The Trinity

The Trinity


  • Total voters
    121

Lon

Well-known member
It is not arrogance to tell the truth about you.
:nono: YOU are out of your element. This is a Triune board. It is 'the truth' about all of us. You are the odd man out 999 to one. :wave2:

I realize it must be hard for you to examine yourself with Christ at this late stage after years of entrenchment in your religion.
Yep. Truth is like that. Your inane attacks on me and mine are far from laudable. This is a triune board. YOU came HERE. Any Trinitarians excited about you being with us? :think: I'm glad you hear the truth every day. I'll take scripture for the win. :plain:

Compare your posts with the way Christ would have answered
Me: Lots of scriptures. You? :nono: THINK! :doh:

to see how far away from the truth in your inward parts that you are.

LA
Bold. One day we will both stand before Him for these words of yours, 'one-upping' me. Very audacious. Hope you aren't removed from the table. Luke 14:7-9 You just placed yourself in the preferential seats :( I'll sit in the poor seats.Psalm 84:10 You are speaking against all Trinitarians here, not just me. We are 999 to your one audaciousness. Whatever gauntlet you throw, is to all of us. It IS the subject matter. James 4:11-12; 5:8-9 :think:

Again, Me: Scriptures. You: zero. :plain: How WOULD Christ answer? :think: :(
 

God's Truth

New member
It doesn't say that, DOES IT? Why do you lie about things like this? Don't you think we have access to the Bible?

Gen. 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.​



:rotfl:



That's okay. I know already. Just read it as if it was so. :rotfl:


You just can't make this stuff up, folks. :wave2:

The scripture plainly says He spoke through His Son in later times, 'He' and 'Son' are proof that the He is the Father.

As for you incessantly posting that scripture from Genesis, it is the Father speaking and how do you ever get that scripture means you can nullify Hebrews?
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Yes, but you warp it in your mind to mean the difference between Christians and yourself :doh:
Romans 10:13 True or false? True, which leaves you fighting against whoever SHOULD be your brother and sister in Christ. So really, you small minorities are the ones who will not be a part of us. I'm well aware of what scripture says. Did you AT LEAST start reading?
Imho, those scriptures alone will straighten you out as they've done for me.

Yes. Only 1/3 of the planet is Christian. Of those are a few 'Lord Lord' who Christ doesn't know but you are wrong to make it between JW's and Trinitarians. That is NOT where the line is drawn. Romans 10:13 True, right?

Again, read any of those scriptures? 1 Timothy 3:16? John 20:28? John 1:1? Nope, Mr. Smarty pants thinks he's one of the chosen FEW against all Christians 999 to one :( Yeah, that makes sense. You had to work hard to convince yourself, but every JW MINDLESSLY thinks the same. It is braindead brainduped brain washing. Romans 10:13, remember? But JW's don't believe that. They don't believe and are IGNORANT of half the scriptures. How about you? I'm definitely challenging, but I'm not being mean. I truly want Scriptures and truth for you. Truly.


:doh: Do you think every one of them was for this? I don't. I think a lot of Priests were crying in their rooms and on their knees. Do you think ALL of the RC was silent during Jewish extermination? Stop scapegoating! I'm not a Catholic AND I'm STILL Triune. Catholics believe Jesus saves. Are you so screwy in the head as to reject that because it is 'Catholic'? Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Cults are wrong and not very intelligent when it comes to these things. They settle for 'half' truths because they stop when they come up with an answer and plug their ears ever after in false doctrine. It is false, because they only know and only CARE about their precious doctrines of half truths, NOT the whole Bible. Not the God of the Universe. They really don't care and will not be forced to think. Read 3 Timothy 3:16. Read it. "Without Controversy!" Suddenly, under a cult, it is FULL of controversy :( I had NO controversy reading and understanding scriptures until a JW or Mormon came and brought up controversy after controversy. The Apostle said to AVOID them.

As long as you deal with scriptures, in a truthful manner, we can discuss why any other option is terrible. Scripture must be the final word and it is.


I have and thank you for the manners with your "please." I like you a lot more than these past few posts may convey. I have a lot of cultists and heretics on ignore simply because they will not listen and will not contend faithfully to and with God's word. You are not on my ignore list. I HATE that cultist heretics have lied to you. It infuriates me. You are worth better than that. Scriptures are meant to be embraced, not the cause of controversy 1 Timothy 3:16 "Without Controversy, God came in the flesh." It is as clear as that. Paul would have never said 'without controversy' if he wasn't as clear as he was: "God came in the flesh." John 1:1 "...was with AND was ...God. John 20:28 "Thomas said to Jesus, 'You are the Lord of me, and God of me.'" Forget that I'm triune for a second. We cannot make these scriptures say but what they say. If we can embrace them as they are 'without controversy' we are a LOT closer to one another and to honoring God between us. Posturing 'controversy' afterwards is what is to be shunned. A meeting of minds is why I'm in this thread: If you genuinely love God's word and have a desire to love Him more, we have some things to talk about. I have a few on ignore who, in my thinking, love the sound of their own voices and false teaching, more than they Love Him, me, or His word. I try hard not to entertain things which are beneath all of us. I think that's why Paul said to avoid foolish controversies, not because truth doesn't matter, but because when love for Him, His Word, and one another is gone, the discussion is fruitless and pointless. -Lon

:nono: YOU are out of your element. This is a Triune board. It is 'the truth' about all of us. You are the odd man out 999 to one. :wave2:


Yep. Truth is like that. Your inane attacks on me and mine are far from laudable. This is a triune board. YOU came HERE. Any Trinitarians excited about you being with us? :think: I'm glad you hear the truth every day. I'll take scripture for the win. :plain:


Me: Lots of scriptures. You? :nono: THINK! :doh:

Bold. One day we will both stand before Him for these words of yours, 'one-upping' me. Very audacious. Hope you aren't removed from the table. Luke 14:7-9 You just placed yourself in the preferential seats :( I'll sit in the poor seats.Psalm 84:10 You are speaking against all Trinitarians here, not just me. We are 999 to your one audaciousness. Whatever gauntlet you throw, is to all of us. It IS the subject matter. James 4:11-12; 5:8-9 :think:

Again, Me: Scriptures. You: zero. :plain: How WOULD Christ answer? :think: :(

People can read your posts to decide for themselves what sort of antichrist nonsense you speak.

LA
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Lon,

Consider--

God is one person.

heis one is a masculine one, and when conjoined with theos by grammer can only be one person/personage and never is represented by three, theos is one a sole one as a person and not three persons/beings 'one' heis-in the greekthayer- a cardinal numeral; one, where it takes the place of a predicate it means one person.pg 186 a grk lexicon of the n.t. a.t.robertson-one when masculine sets forth the idea of the cardinal numeral 'one' when referring to people or beings always the numeral one is implied.pg 186 vol 5 word pictures of the grk n.t. andpg 526-527 vol 4,pg299 vol4 word pict..n.t. bauer-masculine 'one' a single one pg 230 bauers greek lexicon gingrich- equivalent to protos first, only one; single pg 57 shorter lexiconof grk n.t. now hen -0ne youngs one hen when neuter means one thing, pg 719 youngs anaylyticalconcordance of the bible, thayer one when neuter means to be united,in one will or spirit. pg 186-187ibid a.t.robertson one when neuter shows a unity;a oneness of indentity pg 526vol 4 ibidpg 186 ibid vine- one/hen when neuter may be used to show a numeral one of a thing or it may be used to show unity of more than one or someone or thing. 'heis'(the power of the masculine one) a. t. robertson eph 2:14: verse 14 for he is our peace, who hath made both one...(hen)hath made both one 'one' is neuter. "hen" two peoples become one. unity is understood in light of the neuter one. word pictures of the n.t. vol. 4. page 526 & 527. robertson galatians 3:28;verse 28 there is neither jew nor greek, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in christ jesus.'one' is masculine. "heis" no word for man in the greek. yet, man is understood because of masculine 'one' - heis. vincent: "one moral personality" word pictures in the n.t. vol. 4. page 299 'heis'(the power of the masculine one) joseph henry thayer galatians 3:20 & 28;..but god is one..for ye are all one in christ. the word 'one' is masculine; heis thayer: "ye that adhere to christ make one person, just as the lord himself." 'hen' (examples of the neuter God is one person.

heis one is a masculine one, and when conjoined with theos by grammer can only be one person/personage and never is represented by three, theos is one a sole one as a person and not three persons/beings 'one' heis-in the greekthayer- a cardinal numeral; one, where it takes the place of a predicate it means one person.pg 186 a grk lexicon of the n.t. a.t.robertson-one when masculine sets forth the idea of the cardinal numeral 'one' when referring to people or beings always the numeral one is implied.pg 186 vol 5 word pictures of the grk n.t. andpg 526-527 vol 4,pg299 vol4 word pict..n.t. bauer-masculine 'one' a single one pg 230 bauers greek lexicon gingrich- equivalent to protos first, only one; single pg 57 shorter lexiconof grk n.t. now hen -0ne youngs one hen when neuter means one thing, pg 719 youngs anaylyticalconcordance of the bible, thayer one when neuter means to be united,in one will or spirit. pg 186-187ibid a.t.robertson one when neuter shows a unity;a oneness of indentity pg 526vol 4 ibidpg 186 ibid vine- one/hen when neuter may be used to show a numeral one of a thing or it may be used to show unity of more than one or someone or thing. 'heis'(the power of the masculine one) a. t. robertson eph 2:14: verse 14 for he is our peace, who hath made both one...(hen)hath made both one 'one' is neuter. "hen" two peoples become one. unity is understood in light of the neuter one. word pictures of the n.t. vol. 4. page 526 & 527. robertson galatians 3:28;verse 28 there is neither jew nor greek, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in christ jesus.'one' is masculine. "heis" no word for man in the greek. yet, man is understood because of masculine 'one' - heis. vincent: "one moral personality" word pictures in the n.t. vol. 4. page 299 'heis'(the power of the masculine one) joseph henry thayer galatians 3:20 & 28;..but god is one..for ye are all one in christ. the word 'one' is masculine; heis thayer: "ye that adhere to christ make one person, just as the lord himself." 'hen' (examples of the neuter continued--

that oneness. thsu, eleven (11) times the n.t. speaks of god as one person.
8. the above facts might be contested, but they cannot be disputed. in plain simple greek, god conveys to the world that he is one, and the evidence is overwhelming that the word chosen by him to assert his unity means "one person" or "one single being"
the big eleven(heis)a. each time the gk. n.t. uses the word 'one' in reference to god it employs the numeral "heis" b. the gk. numeral "heis" declares god to be one person.
1. mk. 2:7 why doth this man thus speak? he blashemeth; who can forgive sins but one (heis) even god? asv
2. mk, 10:18 and jesus said unto him, why callest thou me good? there is none good but one (heis) that is god.
3. mk. 12:29 and jesus answered him, the first of all the commandments is,hear, o israel; the lord our god is one (heis) lord.
4. lk. 18:19 and jesus said unto him, why callest thou me good? none is good,save one (heis), that is, god.
5. rom. 3:30 seeing it is one (heis) god, which shall justify the circumsion through faith.
6. icor. 8:4 concerning therefore the eating of things sacrificied to idols,we know that no idol is anything in the world, and that there is no god but one asv.
7. icor. 8:6 but to us there is but one (heis) god, the -----
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
father, of whom are all things, and we in him.
8. gal. 3:20 now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but god is one (heis)
9. eph, 4:6 one (heis) god and father of all, who is above all, and through all and in you all.
10. i tim, 2:5 for there is one (heis) god, and one mediator between god and men, the man christ jesus.
11. james 2:19 thou believest that there is one (heis) god; thou doest well;the devils also believe and tremble. "one god" (the first commandment) mark 12:29 and jesus answered him. the first of all the commandments is. hear o israel;the lord our god is one lord. duet 6:4
fact: the greek word for 'one' in this passage is heis. fact: according to 'bauer's creek lexicon page 230 heis means a single only one.
fact: heis found 93 + times in the n.t. relating to people. never is it used for more than one person. never!
fact: heis is the greek masculine 'one' a.t. robertson, the masuline 'one' implies one person only. (word pictures, vol. 5 page 186) the strength of the masculine one to indicate one person is seen in ga. 3:28 'one god'(galatians 3:20) now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but god is one. i. but god is 'one' a. 'one' is heis - masculine b. 'one' takes the place of the predicate in this clause. conclusion: c. god is 'one' person. see; thayer page 186 a greek english lexicon of then.t. 'one god'(galatians 3:20) i. scholars comment on gal, 3:20,. a. kenneth s. wuest, wuest's word studies from the greek n.t. vol. 1, page106 "the word 'one' is masuline in gender, and therefore is personal, referring to a person." op. cit. page 107 'now, the mediator is not (a go-between representing the interests) of one (indivual), but god is one (indivual)." b. bratcher: "but a go-between is not needed when there is only one person; and god is one." c. the amplified bible:"now a go-between (intermediary) has to do with and implies more than one party - there can be no mediator with just one person, yet god is (only) one person."
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
It is not arrogance to tell the truth about you.

I realize it must be hard for you to examine yourself with Christ at this late stage after years of entrenchment in your religion.

Compare your posts with the way Christ would have answered to see how far away from the truth in your inward parts that you are.

LA
Christ ignored some pretty important questions put to Him, ones that dealt with salvation.
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
1 Timothy 3:16
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory. (NIV)


1. Although the above verse in the NIV does not support the Trinity, there are some Greek manuscripts that read, “God appeared in the flesh.” This reading of some Greek manuscripts has passed into some English versions, and the King James Version is one of them. Trinitarian scholars admit, however, that these Greek texts were altered by scribes in favor of the Trinitarian position. The reading of the earliest and best manuscripts is not “God” but rather “he who.” Almost all the modern versions have the verse as “the mystery of godliness is great, which was manifest in the flesh,” or some close equivalent.

2. In regard to the above verse, Bruce Metzger writes:

[“He who”] is supported by the earliest and best uncials…no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports theos; all ancient versions presuppose hos or ho [“he who” or “he”]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century testifies to the reading theos. The reading theos arose either(a) accidentally, or (b) deliberately, either to supply a substantive for the following six verbs [the six verbs that follow in the verse], or, with less probability, to provide greater dogmatic precision [i.e., to produce a verse that more clearly supports the Trinitarian position].” [1]

3. When properly translated, 1 Timothy 3:16 actually argues against the Trinity. “By common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Beheld by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory” (NASB). This section of Scripture beautifully portrays an overview of Christ’s life and accomplishments. It all fits with what we know of the man, Jesus Christ. If Jesus were God, this section of Scripture would have been the perfect place to say so. We should expect to see some phrases like, “God incarnate,” “God and Man united,” “very God and very man,” etc. But nothing like that occurs. Instead, the section testifies to what non-Trinitarians believe—that Christ was a man, begotten by the Father, and that he was taken up into glory.

Buzzard, pp. 144 and 152

Dana, p. 137

Farley, pp. 69 and 70

Morgridge, pp. 82 and 115

Snedeker, p. 451

Back to the list of “Verses Used to Support the Doctrine of the Trinity”


http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/1-timothy-3-16
 

Lon

Well-known member
Can one expect anything else from a Calvanist?
It'd help if you spelled it correctly. It is hard to treat something academically when even the spelling is beyond the one in conversation.
:sigh:
One who follows Calvin the killer of Servatus, will surely become like him.
You are intimating I'd kill you? :think: When it was against the law, I might have turned you in, as Calvin did. If I knew they were going to kill you? I'd like to say 'no' but I nor you live in that age. I'd 'like' to think I'd be my own man in those days, preferring to publish letters over your heresies against scripture. Back then, they took scripture directives to NOT entertain heresy, seriously. Heresy, at that time, was a capital offense.
Why did you not study the posts above?
1) because cut/pastes are against the rules 2) because it wasn't your own material, 3) because I didn't want to become complicit in your TOL rule-breaking. 4) because the author is not here to defend himself 5) because you know commentary and googling better than you know scriptures :(



Dave Hunt shows your heresies very well--

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdnZHyJH4KE

See the new thread on it.

LA

:nono: This thread is NOT about Calvinism :plain: Peter caused a rift once between the Pharisees and Sadducees by mentioning hope in the resurrection to divide them. It will not work for you here. This thread is about God's nature.

Most of my brothers and sisters in Christ are not Calvinists. They nor I are overtly concerned about it. It is NOT a separating issue in this thread. :nono:
 

Lon

Well-known member
1 Timothy 3:16
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory. (NIV)


1. Although the above verse in the NIV does not support the Trinity, there are some Greek manuscripts that read, “God appeared in the flesh.” This reading of some Greek manuscripts has passed into some English versions, and the King James Version is one of them. Trinitarian scholars admit, however, that these Greek texts were altered by scribes in favor of the Trinitarian position. The reading of the earliest and best manuscripts is not “God” but rather “he who.” Almost all the modern versions have the verse as “the mystery of godliness is great, which was manifest in the flesh,” or some close equivalent.

2. In regard to the above verse, Bruce Metzger writes:

[“He who”] is supported by the earliest and best uncials…no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports theos; all ancient versions presuppose hos or ho [“he who” or “he”]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century testifies to the reading theos. The reading theos arose either(a) accidentally, or (b) deliberately, either to supply a substantive for the following six verbs [the six verbs that follow in the verse], or, with less probability, to provide greater dogmatic precision [i.e., to produce a verse that more clearly supports the Trinitarian position].” [1]

3. When properly translated, 1 Timothy 3:16 actually argues against the Trinity. “By common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Beheld by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory” (NASB). This section of Scripture beautifully portrays an overview of Christ’s life and accomplishments. It all fits with what we know of the man, Jesus Christ. If Jesus were God, this section of Scripture would have been the perfect place to say so. We should expect to see some phrases like, “God incarnate,” “God and Man united,” “very God and very man,” etc. But nothing like that occurs. Instead, the section testifies to what non-Trinitarians believe—that Christ was a man, begotten by the Father, and that he was taken up into glory.

Buzzard, pp. 144 and 152

Dana, p. 137

Farley, pp. 69 and 70

Morgridge, pp. 82 and 115

Snedeker, p. 451

Back to the list of “Verses Used to Support the Doctrine of the Trinity”


http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/1-timothy-3-16



καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶ τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· Θεὸς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί
And without-controversy great is the mystery, God came in the flesh.
The debated text, here.
 

Lon

Well-known member
Could you give scriptures that say what you just said?
Yes, which is why you should listen more than talk on TOL. Here one example is given. Matthew 13:13 for another example then Luke 20:28 etc.
You are not ignoring questions so you can be like Jesus.
You ignore questions because you can't answer them.
Why are you using this as an opportunity to attack him???

He was giving an example of why "I" might not have answered Lazy.

Why did you jump to an attack on 'him' as if 'he' was given the plagiarism post to respond to? :idunno:

Isn't this trolling and personal attack? :think:
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Could you give scriptures that say what you just said?

Would you agree that the answer to the question posed to Jesus is important?

Now when He came into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people confronted Him as He was teaching, and said, “By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority?”But Jesus answered and said to them, “I also will ask you one thing, which if you tell Me, I likewise will tell you by what authority I do these things:The baptism of John—where was it from? From heaven or from men?” And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’But if we say, ‘From men,’ we fear the multitude, for all count John as a prophet.”So they answered Jesus and said, “We do not know.” And He said to them, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things. - Matthew 21:23-27 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew21:23-27&version=NKJV

As soon as it was day, the elders of the people, both chief priests and scribes, came together and led Him into their council, saying,“If You are the Christ, tell us.” But He said to them, “If I tell you, you will by no means believe.And if I also ask you, you will by no means answer Me or let Me go.Hereafter the Son of Man will sit on the right hand of the power of God.” - Luke 22:66-69 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke22:66-69&version=NKJV

The people answered Him, “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever; and how can You say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this Son of Man?”Then Jesus said to them, “A little while longer the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you; he who walks in darkness does not know where he is going.While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” These things Jesus spoke, and departed, and was hidden from them. - John 12:34-36 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John12:34-36&version=NKJV

You are not ignoring questions so you can be like Jesus.
You ignore questions because you can't answer them.

On the contrary, I have answered almost all of your questions, only refusing to answer when I'm trying to make a point but you refuse to engage in meaningful discussion, and you have hardly answered any of mine. Earlier, I asked you directly if certain words in other languages have greater meaning than their english counterparts, and you refused to answer with a direct answer, instead you replied with something along the lines of, "English is the best way to read scripture, so read it in English or don't read it at all." It was not even a Bible-related question, yet you outright refused to give me a straight answer, and then you even claimed that you did answer me when you did not.

GT, the answer to my question was YES, Certain words in languages other than English have more meaning than their English counterparts. In addition to that, there are sometimes multiple words in other languages that there is only one English word for, and each of those words have a slightly different meaning to them, even though they have the same general meaning. And even on top of that, there can be different meanings of the same word throughout history, so it's important to keep that in mind when reading texts in other languages from periods other than our current time.

All of that adds up, especially when reading the Bible, because the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, and then later translated to Greek for the Library of Alexandria, and the New Testament being originally written in Greek, and both Testaments being translated into English.

GT, the reason I tell you all of this is that there's only a single English word for 'one', there are three words in Hebrew for the word 'one', and they all have slightly different meaning and usage. No, it's not necessary to learn the entire Hebrew language to be able to understand the Bible, but learning certain words and their meanings, and the differences between words that have similar meanings can certainly help understand what is being said better, and deepen our understanding of scripture, especially if the words one learns are describing God.

And that brings me back to 'yachad,' 'bad,' and 'echad.'

GT, do the above words have the same meaning or different meanings? They all mean "one", but do they all just mean "one"? Or do they each mean something slightly different?

And another question for you, does the Bible ever use figures of speech? Or is it completely literal, and you have to take everything as it means, verbatim?
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶ τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· Θεὸς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί
And without-controversy great is the mystery, God came in the flesh.
The debated text, here.

You believe Jesus was God come down from Heaven to be a man.

However God came down from Heaven to unite with a man at His baptism who God raised up by His word

Christ went to the cross as the man that He is, not as a God, for he never was God, only His Father was.



LA
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
You believe Jesus was God come down from Heaven to be a man.

However God came down from Heaven to unite with a man at His baptism who God raised up by His word

Please show us where scripture says that God "united" with a man to become Jesus.

Christ went to the cross as the man that He is, not as a God, for he never was God, only His Father was.

LA

By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world. - 1 John 4:2-3 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1John4:2-3&version=NKJV

For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. - 2 John 1:7 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2John1:7&version=NKJV

You are antichrist.
 

Lon

Well-known member
You believe Jesus was God come down from Heaven to be a man.

However God came down from Heaven to unite with a man at His baptism who God raised up by His word

Christ went to the cross as the man that He is, not as a God, for he never was God, only His Father was.

LA
For you, then. Scripture is no good. :(
Thomas DID s
ay to Jesus, "You are the Lord of me and God of me." John 20:28 Do you realize Arians attack every single scripture? Rather convenient :noway: When does attacking scripture finally become wrong? :think:

Believe it or attack it, Lazy.
 

God's Truth

New member
You believe Jesus was God come down from Heaven to be a man.

However God came down from Heaven to unite with a man at His baptism who God raised up by His word

Christ went to the cross as the man that He is, not as a God, for he never was God, only His Father was.



LA

Jesus even baptized Elizabeth while he was in Mary's womb.
 

God's Truth

New member
Yes, which is why you should listen more than talk on TOL. Here one example is given. Matthew 13:13 for another example then Luke 20:28 etc.

None of those scriptures say Jesus ignored people's questions.


Why are you using this as an opportunity to attack him???

He was giving an example of why "I" might not have answered Lazy.

Why did you jump to an attack on 'him' as if 'he' was given the plagiarism post to respond to? :idunno:

Isn't this trolling and personal attack? :think:

I just don't debate you Lon, you do not seem right to me. I don't have time for people such as yourself.
 

God's Truth

New member
Would you agree that the answer to the question posed to Jesus is important?

Now when He came into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people confronted Him as He was teaching, and said, “By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority?”But Jesus answered and said to them, “I also will ask you one thing, which if you tell Me, I likewise will tell you by what authority I do these things:The baptism of John—where was it from? From heaven or from men?” And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’But if we say, ‘From men,’ we fear the multitude, for all count John as a prophet.”So they answered Jesus and said, “We do not know.” And He said to them, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things. - Matthew 21:23-27 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew21:23-27&version=NKJV

As soon as it was day, the elders of the people, both chief priests and scribes, came together and led Him into their council, saying,“If You are the Christ, tell us.” But He said to them, “If I tell you, you will by no means believe.And if I also ask you, you will by no means answer Me or let Me go.Hereafter the Son of Man will sit on the right hand of the power of God.” - Luke 22:66-69 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke22:66-69&version=NKJV

The people answered Him, “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever; and how can You say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this Son of Man?”Then Jesus said to them, “A little while longer the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you; he who walks in darkness does not know where he is going.While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” These things Jesus spoke, and departed, and was hidden from them. - John 12:34-36 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John12:34-36&version=NKJV



On the contrary, I have answered almost all of your questions, only refusing to answer when I'm trying to make a point but you refuse to engage in meaningful discussion, and you have hardly answered any of mine. Earlier, I asked you directly if certain words in other languages have greater meaning than their english counterparts, and you refused to answer with a direct answer, instead you replied with something along the lines of, "English is the best way to read scripture, so read it in English or don't read it at all." It was not even a Bible-related question, yet you outright refused to give me a straight answer, and then you even claimed that you did answer me when you did not.

GT, the answer to my question was YES, Certain words in languages other than English have more meaning than their English counterparts. In addition to that, there are sometimes multiple words in other languages that there is only one English word for, and each of those words have a slightly different meaning to them, even though they have the same general meaning. And even on top of that, there can be different meanings of the same word throughout history, so it's important to keep that in mind when reading texts in other languages from periods other than our current time.

All of that adds up, especially when reading the Bible, because the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, and then later translated to Greek for the Library of Alexandria, and the New Testament being originally written in Greek, and both Testaments being translated into English.

GT, the reason I tell you all of this is that there's only a single English word for 'one', there are three words in Hebrew for the word 'one', and they all have slightly different meaning and usage. No, it's not necessary to learn the entire Hebrew language to be able to understand the Bible, but learning certain words and their meanings, and the differences between words that have similar meanings can certainly help understand what is being said better, and deepen our understanding of scripture, especially if the words one learns are describing God.

And that brings me back to 'yachad,' 'bad,' and 'echad.'

GT, do the above words have the same meaning or different meanings? They all mean "one", but do they all just mean "one"? Or do they each mean something slightly different?

And another question for you, does the Bible ever use figures of speech? Or is it completely literal, and you have to take everything as it means, verbatim?

Those scriptures do not say Jesus ignored people's questions. You are in a debate group, are you going to ignore everyone's questions about your doctrines? Do you want people to ignore your questions? Answer that won't you? I think that you do not answer some questions because you don't know the answer.

You said that sometimes the Father spoke in the Old Testament and some times Jesus did, and sometimes the Holy Spirit did, but you don't give scriptures and you deny the scriptures that say the Father spoke in the Old Testament and spoke through the Son in later times.

Are you going to admit that it was the Father alone speaking in the Old Testament?

You need to give a scripture where we are told to learn two languages to know God better. That is not how to know Him.
 
Top