Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?


Alter2Ego

Recommended Posts

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

You didn't get anybody. The changing of "Creator" to "Creators" is found only in modern Bibles. In the ancient text, it is written in the singular. And if you are going to rely on a single verse of scripture--that clearly is a translation blunder--you are not going to get very far in proving trinity as being a Bible teaching. Especially when the dogma is debunked by scripture after scripture, throughout the Judeo-Christian Bible.

I call you on that, the link I posted is from a Jewish site that reflects this very issue, they admit to the plural, it is there whether you accept it or not.

As for your allegation that it is found only in modern bibles, you just quoted half a dozen of them and they all translate to the singular. I quoted directly from the Hebrew using the YLT, a literal translation of the text and a clear reflection of the Hebrew itself, live with it.

The Bible text designated YLT is from the 1898 Young's Literal Translation by Robert Young who also compiled Young's Analytical Concordance. This is an extremely literal translation that attempts to preserve the tense and word usage as found in the original Greek and Hebrew writings. The text was scanned from a reprint of the 1898 edition as published by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids Michigan. The book is still in print and may be ordered from Baker Book House. Obvious errors in spelling or inconsistent spellings of the same word were corrected in the computer edition of the text.

http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Youngs-Literal-Translation-YLT-Bible/

Edited by Jor-el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well to me the trinity is the spirit of life, God, Jesus and in speaking of all human life into one.John 17-

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one.I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one;

Hell in the sin against ones self, the holy spirit, the one sin that was spoke of thats never forgiven. God forgives, but one can`nt really forgive one`self, only by forgiving others Thats why Jesus said to settle it before you get to the court, because when you get the court, God not going to judge but one judges them self. Gee thats all Jesus talk about was forgivenness for all, right up to the cross.

Edited by docyabut2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I call you on that, the link I posted is from a Jewish site that reflects this very issue, they admit to the plural, it is there whether you accept it or not.

As for your allegation that it is found only in modern bibles, you just quoted half a dozen of them and they all translate to the singular. I quoted directly from the Hebrew using the YLT, a literal translation of the text and a clear reflection of the Hebrew itself, live with it.

The Bible text designated YLT is from the 1898 Young's Literal Translation by Robert Young who also compiled Young's Analytical Concordance. This is an extremely literal translation that attempts to preserve the tense and word usage as found in the original Greek and Hebrew writings. The text was scanned from a reprint of the 1898 edition as published by Baker Book House, Grand Rapids Michigan. The book is still in print and may be ordered from Baker Book House. Obvious errors in spelling or inconsistent spellings of the same word were corrected in the computer edition of the text.

http://www.biblegate...tion-YLT-Bible/

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

It matters not that it is a Jewish website. Let me remind you that Jews, as a people, overwhelmingly reject Jesus Christ and insist, to this day, that the Jesus Christ of the Bible is not their Messiah. So if you are going to look to them for help in proving that Jesus is also Jehovah in a 3-prong-god, you're in bad shape.

Furthermore, I already informed you that ancient Hebrew manuscripts render Ecclesiastes 12:1 as singular "Creator." Notice one commentary confirming this.

Remember thy Creator - בוראיך Boreeycha, thy Creators. The word is most certainly in the plural number in all our common Hebrew Bibles; but it is in the singular number, בוראך Borecha, in one hundred and seventy-six of Dr. Kennicott's MSS., and ninety-six of De Rossi's; in many ancient editions; and in all the ancient versions. There is no dependence on the plural form in most of the modern editions; though there are some editions of great worth which exhibit the word in this form, and among them the Complutensian, Antwerp, Paris, and London polyglots.

(Source: Clarke's Commentary on the Bible)

The commentator, who is clearly a Trinitarian, then goes on to admit that to rely on Ecclesiastes 12:1 for proof of trinity is "precarious" and amounts to resorting to "dubious" means.

The evidence, therefore, that this text is supposed to give to the doctrine of the ever blessed Trinity, is but precarious, and on it little stress can be laid; and no man who loves truth would wish to support it by dubious witnesses. Injudicious men, by laying stress on texts dubious in themselves, and which may be interpreted a different way, greatly injure the true faith. Though such in their hearts may be friends to the orthodox faith, they are in fact its worst friends, and their assistance is such as helps their adversaries.

(Source: Clarke's Commentary on the Bible)

http://clarke.biblec...esiastes/12.htm

Not only that, one single verse of scripture from Ecclesiastes 12:1 does not help your case for Trinity, because the rest of the Bible says otherwise.

Edited by Alter2Ego
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not my job to convince you,or to even try and alter your beliefs. You can take that a a cop out if you wish.But it has a much more positive intent.

By the by, Jorel has produced many verses which can clearly be intepreted in the overall context of the bible as pointing to a god who is 3 separate entiities who yet are one. I've already explained how i see humans as also being of this model. There are 3 distinct parts to us yet we are one whole being. Consciousness, Physical body, and energy and other systems which connect mind and body.

While years of reading and study leads me to think of god as trinitarian, the same conclusions might not be clear to you. That's ok The bible is NOT the infallible word of god It is the understanding of god presented by men and women some of whom walked with god. And it IS very difficult to interpret. The important thing for an individual to do is first, study the bible, open their heart and mind to god and do their best to understand it. The second thing is NOT to ever take another person's word for what the bible says or for the nature of god No matter what authority that person seems to have.

God appears to humans in many ways and forms. That is the observable nature of god. He might well seem different to you and I.

ALTER2EGO -to- MR WALKER:

Now you are getting it twisted. I did not ask you to convince me of anything, much less attempt to alter my belief. I asked you to show me where you see trinity in the Bible by quoting at least four (4) verses and then bolding the parts of each verse that you believe refers to Father, Son, and holy ghost being combined into a single god and in which they are co-equal and co-eternal. You have not produced a single verse up to this point as proof of anything. Instead you keep coming back with the same wash, rinse, and repeat by telling me your personal philosophy aka you personal opinion.

This is a public forum. Everybody on this planet has an opinion and can therefore duplicate what you are doing by talking about their personal philosophy and insisting that merely because they believe whatever, then it must be so. Talk is cheap. Biblical proof is what's required when discussing Christian doctrines--especially when the doctrine (trinity) did not officially become Christian teaching until more than 300 years after Jesus Christ returned to heavenly life.

Telling me what you believe and showing me where the Bible says what you are claiming it says are two entirely different things.

BTW: Don't look to Jor-el to help you, because he is presently stuck on a single verse of scripture (Ecclesiastes 12:1) as his proof of a 3-prong god. He is convinced that Ecclesiastes 12:1, where a translation blunder occurred with the word "Creator" vs. "Creators" is his trump card. Meanwhile, the rest of the Bible repeatedly has Jesus Christ being inferior to Jehovah instead of being co-equal, and the Bible confirms that Jesus is not eternal and that only Jehovah (the Father) is eternal.

Edited by Alter2Ego
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

It matters not that it is a Jewish website. Let me remind you that Jews, as a people, overwhelmingly reject Jesus Christ and insist, to this day, that the Jesus Christ of the Bible is not their Messiah. So if you are going to look to them for help in proving that Jesus is also Jehovah in a 3-prong-god, you're in bad shape.

And exactly for that reason they are the best authority on the reading of this verse, since they admit categorically that the verse is rendered "your creators" and ARE NOT Trinitarians they outweigh the modern readings even by Trinitarians themselves.

Furthermore, I already informed you that ancient Hebrew manuscripts render Ecclesiastes 12:1 as singular "Creator." Notice one commentary confirming this.

(Source: Clarke's Commentary on the Bible)

The commentator, who is clearly a Trinitarian, then goes on to admit that to rely on Ecclesiastes 12:1 for proof of trinity is "precarious" and amounts to resorting to "dubious" means.

(Source: Clarke's Commentary on the Bible)

http://clarke.biblec...esiastes/12.htm

Not only that, one single verse of scripture from Ecclesiastes 12:1 does not help your case for Trinity, because the rest of the Bible says otherwise.

Again you are incorrect, that reading does confirm the rest of the bible as I have already demonstrated in a post to Mr. Walker, which you have avoided commenting on, I can provide links all day long to parallels like that, that you cannot refute. You hard headedness in refusing to see what is there, is a symptom of only one thing, believing what others tell you instead of putting the priority on the Word itself.

See: http://www.unexplain...15#entry4761789

PS - I went and read Clarkes Commentary but you seem to have ignored others like Gills Commentary and others.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth,.... Or "Creators" ( B); as "Makers", Job 35:10; for more than one were concerned, as in the creation of all things in general, so of man in particular, Genesis 1:26; and these are neither more nor fewer than three; and are Father, Son, Spirit; the one God that has created men, Malachi 2:10; the Father, who is the God of all flesh, and the Father of spirits; the former both of the bodies and souls of men, Jeremiah 31:27; the Son, by whom all things are created; for he that is the Redeemer and husband of his church, which are characters and relations peculiar to the Son, is the Creator, Isaiah 43:1; and the Holy Spirit not only garnished the heavens, and moved upon the face of the waters, but is the Maker of men, and gives them life, Job 33:4.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

CHAPTER 12

Ec 12:1-14.

1. As Ec 11:9, 10 showed what youths are to shun, so this verse shows what they are to follow.

Creator-"Remember" that thou art not thine own, but God's property; for He has created thee (Ps 100:3). Therefore serve Him with thy "all" (Mr 12:30), and with thy best days, not with the dregs of them (Pr 8:17; 22:6; Jer 3:4; La 3:27). The Hebrew is "Creators," plural, implying the plurality of persons, as in Ge 1:26; so Hebrew, "Makers" (Isa 54:5).

while . not-that is, before that (Pr 8:26) the evil days come; namely, calamity and old age, when one can no longer serve God, as in youth (Ec 11:2, 8).

no pleasure-of a sensual kind (2Sa 19:35; Ps 90:10). Pleasure in God continues to the godly old (Isa 46:4).

Edited by Jor-el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

It matters not that it is a Jewish website. Let me remind you that Jews, as a people, overwhelmingly reject Jesus Christ and insist, to this day, that the Jesus Christ of the Bible is not their Messiah. So if you are going to look to them for help in proving that Jesus is also Jehovah in a 3-prong-god, you're in bad shape.

Furthermore, I already informed you that ancient Hebrew manuscripts render Ecclesiastes 12:1 as singular "Creator." Notice one commentary confirming this.

(Source: Clarke's Commentary on the Bible)

And exactly for that reason they are the best authority on the reading of this verse, since they admit categorically that the verse is rendered "your creators" and ARE NOT Trinitarians they outweigh the modern readings even by Trinitarians themselves.

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

Next you will be arguing that only Jews can read Hebrew. I quoted a source that says the word "Creator" and not "Creators" is what appears in all of the ancient renditions of Ecclesiastes 12:1. Even the Trinitarian Bibles that I quoted would not use "Creators" (plural). The King James Version is a prominent Trinitarian Bible translation, and even it avoided the plural "Creators."

Not only that, the rest of the Bible repeatedly says Jesus is not co-equal and is not co-eternal with Jehovah. I quoted the verse in my OP from Acts that says Jesus Christ is mortal rather than eternal.

"He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption." (Acts 2:31--King James Version)

That's "resurrection" as "he was dead" and had to be brought back to life by Almighty God Jehovah. An eternal person cannot die.

DEFINITION OF "ETERNAL": Eternal means not having a beginning or an end.

http://www.yourdictionary.com/eternal

Jesus Christ literally died. His life ended for three days. That fact alone debunks all claims about trinity in which Jesus is supposedly co-eternal and co-equal with Jehovah. Jesus' mortality renders your argument about Ecclesiastes 12:1 useless.

QUESTION #1 to JOR-EL: How do you get around the fact that Jesus Christ literally died when the trinity dogma says he is co-eternal with Jehovah and, by definition, an eternal person cannot die?

Edited by Alter2Ego
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

Next you will be arguing that only Jews can read Hebrew. I quoted a source that says the word "Creator" and not "Creators" is what appears in all of the ancient renditions of Ecclesiastes 12:1. Even the Trinitarian Bibles that I quoted would not use "Creators" (plural). The King James Version is a prominent Trinitarian Bible translation, and even it avoided the plural "Creators."

No but everybody admits to the Hebrew rendering "your creators" it is not a misspelling, it is not a mistranslation, that is what you are not getting here. The source, which is Clarkes Commentary is the only one that mentions a preponderance of Old manuscripts having the singular rendering and the fact that it states this is invariably false, I checked.

I also found the following...

10. The translation of this enigmatic reference to God. the creator, will be treated in the body of the commentary. Here, however, I raise the issue surrounding its morphology. The difficulty is that the word is in the plural, literally "your creators." However, the plural makes no sense in this context and has been explained in several ways. Baer (in 1886; see reference in Whitley, Koheleth, p. 95) and Lauha (Kohelet, p. 205) note that the versions (creatoris (Vulgate) and ktisas (Septuagint)) and a few Hebrew manuscripts show the singular.

Perhaps the translations of the versions were based on these Hebrew manuscripts, though we must leave open the possibility that they "corrected" the text for theological reasons. Ciordis (Koheleth, pp. 340-41) approaches the issue by arguing that a tamed-aleph is treated as a lamed-he verb (the form is a participle with suffix). A third option is to understand that the plural is used as an emphatic rather than as indicating plurality (Schoors, The Preacher Sought to Find Pleasing Words, p. 24). While it is impossible to decide among the options, their availability undermines the necessity of an emendation.

Source: The book of Ecclesiastes By Tremper Longman

It states the very opposite of Clarke, because it is not in the number of particular manuscripts who may all have been copied from a single source that determines one reading over another, or, as the author states, they may have been tampered with for theological reasons. What we do know is that there are many manuscripts that have the plural and they may be older than the ones containing the singular. But this is beside the point, there are more than enough verses that demonstrate that Jesus was God.

Not only that, the rest of the Bible repeatedly says Jesus is not co-equal and is not co-eternal with Jehovah. I quoted the verse in my OP from Acts that says Jesus Christ is mortal rather than eternal.

"He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption." (Acts 2:31--King James Version)

That's "resurrection" as "he was dead" and had to be brought back to life by Almighty God Jehovah. An eternal person cannot die.

DEFINITION OF "ETERNAL": Eternal means not having a beginning or an end.

http://www.yourdictionary.com/eternal

Does not the bible clearly state that Jesus is exactly that... Eternal?

The Alpha and Omega, The beginning and End

Revelation 1:8

8“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”

Revelation 22:12-16

12“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. 13I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

14“Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. 15Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

16“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

Revelation 21:1-7

1Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth, " for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

5He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” Then he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”

6He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children.

There is no way that anyone can deny that the term is used by God and by Jesus himself, thus Jesus is God and God is a unity of more than one being. I challenge anyone to deny these verses do not say what they do...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Cloud Rider used by Jesus and of Yahweh himself

The very term "Cloud Rider", is a statement of Deity. Specifically of one particular Deity, Yahweh himself.

Isaiah 19:1 (ESV)

19 An oracle concerning Egypt.

Behold, YAHWEH is riding on a swift cloud,

and comes to Egypt;

and the idols of Egypt will tremble at his presence,

and the heart of the Egyptians will melt within them

Deuteronomy 33:26 (ESV)

26 “There is none like EL, O Jeshurun,

who rides through the heavens to your help,

through the skies in his majesty.

Psalm 68:33 (ESV)

33 to Him who rides in the heavens, the ancient heavens;

behold, he sends out his voice, his mighty voice

Psalm 104:3 (ESV)

3 He lays the beams of his chambers on the waters;

he makes the clouds his chariot;

he rides on the wings of the wind;

Daniel 7:9-14

9“As I looked,

“thrones were set in place,

and the Ancient of Days took his seat.

His clothing was as white as snow;

the hair of his head was white like wool.

His throne was flaming with fire,

and its wheels were all ablaze.

10A river of fire was flowing,

coming out from before him.

Thousands upon thousands attended him;

ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him.

The court was seated,

and the books were opened.

11“Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12(The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.)

13“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

The language is not symbolic, the Cloud Rider is none other than God himself!

Notice especially Daniel where the ancient of Days (God) is seated on his throne when "one like a son of man" (human being) comes into his presence. He is given dominion over all men and the WORSHIP him!

So to whom exactly did God give his authority, his power and his dominion?

So who is the Cloud Rider?

Matthew 26:64-68

And the high priest said to him, “I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.”

64Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

65Then the high priest tore his robes and said, “He has uttered blasphemy. What further witnesses do we need? You have now heard his blasphemy. 66What is your judgment?” They answered, “He deserves death.” 67Then they spit in his face and struck him. And some slapped him, 68saying, “Prophesy to us, you Christ! Who is it that struck you?”

The answer hasn't changed it seems... the answer is still God.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ancient of Days Title for God and reference to Jesus

Daniel 7:13

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence."

Micah 5:2

But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days.

"But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity."

Daniel 7:9

"As I looked, "thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool. His throne was flaming with fire, and its wheels were all ablaze.

Titles of God are clear markers of who is considered divine and Deity. It seems the Messiah is considered in this way, the reference can only be of him and of Yahweh himself, there can be no confusion in the parallel.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mighty God, The everlasting Father

Isaiah 9:6

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Every Christian knows this verse is a reference to Jesus and yet the very same verse is calling him mighty God and The everlasting Father. There can be no doubt, if one tries to say this is not Jesus one has to abandon Christian doctrine of the messiah being born of a virgin. Either this is a reference to the messiah or to God, the context forces us to accept both.

Jesus Christ literally died. His life ended for three days. That fact alone debunks all claims about trinity in which Jesus is supposedly co-eternal and co-equal with Jehovah. Jesus' mortality renders your argument about Ecclesiastes 12:1 useless.

Do you end, completely when you die? The answer is no, not even you can say that. There is more than enough biblical evidence that we continue after death albeit without a physical body. Do you deny this?

The bible demonstrates quite clearly in many places that people continue in spirit, after physical death, I can quote them if you disagree. There are no exceptions, you referred to Hades and Sheol in your OP, they would not exist if there was no awareness after death. Jesus would have been lying if you say the opposite. He himself stated that people are aware and have consciousness after death, that they go to a place called Hades / Sheol. Are you going to call Jesus a liar?

Jesus died physically, but the being who inhabited that body whom we call the Memra, the Living Word of God, did not die, it cannot, just as you do not cease to exist when you die. You are confusing physicality with the eternal Spirit, which is God.

QUESTION #1 to JOR-EL: How do you get around the fact that Jesus Christ literally died when the trinity dogma says he is co-eternal with Jehovah and, by definition, an eternal person cannot die?

Because his literal death had no impact on his eternal Spirit, it liberated that spirit into the form it occupied before becoming incarnate... You know that is what the word means, to incarnate, a spirit takes on flesh.

Humans do not incarnate, we did not exist before conception, we came to life upon conception, Jesus did not. As the bible clearly states jesus is the word of God, and even the ancient Jews knew exactly what that meant.

John 1:1-4

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.

I am absolutely sure you know this verse and have always dismissed it, but not even the Jews did that, they knew exactly what it meant. Jesus was a pre-incarnate being, unlike humanity. He was not created, He always was. He is eternal, he is the visible manifestation of God.

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence

And firstborn here does NOT mean that he was created, it means preeminent son. The Greek is prōtotokos. Notice that it does not say the "firstborn of all creation", that would imply that he was merely the 1st to be created, no the term there is "over all creation", as is the right of the heir, but not just any heir, it is a heir who is the exact and express image of his father. This usage is firmly established in the Old Testament. For example, Ephraim is referred to as the Lord’s “firstborn” (Jer. 31:9) even though Manasseh was born first (Gen. 41:51).

Likewise, David is appointed the Lord’s “firstborn, the most exalted of the kings of the earth” (Ps. 89:27), despite being the youngest of Jesse’s sons (1 Sam. 16:10‐13). While neither Ephraim nor David was the first one born, they were firstborn in the sense of preeminence or “prime position.”

Hebrews 1:3

The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

Your confusion is simply that you are taking his physical body and expecting that it cannot die, if he is eternal, but eternity has nothing to do with a physical body, it is a spiritual element. His resurrected body was not his original, physical and normal human body, it was something far greater and more precious, it was the body promised to all believers upon our own resurrection.

Jesus didn't change bodies, like we change a shirt. His actual physical body was transformed/reconfigured/transfigured into the resurrected body he had, after being raised from death.

It wasn't just a reanimation of a physically dead body in decomposition.

The human flesh body had human limitations, Jesus was entirely human, from birth to death, the body he rose in is based on that body, but it is not a human body as we know it anymore. It is an immortal, indestructible body, a body that is not made of normal matter in the sense that it is now eternal and will never decay in any way.

He can still eat, drink, use it to walk and open doors and touch people but that body does not need to eat, drink or sleep anymore, it can do impossible things, go through walls, transport itself wherever it desires without walking there among many other characteristics. It is the resurrection body all believers will get.

As I said, the Jews knew about the word of God and what it meant, and it wasn't a book.

Targum Onkelos

And they heard the voice of the Word of the Lord God walking in the garden in the evening of the day; and Adam and his wife hid themselves from before the Lord God among the trees of the garden. And the Lord God called to Adam and said to him, Where art thou?

And he said, The voice of Thy Word heard I in the garden, and I was afraid, because I (was) naked, and I would hide.

The Targum of Palestine

Walking in the garden in the strength of the day......And the Word of the Lord God called to Adam, and said to him, Behold, the world which I have created is manifest before Me; and how thinkest thou that the place in the midst whereof thou art, is not revealed before Me? Where is the commandment which I taught thee?

And he said, The voice of Thy Word heard I in the garden, and I was afraid, because I am naked; and the commandment which Thou didst teach me, I have transgressed; therefore I hid myself from shame.

Edited by Jor-el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No but everybody admits to the Hebrew rendering "your creators" it is not a misspelling, it is not a mistranslation, that is what you are not getting here. The source, which is Clarkes Commentary is the only one that mentions a preponderance of Old manuscripts having the singular rendering and the fact that it states this is invariably false, I checked.

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

Which "everybody" are you referring to? The ones you dreamed up. I quoted five Trinitarian Bibles at Post 21 http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=247376&st=15#entry4761689 and they all refused to render Ecclesiastes 12:1 with the plural "Creators." I'm talking "Trintarian Bibles" as in, "the publishers of those Bibles believe in the Trinity." Below is a partial listing:

1. New International Bible (NIV)

2. New Living Translation (NLT)

3. English Standard Version (ESV)

4. New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5. King James Bible (KJB)

6. Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

7. International Standard Version (ISV)

8. NET Bible

9. GOD's WORD Translation (GWT)

10. American Standard Version (ASV)

11. Douay-Rheims Bible (DRB)

12. Darby Bible Translation (DBT)

13. English Revised Version (ERV)

14. Webster's Bible Translation (WBT)

15. World English Bible (WEB)

Those are among the "everybody" that you claim agrees with you?

FYI: All of the Trinitarian Bibles insert an occasional fabrication--when they figure they can get away with it. Clearly, they realize they cannot get away with the translation blunder at Ecclesiastes 12:1 and so the have all avoided it, with a very few exceptions.

BTW. The above portion of your last post that I quoted is as far as I got. When someone starts responding with a wall of text after I ask them a simple question, that's proof positive that they are not willing to reason on the scriptures. Loading up a post with a wall of text or sending people to a third party website to read page after page of tripe is referred to as "Elephant Hurling." The intent is to load up the opponent with more info than the opponent is willing to handle all at one time. This saves the person doing the elephant hurling from being challenged on the misinformation that is part and parcel of the wall of text. The person doing the elephant hurling then proceeds to claim victory when the opponent refuses to deal with the wall of text.

Don't hold your breath waiting for me to respond to anything else you plastered into Post 32. I asked you a direct question at Post 31, which you are now evading by means of your elephant hurling behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Alter2Ego;

The queries you originally posed were plainly loaded questions, the answers to which you already have predetermined, irrevocable answers. This begs the question: What is the purpose of your exercise? This isn't a debate or a discussion; it is you challenging others to refute your particular theological niche which you have already indicated is unassailable. Why anyone would rise to the bait is quite beyond me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allah would be proud of you. :D

Which Bible's do not support the trinity??

Other then the Quran?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALTER2EGO -to MR WALKER:

Let's start with your four (4) best examples of scriptures that you believe are proof of trinity.

Hi Alter2Ego,

I know you weren't addressing me, but I thought I'd add my four best examples. I shared a link in my first post, so most of this information is there to some extent, but I'll expand on it a bit further:

Passage 1 - " And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

~ Matthew 28:18-20

In this passage, especially the highlighted piece, Jesus calls his disciples to baptise people in the name/s of the Father AND of the Son AND of the Holy Spirit. What role to the Son and the Holy Spirit lay in baptism? We know that baptism is for the purpose of being reborn as new entities (born once by flesh, once by the spirit - John 3:3-8) and without being reborn by the spirit, we cannot have eternal life.

Passage 2 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God"

~ John 1:1-2

As you read through John chapter 1, the logos, translated into English as "the Word", is identified as Jesus Christ. Therefore we have to accept that Jesus IS God, according to John 1!

Passage 3 - "Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple".

~ John 8:58-59

Jesus had just finished telling the crowds that he knew Abraham and had met him, and the crowds were naturally sceptical. Then Jesus said, "before Abraham was, "I Am". The phrase "I Am" is a reference to Exodus. In chapter 3, when Moses sees God in the burning bush, he asks God what his name was. God replies "I Am Who I Am! Tell the people of Israel that "I Am" has sent you" (Exodus 3:14). Naturally, when Jesus called himself "I Am", in John 8:58, the Jews believed he was committing blasphemy by calling himself God. That's why they attempted to stone him in the very next verse.

Passage 4 - "Here O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One"

~ Deuteronomy 6:4

Compare:

"Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"

~ John 20:28

How could Thomas call Jesus "My Lord and my God", and yet still claim to adhere to the Jewish Shema (Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One)?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

These four passages clearly show that Jesus and God are the same. Three of these passages attest to at the very least a binatarian God (God the Father, God the Son). The fourth of these passages clearly includes the Holy Spirit as well. I think we have clearly identified a triune, Trinitarian God using these four passages.

As for the Hellfire issue, I've linked the essay I wrote in my first post, so I'll leave this here with only my comments on the Trinity.

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, {17} that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

Perhaps my favorite Bible verse, as it says how scripture should be treated. The key word is "beneficial" (sometimes translated "useful"). It never says scripture is final or determinative about anything -- only beneficial, nor does it spell out what books are deemed "scripture" (we may presume the author had much of what we call the OT in mind plus probably a few other writings that have fallen by the wayside). At a minimum, we may exclude the entire NT from the scope of this passage as the canon was nowhere near completion. By extension, or in spirit, of course we can, but we can similarly include many, many other writings. Just because a Church Council under the political control of the Emperor Constantine decreed certain books is not relevant.

You also have the expression "inspired," sometimes rendered "God-breathed." Now I happen to be listening to Hayden at the moment, and one could say that what I type is inspired by him, since he puts me in a quiet, reasonable mood. Far too much meaning is imposed on "inspired." It does not mean "dictated," nor even "prevented from error." It only means that the men writing it had God in mind, were, as it were, "holy."

I think Protestant Christians and Muslims commit idolatry when they assert that their scriptures are infallible. That is ascribing human things to God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALTER2EGO -to- MR WALKER:

Now you are getting it twisted. I did not ask you to convince me of anything, much less attempt to alter my belief. I asked you to show me where you see trinity in the Bible by quoting at least four (4) verses and then bolding the parts of each verse that you believe refers to Father, Son, and holy ghost being combined into a single god and in which they are co-equal and co-eternal. You have not produced a single verse up to this point as proof of anything. Instead you keep coming back with the same wash, rinse, and repeat by telling me your personal philosophy aka you personal opinion.

This is a public forum. Everybody on this planet has an opinion and can therefore duplicate what you are doing by talking about their personal philosophy and insisting that merely because they believe whatever, then it must be so. Talk is cheap. Biblical proof is what's required when discussing Christian doctrines--especially when the doctrine (trinity) did not officially become Christian teaching until more than 300 years after Jesus Christ returned to heavenly life.

Telling me what you believe and showing me where the Bible says what you are claiming it says are two entirely different things.

BTW: Don't look to Jor-el to help you, because he is presently stuck on a single verse of scripture (Ecclesiastes 12:1) as his proof of a 3-prong god. He is convinced that Ecclesiastes 12:1, where a translation blunder occurred with the word "Creator" vs. "Creators" is his trump card. Meanwhile, the rest of the Bible repeatedly has Jesus Christ being inferior to Jehovah instead of being co-equal, and the Bible confirms that Jesus is not eternal and that only Jehovah (the Father) is eternal.

I was pointing out that while i can explain and quote sections of the bible to indicate that god is 3 beings in one, you wont necessarily accept that and it is not my business to convince you If it was something criticla to your salvation i might make more effort but it is not.

I KNOW god just as moses and abraham, daniel, job, and elijah knew god. That is enough for me This (the nature of the trinity) is not a critical point to me, as it is to you. I am not dogmatic about it.

It is betwen you and god to come to a relationship which works for you. If you find it hard seeing god as 3 in one, then dont.It wont matter. But there is no theological, biblical or dogmatic proof that god is not trinitarian and a lot of suggestion tha the must be.. I have spent 40 years reading and studing the bible with peole of all sorts of different beliefs. All sorts of peole from anglicans to seventh day adventists, (who are very biblically literate and literal) who differ greatly on the bible in other respects can agree from independent readings and study, that god seems to have a trinitarian nature.

Jesus, the man, was "inferior" to god only because his spirit was housed in a human body while on earth. In heaven he and god and the spirit share the authority and rule of heaven, each with different but overlapping functions. Christ was with god when god created the earth in the bible story, and it says he was god, as well as being with god. And christ continues on eternally as does the spirit, because god cannot exist without them as a part of him They are not creations of god but part of his creative physical nature. Christ is only gods son in terms of his human avatar who lived on earth for 30 years And WAS the physicla son of god. Christ in heaven is not the son of god but a part of god (so a part of god inseminated a woman called mary producing a god/man on earth.)

After his death and translation, that part of god returned to the whole part of god,(in the ascencion) and went back to his original nature as a part of god. But it can act separately,independently and as an instrument of the total will of god, as it does all through the old testament, and up to revelations final chapter.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALTER2EGO -to- MR WALKER:

Now you are getting it twisted. I did not ask you to convince me of anything, much less attempt to alter my belief. I asked you to show me where you see trinity in the Bible by quoting at least four (4) verses and then bolding the parts of each verse that you believe refers to Father, Son, and holy ghost being combined into a single god and in which they are co-equal and co-eternal. You have not produced a single verse up to this point as proof of anything. Instead you keep coming back with the same wash, rinse, and repeat by telling me your personal philosophy aka you personal opinion.

This is a public forum. Everybody on this planet has an opinion and can therefore duplicate what you are doing by talking about their personal philosophy and insisting that merely because they believe whatever, then it must be so. Talk is cheap. Biblical proof is what's required when discussing Christian doctrines--especially when the doctrine (trinity) did not officially become Christian teaching until more than 300 years after Jesus Christ returned to heavenly life.

Telling me what you believe and showing me where the Bible says what you are claiming it says are two entirely different things.

BTW: Don't look to Jor-el to help you, because he is presently stuck on a single verse of scripture (Ecclesiastes 12:1) as his proof of a 3-prong god. He is convinced that Ecclesiastes 12:1, where a translation blunder occurred with the word "Creator" vs. "Creators" is his trump card. Meanwhile, the rest of the Bible repeatedly has Jesus Christ being inferior to Jehovah instead of being co-equal, and the Bible confirms that Jesus is not eternal and that only Jehovah (the Father) is eternal.

I was pointing out that while i can explain and quote sections of the bible to indicate that god is 3 beings in one, you wont necessarily accept that and it is not my business to convince you If it was something criticla to your salvation i might make more effort but it is not.

I KNOW god just as moses and abraham, daniel, job, and elijah knew god. That is enough for me This (the nature of the trinity) is not a critical point to me, as it is to you. I am not dogmatic about it.

It is betwen you and god to come to a relationship which works for you. If you find it hard seeing god as 3 in one, then dont.It wont matter. But there is no theological, biblical or dogmatic proof that god is not trinitarian and a lot of suggestion tha the must be.. I have spent 40 years reading and studing the bible with peole of all sorts of different beliefs. All sorts of peole from anglicans to seventh day adventists, (who are very biblically literate and literal) who differ greatly on the bible in other respects can agree from independent readings and study, that god seems to have a trinitarian nature.

Jesus, the man, was "inferior" to god only because his spirit was housed in a human body while on earth. In heaven he and god and the spirit share the authority and rule of heaven, each with different but overlapping functions. Christ was with god when god created the earth in the bible story, and it says he was god, as well as being with god. And christ continues on eternally as does the spirit, because god cannot exist without them as a part of him They are not creations of god but part of his creative physical nature. Christ is only gods son in terms of his human avatar who lived on earth for 30 years And WAS the physicla son of god. Christ in heaven is not the son of god but a part of god (so a part of god inseminated a woman called mary producing a god/man on earth.)

After his death and translation, that part of god returned to the whole part of god,(in the ascencion) and went back to his original nature as a part of god. But it can act separately,independently and as an instrument of the total will of god, as it does all through the old testament, and up to revelations final chapter.

Edited by Mr Walker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Alter2Ego,

I know you weren't addressing me, but I thought I'd add my four best examples. I shared a link in my first post, so most of this information is there to some extent, but I'll expand on it a bit further:

Passage 1 - " And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

~ Matthew 28:18-20

In this passage, especially the highlighted piece, Jesus calls his disciples to baptise people in the name/s of the Father AND of the Son AND of the Holy Spirit. What role to the Son and the Holy Spirit lay in baptism? We know that baptism is for the purpose of being reborn as new entities (born once by flesh, once by the spirit - John 3:3-8) and without being reborn by the spirit, we cannot have eternal life.

Passage 2 - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God"

~ John 1:1-2

As you read through John chapter 1, the logos, translated into English as "the Word", is identified as Jesus Christ. Therefore we have to accept that Jesus IS God, according to John 1!

Passage 3 - "Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple".

~ John 8:58-59

Jesus had just finished telling the crowds that he knew Abraham and had met him, and the crowds were naturally sceptical. Then Jesus said, "before Abraham was, "I Am". The phrase "I Am" is a reference to Exodus. In chapter 3, when Moses sees God in the burning bush, he asks God what his name was. God replies "I Am Who I Am! Tell the people of Israel that "I Am" has sent you" (Exodus 3:14). Naturally, when Jesus called himself "I Am", in John 8:58, the Jews believed he was committing blasphemy by calling himself God. That's why they attempted to stone him in the very next verse.

Passage 4 - "Here O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One"

~ Deuteronomy 6:4

Compare:

"Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"

~ John 20:28

How could Thomas call Jesus "My Lord and my God", and yet still claim to adhere to the Jewish Shema (Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One)?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

These four passages clearly show that Jesus and God are the same. Three of these passages attest to at the very least a binatarian God (God the Father, God the Son). The fourth of these passages clearly includes the Holy Spirit as well. I think we have clearly identified a triune, Trinitarian God using these four passages.

As for the Hellfire issue, I've linked the essay I wrote in my first post, so I'll leave this here with only my comments on the Trinity.

Thanks PA, I think that pretty well covers my thinking, and the quotes/concepts I would use. It is clear that at times there are three parts to god, and yet at the same time he is one .

But I dont think alter2ego really understood that I feel uncomfortable challenging anothers personal beliefs. It is not about him and whether he is "right" or "wrong", but about what I chose to do and how I choose to respond to his challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks PA, I think that pretty well covers my thinking, and the quotes/concepts I would use. It is clear that at times there are three parts to god, and yet at the same time he is one .

But I dont think alter2ego really understood that I feel uncomfortable challenging anothers personal beliefs. It is not about him and whether he is "right" or "wrong", but about what I chose to do and how I choose to respond to his challenge.

No worries, I see your point. But let's be honest, you're much more liberal than I am. To you, Christianity is simply the way you have chosen to follow God because that is your culture. You could have chosen any cultural way of expressing your belief in God. For you, it doesn't matter whether one accepts Jesus or not. They can choose whatever they feel is the best way for them to worship the divine. For me, Jesus truly is the only way to God, so you may understand why I am more proactive in sharing my points. Don't get me wrong, I'd never "preach" my views to anyone in the sense of forcing them to believe what I believe. But if someone asks for an opinion from the Bible, then I am quite comfortable sharing that opinion. In that sense, I'm willing to share my views to any who wish to listen. I don't necessarily think of that as "challenging" their personal beliefs, at the end I'm not expecting anyone who reads my post to shout "HALLELUJAH" and turn to my way of thinking. But I'm happy to share my beliefs, and if necessary my scriptural support for my beliefs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries, I see your point. But let's be honest, you're much more liberal than I am. To you, Christianity is simply the way you have chosen to follow God because that is your culture. You could have chosen any cultural way of expressing your belief in God. For you, it doesn't matter whether one accepts Jesus or not. They can choose whatever they feel is the best way for them to worship the divine. For me, Jesus truly is the only way to God, so you may understand why I am more proactive in sharing my points. Don't get me wrong, I'd never "preach" my views to anyone in the sense of forcing them to believe what I believe. But if someone asks for an opinion from the Bible, then I am quite comfortable sharing that opinion. In that sense, I'm willing to share my views to any who wish to listen. I don't necessarily think of that as "challenging" their personal beliefs, at the end I'm not expecting anyone who reads my post to shout "HALLELUJAH" and turn to my way of thinking. But I'm happy to share my beliefs, and if necessary my scriptural support for my beliefs.

Thats a very fair summation. It is MY choice not to prosylethise, in part because god came to me and in my mind a relationship between god and man must be mutually acceptable to both to work This means it should be a voyage of SELF discovery not one of directed conversion. I didn't go seeking god or following a ritual or path to come to him. But that makes me a bit different to people who have learned one theology or means to connect to god, and believe it to be the only way to god. I know that god can come to an atheist secular humanist with no particualar religious background so i cant see him quibbling about whether he is a trinity or not. I persoanlly identify two parts to god inmy relationship with him and strangely the part i am least familiar with is the aspect of christ.

But then I think that we all are aspects of christ, if we are filled with the holy spirit as he was. Christ shows us how to live on this earth, as human beings filled with the spirit of god. There are not many other well known examples of this symbiotic relationship of god/man, in humans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John14 - 19-20

Jesus -Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

At that day ye shall know that I [am] in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

(The Trintity )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thread cleaned

Alter2Ego, please avoid bringing up your personal misgivings towards the staff of other websites on to the forums or using that as a basis to make disparaging remarks about the staff here, our moderators are as entitled to participate in a discussion as anyone else.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does not the bible clearly state that Jesus is exactly that... Eternal?

The Alpha and Omega, The beginning and End

Revelation 1:8

Hi Jor-el,

I have this question, but I'm not comfortable asking it. It has something to do with Isaiah 65:17, the Fall of Man, and The NeverEnding Story (film). Ultimately, it's about salvation (for all, not just for Christians) and God's "unconditional love." You may be able to piece the question together, or any reader. The answer(s) or loophole will be personal in nature.

Peace

-------------------

"See, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind." Isaiah 65:17

Edited by braveone2u
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ALTER2EGO -to- JOR-EL:

Which "everybody" are you referring to? The ones you dreamed up. I quoted five Trinitarian Bibles at Post 21 http://www.unexplain...15#entry4761689 and they all refused to render Ecclesiastes 12:1 with the plural "Creators." I'm talking "Trintarian Bibles" as in, "the publishers of those Bibles believe in the Trinity." Below is a partial listing:

1. New International Bible (NIV)

2. New Living Translation (NLT)

3. English Standard Version (ESV)

4. New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5. King James Bible (KJB)

6. Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

7. International Standard Version (ISV)

8. NET Bible

9. GOD's WORD Translation (GWT)

10. American Standard Version (ASV)

11. Douay-Rheims Bible (DRB)

12. Darby Bible Translation (DBT)

13. English Revised Version (ERV)

14. Webster's Bible Translation (WBT)

15. World English Bible (WEB)

Those are among the "everybody" that you claim agrees with you?

FYI: All of the Trinitarian Bibles insert an occasional fabrication--when they figure they can get away with it. Clearly, they realize they cannot get away with the translation blunder at Ecclesiastes 12:1 and so the have all avoided it, with a very few exceptions.

BTW. The above portion of your last post that I quoted is as far as I got. When someone starts responding with a wall of text after I ask them a simple question, that's proof positive that they are not willing to reason on the scriptures. Loading up a post with a wall of text or sending people to a third party website to read page after page of tripe is referred to as "Elephant Hurling." The intent is to load up the opponent with more info than the opponent is willing to handle all at one time. This saves the person doing the elephant hurling from being challenged on the misinformation that is part and parcel of the wall of text. The person doing the elephant hurling then proceeds to claim victory when the opponent refuses to deal with the wall of text.

Don't hold your breath waiting for me to respond to anything else you plastered into Post 32. I asked you a direct question at Post 31, which you are now evading by means of your elephant hurling behavior.

The everybody is every single Hebrew speaker and translator out there. The English is a deliberate mistranslation, because of the view that such a term as "Creators" is not warranted and due to the fact that other manuscripts have it in the singular but the Masoretic text has it in the plural, which is deliberately ignored.

You are absolutely ignorant of manuscript evidence, to determine independently on what the correct reading is. When coupled to your confusion in determining the difference between the "Nature" of God and the "Hierarchy", of God, it is no surprise that you come to the conclusions you do.

Claiming Trinitarian fabrication is not Kosher, it is "flame baiting" unless you have evidence of such a thing, which you don't.

Let's be honest here, the reason you really didn't answer my post is because you can't answer it without showing the tumble of confusion you are in, you cannot refute a single thing I said in that post which is why you are running and hiding behind terms like " with a wall of text" and "Elephant Hurling" , which makes me laugh. You claim to have asked a simple question that I avoided... If you had bothered to read my post instead of filibustering and wasting everybody's precious time, you would have noticed that I did answer your post, in detail.

What?

Were you expecting a simple sentence in answer to your post?

Do you think a subject like this can be answered in a simple sentence to your satisfaction? You will never be satisfied even with evidence staring you straight in your face, which is why you have refused to answer my post, that evidence was indeed staring you in the face and you had no answer for it, so you rejected it with a pathetic excuse.

As I stated, my answer to your question in post 31 is there for everybody to see... your filibustering does not pull the wool over anyone's eyes. If you do not answer my post in full you will have effectively admitted you don't have an argument.

We are supposedly here to debate, you have yet to do so. why have you not answered a single post where effective biblical evidence of the Trinity has been given to you? ( and that would include mine)

Good luck and all that.

Edited by Jor-el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Jor-el,

I have this question, but I'm not comfortable asking it. It has something to do with Isaiah 65:17, the Fall of Man, and The NeverEnding Story (film). Ultimately, it's about salvation (for all, not just for Christians) and God's "unconditional love." You may be able to piece the question together, or any reader. The answer(s) or loophole will be personal in nature.

Peace

-------------------

"See, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind." Isaiah 65:17

I think I understand your question and will answer it in regards to my personal understanding of it.

There are no loopholes... but there may be mercy and the possibility of redemption at the very last instant, each according to his own heart.

PS - if that wasn't it, then PM me with the actual question.

Edited by Jor-el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the scriptures are part of the tradition, it being put together (the canon) a couple of centuries after the founding of the faith.

doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the scriptures are part of the tradition, it being put together (the canon) a couple of centuries after the founding of the faith.

doug

Incorrect, the scriptures were not put together a couple of centuries after the founding of Christianity. That can in fact be proved, since the very period you assert that the scriptures were written in, believed in a quite a number of things that the bible actually prohibits, proscribes and condemns.

One of those is that Christianity is not political in nature and under no circumstances should it rule nations and Empires. It is effectively allying itself with the beast of revelation if it does so... so the question is, who was ruling the Roman Empire at the time you are talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

Christendom's trinity, written in Article I of The Catholic Faith, is defined as follows:

"There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things both visible and indivisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be THREE PERSONS, of ONE substance, POWER, and ETERNITY; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost."

http://www.sevenwhol...3/10/article-i/

There is not so much as one verse of scripture in the God's inspired word, the Judeo-Christian Bible, that supports the teaching that the Father, Son, and holy ghost/holy spirit are CO-EQUAL and CO-ETERNAL and that they are combined into one god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.