then after them;

Therefore I have no other choice but to take your comments quoted herein above as coming from a cry-baby child throwing a temper tantrum: "Sit down in the corner and listen up to me because I paid big bucks for my education and therefore I AM right and you are wrong!" :baby: (lol).

This is what the scripture says concerning you and your kind:

Acts 8:9-23 ASV
9 But there was a certain man, Simon by name, who beforetime in the city used sorcery, and amazed the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
10 to whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is that power of God which is called Great.
11 And they gave heed to him, because that of long time he had amazed them with his sorceries.
12 But when they believed Philip preaching good tidings concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 And Simon also himself believed: and being baptized, he continued with Philip; and beholding signs and great miracles wrought, he was amazed.
14 Now when the apostles that were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
15 who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit:
16 for as yet it was fallen upon none of them: only they had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
18 Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money,
19 saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay my hands, he may receive the Holy Spirit.
20 But Peter said unto him, Thy silver perish with thee, because thou hast thought to obtain the gift of God with money.
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right before God.
22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray the Lord, if perhaps the thought of thy heart shall be forgiven thee.
23 For I see that thou art in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.

Understand magos? You are nothing more than a word sorcerer tinkering with holy writings and thinking yourself to be some mighty one. You are not far from Elymas Bar-Jesus the son of Jesus who is likewise the spirit of all word sorcerers such as yourself.

If the KJV has it in italics it isn't misdirection silly. Italics means they added it for grammatical purposes (etc) but the word isn't directly in the source text.

daqq · Aug 13, 2016

Rosenritter said:
Daqq, i wish you would check your own arguments to see if they made sense. "I AM" and "I am Christ" work equally well for the Christian who knows to beware of false prophets EVEN IF they profess with their mouth that Jesus is Christ and especially if Jesus is God. If the KJV had "I AM" there you would be screaming your head off twice as loudly.

Now if you can be calm for a moment, please explain how John 8:58 is a parable and explain its symbols and meaning, preferably from scriptural passages for source reference.

John 8:56-59 KJV
Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it , and was glad. [57] Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? [58] Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. [59] Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

It's not in the form of a story and there is no possible symbolism that I can see. Please enlighten us and explain the meaning of this parable.

There is no need for me to rehash John 8:58 all over again here in this thread when it has already been explained manifold times and you have already been pointed to one of those places. You continue to ignore the points that have been made about the statements from the Mark and Luke passages that are mistranslated. Also why should I need to calm down when I am not upset to begin with? Trying to paint me in such a light only exposes your deceitful practices when you have no argument. Anyone who gave what I say half a chance would realize that there is no way that another could have come in the name of Yeshua, claiming to be "I AM", and would have deceived the disciples whom Yeshua said this to. You simply refuse to think it through logically because your paradigm does not allow it. There is no way someone else could have deceived Peter, James, John, or Andrew, by coming to them and claiming to be a follower of Yeshua, and yet claiming to be "I AM" or saying "I AM". Do you honestly think that such a person could have deceived them? Do you honestly believe that they would have fallen for someone else saying "I AM" after all the time they had spent with Yeshua? Your translation nullifies the actual statement because your translation makes the statement into an UNTRUE and FALSE statement. How is it not possible for you to hear what I am saying? The only way in which someone could have deceived the disciples was to approach them in the name of Yeshua, claiming to be a follower of Yeshua, and at the same time teaching that he is God or that he is "I AM" just exactly as you do. This could have deceived them because they were not yet converted when the statement was made and they clearly did not fully understand the Testimony of Yeshua until much later.

Take heed lest any man deceive you: for many shall come in my name saying that I AM and shall deceive many.

Lon, Take heed lest Rosenritter deceive you: for many shall come in the name of Yeshua saying that he is I AM and shall deceive many. Rosenritter, Take heed lest Lon deceive you: for many shall come in the name of Yeshua saying that he is I AM and shall deceive many. No, I'm not angry, not a cultist, not sitting in the corner, did not give a ransom for an education that must be maintained at all cost, and am not afraid to confront buffoonery with reason, logic, and truth. :chuckle:

daqq · Aug 13, 2016

Lon said:
:doh: "the APOCRYPHA!!!!" Please leave this discussion to those of us with A's behind our education! Now sit down over there in the corner and be quiet!

No. You wouldn't. This much is clear. No sit down over there in that corner and leave the adults to "intelligent" conversation :doh: I'm sorry to be mean but your ignorance is hurting you. Knock it off.

Rosenritter said:
Daqq, i wish you would check your own arguments to see if they made sense.

The following is a good example of essentially what the two wise ones in this thread would have everyone believe, by way of their interpretation of Mark 13:6 and Luke 21:8, for this is what they both clearly believe was and is quite possible according to their interpretation of those passages:

Say for the moment that it is several years after the crucifixion and the resurrection; and Peter is kicking back at the house of Simon the Tanner by the seaside. A man comes strolling along by the seaside preaching about Yeshua, (coming in the name of Yeshua), and claiming of himself, "I AM", just as it says in Mark 13:6 and Luke 21:8. What Lon and Rosenritter would have everyone believe is that this is the very situation that Yeshua had warned Peter and the disciples about. So Lon and Rosenritter expect everyone to believe, as they themselves believe, that there is definitely a good possibility that Peter might end up being deceived into following the false preacher who came in the name of Yeshua preaching by the seaside and claiming to be "I AM". And what do Lon and Rosenritter suppose that Peter would say to himself at this point if he were indeed to have been deceived by the false prophet? I suppose they imagine in the machinations of their vain imaginations that Peter would probably have said to himself something like, "Well, the Master was crucified, resurrected, and taken away into heaven; so I suppose that now you might indeed be God: okay, I'm going to follow you now as the Great I AM."

I say, again, it is buffoonery at the highest levels of the imagination of man . . .
Everyone should know there is only one reason they think this way: the DogmagoD. :crackup:

Lon · Aug 13, 2016

daqq said:
Whether or not you consider Eusebius and Jerome apocrypha has no bearing on what was said and you either know it or are too blind to see what was just posted again right in front of your eyes.

:doh: This "Book of Matthew" is NOT the gospel of Matthew they are talking about :doh: I really wish you'd sit there and be quiet. You haven't the slightest clue of what you are talking about. You are an inept, amateur, wanna-be. Do I disdain laity? No. You? Yes because I can't teach you a thing and you have a LOT to learn.

daqq said:
I say, again, it is buffoonery at the highest levels of the imagination of man . . .
Everyone should know there is only one reason they think this way: the DogmagoD. :crackup:

Mormon is it? Daqq, are you a Mormon? Be bold, don't hide your cultic ties. Here let me start: I am a triune Reformed Christian. Your turn.

daqq said:
No, I'm not angry, not a cultist, not sitting in the corner, did not give a ransom for an education that must be maintained at all cost, and am not afraid to confront buffoonery with reason, logic, and truth. :chuckle:

Let's see, if I'm a 'buffoon' with an incredibly higher IQ than your's, what would that make you? :think: Please stop. You are really hurting yourself and your credibility. "Give a man enough rope..." then he'll do what? You are showing exactly who you are in thread.

I don't know why God didn't connect nerves that would pain you if you neglected intelligence. It'd sure have stopped these kinds of tragedies. For now, you just need sit in the corner, study, and catch up because you are woefully far behind. Please learn to love learning and thinking and stop being a lone-ranger. It is completely opposite of God's call to the Body of Christ. Be united to the Body of Christ and quit disdaining her and us.

daqq · Aug 13, 2016

Lon said:
:doh: This "Book of Matthew" is NOT the gospel of Matthew they are talking about :doh: I really wish you'd sit there and be quiet. You haven't the slightest clue of what you are talking about. You are an inept, amateur, wanna-be. Do I disdain laity? No. You? Yes because I can't teach you a thing and you have a LOT to learn.

Mormon is it? Daqq, are you a Mormon? Be bold, don't hide your cultic ties. Here let me start: I am a triune Reformed Christian. Your turn.

Let's see, if I'm a 'buffoon' with an incredibly higher IQ than your's, what would that make you? :think: Please stop. You are really hurting yourself and your credibility. "Give a man enough rope..." then he'll do what? You are showing exactly who you are in thread.

I don't know why God didn't connect nerves that would pain you if you neglected intelligence. It'd sure have stopped these kinds of tragedies. For now, you just need sit in the corner, study, and catch up because you are woefully far behind. Please learn to love learning and thinking and stop being a lone-ranger. It is completely opposite of God's call to the Body of Christ. Be united to the Body of Christ and quit disdaining her and us.

No Mormonism here. But as far as the comments of Eusebius and Jerome you now imagine that they do not speak of a Gospel account but rather a "book"? They clearly call it a Gospel. So you call them liars too? Were they also Mormons, cultists, and perhaps may not have had a high enough IQ to understand the wonderful things that you have attained in the machinations of your imagination? If you have such a magnificent a IQ then why was it not possible for you to discern that I did not actually call you a buffoon? What I have said is that your dogma and Trinity biased interpretation of Mark 13:6 and Luke 21:8 is what is buffoonery. There is a critical difference between what I actually said and what you have stated that I said; a difference that anyone having an exceedingly high IQ should have been quite capable of recognizing. The more likely truth is that you, like most politicians, are probably a psychopath: but hey, whatta ya know, that is what Calvinism is for, right? (psychopaths). That also would explain why you are the most pompous, audacious, crude, sarcastic, and arrogant person I have ever had the pleasure of meeting in a forum atmosphere. I am actually learning quite a bit from you about how not to be. :chuckle:

Lon · Aug 13, 2016

daqq said:
No Mormonism here.

Good. It'd be worse that way but you aren't understanding scriptures or this conversation. My next guess: Older than 60, stuck in your ways, not really studying much any more?

daqq said:
But as far as the comments of Eusebius and Jerome you now imagine that they do not speak of a Gospel account but rather a "book"? They clearly call it a Gospel. So you call them liars too?

I provided the link you followed. I wish you'd pay attention and learn

daqq said:
Were they also Mormons, cultists, and perhaps may not have had a high enough IQ to understand the wonderful things that you have attained in the machinations of your imagination? If you have such a magnificent a IQ then why was it not possible for you to discern that I did not actually call you a buffoon? What I have said is that your dogma and Trinity biased interpretation of Mark 13:6 and Luke 21:8 is what is buffoonery.

Well, forgetting IQ's for a moment, reading would help a LOT.

daqq said:
There is a critical difference between what I actually said and what you have stated that I said; a difference that anyone having an exceedingly high IQ should have been quite capable of recognizing. The more likely truth is that you, like most politicians, are probably a psychopath: but hey, whatta ya know, that is what Calvinism is for, right? (psychopaths). That also would explain why you are the most pompous, audacious, crude, sarcastic, and arrogant person I have ever had the pleasure of meeting in a forum atmosphere. I am actually learning quite a bit from you about how not to be. :chuckle:

Sure. Simply point out the supposed mistake. I'm Triune. You? :nono: What'd I miss?

Pompous? Guilty. Audacious? Not so much. The mockery and :chuckle: icon might be used to convey such. Crude? No, not really at all. Sarcastic? Granted though not used much with you. Arrogant (Isn't this a little bit like "Pompous?")? Yes and ever working on it. Again, it might not be a good idea to give people like me A's. It might be that I actually earned them but perhaps the highest grade one should be able to attain is a B unless he/she is incredibly exceptional. :think:

Rosenritter · Aug 13, 2016

daqq said:
There is no need for me to rehash John 8:58 all over again here in this thread when it has already been explained manifold times and you have already been pointed to one of those places. You continue to ignore the points that have been made about the statements from the Mark and Luke passages that are mistranslated. Also why should I need to calm down when I am not upset to begin with? Trying to paint me in such a light only exposes your deceitful practices when you have no argument. Anyone who gave what I say half a chance would realize that there is no way that another could have come in the name of Yeshua, claiming to be "I AM", and would have deceived the disciples whom Yeshua said this to. You simply refuse to think it through logically because your paradigm does not allow it. There is no way someone else could have deceived Peter, James, John, or Andrew, by coming to them and claiming to be a follower of Yeshua, and yet claiming to be "I AM" or saying "I AM". Do you honestly think that such a person could have deceived them? Do you honestly believe that they would have fallen for someone else saying "I AM" after all the time they had spent with Yeshua? Your translation nullifies the actual statement because your translation makes the statement into an UNTRUE and FALSE statement. How is it not possible for you to hear what I am saying? The only way in which someone could have deceived the disciples was to approach them in the name of Yeshua, claiming to be a follower of Yeshua, and at the same time teaching that he is God or that he is "I AM" just exactly as you do. This could have deceived them because they were not yet converted when the statement was made and they clearly did not fully understand the Testimony of Yeshua until much later.

Take heed lest any man deceive you: for many shall come in my name saying that I AM and shall deceive many.

Lon, Take heed lest Rosenritter deceive you: for many shall come in the name of Yeshua saying that he is I AM and shall deceive many. Rosenritter, Take heed lest Lon deceive you: for many shall come in the name of Yeshua saying that he is I AM and shall deceive many. No, I'm not angry, not a cultist, not sitting in the corner, did not give a ransom for an education that must be maintained at all cost, and am not afraid to confront buffoonery with reason, logic, and truth. :chuckle:

You sound angry, as you breathe poisonous fumes at us. But you lost your chance to persuade me when you refuse to answer the question. I gave you fair chance to explain the alleged parable and you would rather use a million words to insult and justify why you will not.

Rosenritter · Aug 13, 2016

Lon said:
:doh: This "Book of Matthew" is NOT the gospel of Matthew they are talking about :doh: I really wish you'd sit there and be quiet. You haven't the slightest clue of what you are talking about. You are an inept, amateur, wanna-be. Do I disdain laity? No. You? Yes because I can't teach you a thing and you have a LOT to learn.

Mormon is it? Daqq, are you a Mormon? Be bold, don't hide your cultic ties. Here let me start: I am a triune Reformed Christian. Your turn.

Let's see, if I'm a 'buffoon' with an incredibly higher IQ than your's, what would that make you? :think: Please stop. You are really hurting yourself and your credibility. "Give a man enough rope..." then he'll do what? You are showing exactly who you are in thread.

I don't know why God didn't connect nerves that would pain you if you neglected intelligence. It'd sure have stopped these kinds of tragedies. For now, you just need sit in the corner, study, and catch up because you are woefully far behind. Please learn to love learning and thinking and stop being a lone-ranger. It is completely opposite of God's call to the Body of Christ. Be united to the Body of Christ and quit disdaining her and us.

He isn't Mormon. I knew that before he replied. Why did you suggest Mormon? Seems at least quasi-Jewish Unitarian to me.

Notaclue · Aug 13, 2016

Quote Originally Posted by Notaclue
View Post

Can we become......God?

Posted by Lon.

No. "Friends" of God rather.

Friends of God?.......... Do you have Scripture for this?

I will answer the rest of the post later, I have been very busy.

Is.57:21.

Lon · Aug 14, 2016

Rosenritter said:
He isn't Mormon. I knew that before he replied. Why did you suggest Mormon? Seems at least quasi-Jewish Unitarian to me.

He already said so. There are a few buzzwords Mormons use about God that mean nothing like what you and I deem they mean. He used one so I simply asked. We'll hope he will be bold and tell us exactly what theology he espouses.

Lon · Aug 14, 2016

Notaclue said:
Can we become......God?

No

Lon said:
"Friends" of God rather.

Notaclue said:
Friends of God?.......... Do you have Scripture for this?

Sure: John 15:13-15 James 2:3

Notaclue said:
I will answer the rest of the post later, I have been very busy.

Understood

Notaclue said:
Is.57:21.

Have heard it a few ways: No rest for the weary-wicked-tired. There is rest in Christ where our wickedness is cleansed away. Matthew 11:28,29

-Lon

Zeke · Aug 14, 2016

Yet the facts don't even support a historic Jesus so the institutionalized nonsense exposed by those prancing around with theological decrees is hilarious to say the least, not to mention the worldly spirit/ego oozing from their post about none existed facts.

These same folks can't even discern their own slavery to the system that trained them to expose the lie of a human sacrifice that is the real blaspheme against the Divine who laughs as I do against such educated stupidity.

Lon · Aug 14, 2016

Zeke said:
Yet the facts don't even support a historic Jesus so the institutionalized nonsense exposed by those prancing around with theological decrees is hilarious to say the least, not to mention the worldly spirit/ego oozing from their post about none existed facts.

Not really any threads or interest in "There Was No Historical Jesus" are there?.... This thread already concedes His existence. I'm very sad your journey took you away from sound reasoning but this isn't the thread for it. You are really going to have to start your own thread or go back to the Urantian one. This ain't that thread.

Zeke said:
These same folks can't even discern their own slavery to the system that trained them to expose the lie of a human sacrifice that is the real blaspheme against the Divine who laughs as I do against such educated stupidity.

I don't know what passes for intelligence in your neck of the woods. Obviously different than what most of us believe intelligence must entail. Your corner will always be lonely, Zeke. I'm sad you left us, but you put yourself in that corner. I didn't even know initially why you were angry with me: You chose this, I can't unchoose it for you. Anyway, wrong thread. Respectfully -Lon

Rosenritter · Aug 14, 2016

Zeke said:
Yet the facts don't even support a historic Jesus so the institutionalized nonsense exposed by those prancing around with theological decrees is hilarious to say the least, not to mention the worldly spirit/ego oozing from their post about none existed facts.

These same folks can't even discern their own slavery to the system that trained them to expose the lie of a human sacrifice that is the real blaspheme against the Divine who laughs as I do against such educated stupidity.

You mean the historic Jesus recorded in four Gospels, the Jesus with the brother James mentioned by Jewish Roman historian Josephus, the same Jesus that so persuaded cowed disciples that they were then willing to sacrifice their lives for? You mean that historic Jesus?

I agree with Lon on this, this thread presumes at least that Jesus existed, even if the thread owner didn't specify that.

Zeke · Aug 14, 2016

Lon said:
Not really any threads or interest in "There Was No Historical Jesus" are there?.... This thread already concedes His existence. I'm very sad your journey took you away from sound reasoning but this isn't the thread for it. You are really going to have to start your own thread or go back to the Urantian one. This ain't that thread.

I don't know what passes for intelligence in your neck of the woods. Obviously different than what most of us believe intelligence must entail. Your corner will always be lonely, Zeke. I'm sad you left us, but you put yourself in that corner. I didn't even know initially why you were angry with me: You chose this, I can't unchoose it for you. Anyway, wrong thread. Respectfully -Lon

Never let facts get in the way Lon, to bad you are so brainwashed that you have lost the ability to discern the possibility that you maybe the one that is deceived, But I know that you are manipulated by that worldly ego that patronizes this worlds system that also educated you and requires you be in compliance with it every day, sad but you choose to embrace it even after you have been shown that its a fraud like you're dogma. I am not angry with you Lon only pity that you are stuck in the exclusive club of bigotry that every false religion thrives on around the globe since time began.

Lon · Aug 14, 2016

Zeke said:
Never let facts get in the way Lon, to[o] bad you are so brainwashed that you have lost the ability to discern the possibility that you [are] maybe the one that is deceived, But I know that you are manipulated by that worldly ego that patronizes this world[']s system that also educated you and requires you be in compliance with it every day,[. S] sad but you choose to embrace it even after you have been shown that its a fraud like you're dogma.

Shown? :nono: Nowhere near like. You give me a god in your image that I then must worship because there are like 10 of you guys that believe He is like you think and in your image. I HAD to be molded into His and still need to be molded into His. 1 John 3:1-2 Most people on the planet still believe history is accurate and viable. *(you are spamming this thread btw-against TOL rules)

Zeke said:
I am not angry with you Lon only pity that you are stuck in the exclusive club of bigotry that every false religion thrives on around the globe since time began.

Sorry, truth is bigoted. It is against falsehood necessarily. Lovers of God will find out what pleases Him. Proverbs 8:17 Hebrews 11:6 *(Try making your own thread or PMing instead)

Zeke · Aug 14, 2016

Rosenritter said:
You mean the historic Jesus recorded in four Gospels, the Jesus with the brother James mentioned by Jewish Roman historian Josephus, the same Jesus that so persuaded cowed disciples that they were then willing to sacrifice their lives for? You mean that historic Jesus?

I agree with Lon on this, this thread presumes at least that Jesus existed, even if the thread owner didn't specify that.

Hear say that many have disputed as being unreliable which weighs against the historic trinity even being viable except to those still caught in that Roman matrix, The kingdom of God is within Luke 17:20-21 and the stories if spiritual deal with NOW! not the past or future which is the observable lie being debated by all indoctrinated converts to Romes scheme.

Zeke · Aug 14, 2016

Lon said:
Shown? :nono: Nowhere near like. You give me a god in your image that I then must worship because there are like 10 of you guys that believe He is like you think and in your image. I HAD to be molded into His and still need to be molded into His. 1 John 3:1-2 Most people on the planet still believe history is accurate and viable. *(you are spamming this thread btw-against TOL rules)
Sorry, truth is bigoted. It is against falsehood necessarily. Lovers of God will find out what pleases Him. Proverbs 8:17 Hebrews 11:6 *(Try making your own thread or PMing instead)

You are still within the false kingdom of mans traditions that educated you Lon, the kingdom is spiritual and isn't something one learns in a theological school that reeks of worldly elitist mentality, sheer egocentric based BS! that wouldn't know 1Cor 13:1-13 if it smacked you across that over educated face, not to mention you are a worldly shill with ID to prove my assertion, a spiritual misfit with a worldly diploma to prove it.

Lon · Aug 14, 2016

Zeke said:
You are still within the false kingdom of mans traditions that educated you Lon, the kingdom is spiritual and isn't something one learns in a theological school that reeks of worldly elitist mentality, sheer egocentric based BS!

Again, truth is VERY elitist. It HAS to be. (Again a much broader subject than this thread is addressing)

Zeke said:
that wouldn't know 1Cor 13:1-13 if it smacked you across that over educated face, not to mention you are a worldly shill with ID to prove my assertion, a spiritual misfit with a worldly diploma to prove it.

Did your parents ever correct you, Zeke? Hate you because of it?

I care a LOT more about you than you think I do. Go through and read all of my posts to you since you've gone off the deep end. Analyze them. If you see anything but love in them, please tell me. I may not be the same way with all, but I believe I have been nothing but to you, and yet you disdain me for it

Let's revisit 1 Corinthians 13? Start with loving the same Jesus.

daqq · Aug 14, 2016

Rosenritter said:
He isn't Mormon. I knew that before he replied. Why did you suggest Mormon? Seems at least quasi-Jewish Unitarian to me.

Lon said:
He already said so. There are a few buzzwords Mormons use about God that mean nothing like what you and I deem they mean. He used one so I simply asked. We'll hope he will be bold and tell us exactly what theology he espouses.

I already told you I am not a Mormon. Others can see that right away.
What is wrong with you Lon? You need to go seek psychiatric help.

Lon said:
Again, truth is VERY elitist. It HAS to be. (Again a much broader subject than this thread is addressing)

Did your parents ever correct you, Zeke? Hate you because of it? I care a LOT more about you than you think I do. Go through and read all of my posts to you since you've gone off the deep end. Analyze them. If you see anything but love in them, please tell me. I may not be the same way with all, but I believe I have been nothing but to you, and yet you disdain me for it Let's revisit 1 Corinthians 13? Start with loving the same Jesus.

Again showing your elitist psychopathic mentality that goes hand in hand with Calvinism.
You know better than the sheeple so they just need to sit down shut up and listen to you. :rotfl:

The Trinity

The Trinity

Yes

No

Not sure

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member