|
biblicaldiscussionanddebate
Aimoo Forum List |
Ticket |
Today |
Member |
Search |
Who's On |
Help |
Sign In |
|
|
| Title: THE ROSE | |
| biblicaldiscussionanddebate > Category > Fellowship Board | Go to subcategory： |
| Author | Content |
jcan071
|
|
|
Date Posted：04/29/2016 5:09 AMCopy HTML THE ROSE
A certain man planted a rose and watered It faithfully, and before it Blossomed, he examined it. He saw the bud that would soon blossom And also the thorns. And he thought, "How can any beautiful flower Come from a plant Burdened with so many sharp thorns?" Saddened by this thought, he neglected To water the rose, And before it was ready To bloom, it died. So it is with many people. Within every soul there is a rose. The God-like qualities planted In us at birth Grow amid the thorns of our faults. Many of us look at ourselves And see only the thorns, The defects. We despair, Thinking that nothing good Can possibly come from us. We neglect to water The good within us, And eventually it dies. We never realize our potential. Some people do not see the rose Within themselves; Someone else must show it to them. One of the greatest gifts a person Can possess is to be Able to reach past the thorns and Find the rose within others. This is the characteristic of love, To look at a person, And knowing his faults, Recognize the nobility in his Soul, and help him realize That he can overcome his faults. If we show him the rose, He will conquer the thorns. Then will he blossom, Blooming forth thirty, sixty, A hundred-fold as it is given to him. Our duty in this world is to help Others by showing Them their roses and Not their thorns. Only then can we achieve the love We should feel for each other; Only then can we Bloom in our own garden. Yes The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#1
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 5:34 AMCopy HTML ALTER2EGO -to- PHATTONEZ:
The Bible says God is not a man. “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?” (Numbers 23:19 -- King James Version) The Bible repeatedly refers to Jesus Christ as "son of man." So not only does the Bible itself contradict the trinity dogma, but you confirmed the contradiction when you admitted above that Jesus was a man at some point. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#2
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 5:46 AMCopy HTML  Originally Posted by phattonez  You got the first two parts right, but then you ruined it when you ended with "Jesus is God." As you correctly stated: "Only God creates." Since only Almighty God Jehovah creates--and Jesus Christ does not create--Jesus is not Almighty God. Originally Posted by phattonez "{15} He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;" (Colossians 1:15) Verse 15 puts Jesus Christ among "ALL CREATION," and refers to him as being "born." That verse alone debunks the trinity dogma which claims Jesus is CO-ETERNAL with the Father. An eternal person cannot be born or be among "all creation." So your flawed logic: "thus He must be God. Hence the Trinity," is not supported by scripture. The reality is that Jehovah was the power behind the creating. Jesus himself said he could not do anything without the power of Jehovah behind him. QUESTION #1 to PHATTONEZ: If Jesus Christ were really CO-EQUAL with the Father (Almighty God Jehovah), why would he need to take instructions from Jehovah? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#3
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 5:52 AMCopy HTML ALTER2EGO -to- PHATTONEZ:
I quoted scripture from Numbers 23:19 that says in plain English that "God is not a man" and that also he is "neither the son of man." Unless you can quote scripture that says Jesus is "fully human and fully divine," I am afraid I will have to dismiss your above comment as nothing more than your personal philosophy. ALTER2EGO -to- LOGICMAN: I will debunk every single verse of scripture that you quoted above, which you presented at Post 196 on Page 20 of this thread. The following weblink will take you directly to what you posted there: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063040172 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) I will also ask you questions dealing with the context of each of your cherry picked verses. So get ready. Originally Posted by Logicman Furthermore, the context (surrounding words, verses, or chapters) to John 1:23 debunks your claim that Jesus is also Jehovah. Notice the bolded words within the following quotation, with Jesus Christ as the speaker. "I can of my own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not my own will, but the will of the Father which has sent me." (John 5:30 -- King James Version) QUESTION #1 to LOGICMAN: If Jesus is also Jehovah, why did Jesus acknowledge that his will is different from that of Jehovah? QUESTION #2 to LOGICMAN: If Jesus is equal to Jehovah, why did Jesus allow Jehovah to send him, since, by default, the one sent is considered inferior to the one doing the sending? CONCLUSION: John 1:23 is not talking trinity. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#4
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 5:54 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman The word “Rock” is a title. Psalms 18:31 is simply saying that Jehovah is the ultimate example of the Rock aka superior to all. However, that does not prevent the TITLE “Rock” from being applied to Jesus Christ in the sense that Christ is in a powerful position. In fact, you ignored the context to 1 Corinthians 10:4 which makes it clear that Jesus Christ is inferior to Jehovah. Notice the words that are bolded within the quotation below. "But I want you to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn, the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3) QUESTION #3 to LOGICMAN: If Jesus is equal to Jehovah, how is it that Jehovah is Jesus’ head aka Jehovah takes the lead in the relationship—and does so consistently? CONCLUSION: 1 Corinthians 10:4 is not talking trinity. I will debunk two more of your verses soon. Meanwhile, I await your answer to the three (3) questions I asked you with regards to John 1:23 and 1 Corinthians 10:4. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#5
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 5:58 AMCopy HTML ALTER2EGO -to- LOGICMAN:
I read from more than a dozen different Bible versions, including the New World Translation. While debating you, I will identify which Bible version I am quoting from whenever I quote a verse of scripture. How does that sound? Originally Posted by Logicman Originally Posted by Alter2Ego “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?” (Numbers 23:19 -- King James Version) Originally Posted by Logicman Originally Posted by Alter2Ego QUESTION #4 to LOGICMAN: If Jesus Christ is equal to Jehovah the Father--as Trinitarians claim--how is it that the scriptures in the Bible consistently have Jesus taking orders from the Father, but the scriptures never have Jehovah the Father taking orders from Jesus? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#6
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:04 AMCopy HTML If (Old Testament or New)
"9...in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form," that is only because "19...God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him..." Originally Posted by Logicman Originally Posted by Alter2Ego "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?" (Numbers 23:19). Those who deny that Jesus has two natures, the divine and human, will often quote Numbers 23:19 as proof that Jesus cannot be God in flesh. But this verse is not a challenge to the doctrine that Christ is God in flesh. First of all, at the time Numbers was written, God had not yet become incarnate. So, it is true that God was not then a man--because the Word had not yet become flesh (John 1:1, 14). Remember, the verse says, "God IS not a man . . . " Second, the verse says that "God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should repent." In other words, the verse is dealing with the issue that God does not lie nor does he repent (of his sins). The verse isn't denying that the Word becomes incarnate later on. Instead, it is saying that God is not like people because he does not lie, nor does he need to repent from sin. At this point, you are contradicting scripture by arguing that Numbers 23:19 is in the past tense and that it no longer applies because, according to your Trinitarian ideology, at some point God became a man (after the Word became flesh). Not only that, you made a critical mistake when you presented John 1:1 and John 1:14 as part of your argument for trinity. I will show you why later. But one thing at a time. You are attempting to talk your way around scripture by telling me that Numbers 23:19 is no longer accurate because it was written before Jesus Christ supposedly showed up as God on earth. Context (surrounding words, verses, and chapters) is the key to understanding scripture. Without context, anyone can give their preferred meaning to words that are isolated from their context. Why so? Because words that are isolated (their context is ignored) can then be easily misinterpreted. Notice part of the context to John 1:1 and 14. Focus on the words that are bolded within the quotation below. "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (John 1:18 -- King James Bible) QUESTION #5 to LOGICMAN: Since you claim Jesus is Almighty God in the flesh and therefore Numbers 23:19 no longer applies, why does John 1:18 say "No man has seen God at anytime"? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#7
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:06 AMCopy HTML The solution is simple. All you need to do is accept what the Bible says. If the people of the OT were seeing God, the Almighty God, and Jesus said that no one has ever seen the Father (John 6:46), then they were seeing God Almighty but not the Father. It was someone else in the Godhead. I suggest that they were seeing the Word before He became incarnate. In other words, they were seeing Jesus.
If God is a Trinity, then John 1:18 is not a problem either because in John chapter one, John writes about the Word (Jesus) and God (the Father). In verse 14 it says the Word became flesh. In verse 18 it says no one has seen God. Since Jesus is the Word, God then, refers to the Father. This is typically how John writes of God: as a reference to the Father. We see this verified in Jesus' own words in John 6:46 where He said that no one has ever seen the Father. Therefore, Almighty God was seen but not the Father. It was Jesus before His incarnation. There is more than one person in the Godhead, and the doctrine of the Trinity must be true. Has anyone ever seen God? | Theophany | See God | See Christ | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry Jesus is God! The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#8
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:09 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman Originally Posted by Alter2Ego Jesus is God! At this point, it is obvious you are beginning to see the contradictions when you pay attention to context. Clearly, Numbers 23:19 which says "God is not a man" is a contradiction of your Trinitarian claim that Jesus Christ/the Word was God in the flesh. Below is where the discussion of Numbers 23:19 has taken us up to this point. POST #402, PARAGRAPH 2: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063228427 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) POST #404, PARAGRAPHS 2 & 3: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063228519 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Alter2Ego Originally Posted by Logicman Notice your acknowledgment that Jesus Christ was temporarily a human--while you completely evaded my question. Well, guess what? The minute you admitted that Jesus was at some point a human, you ended up debunking your beloved trinity. Notice why. “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?” (Numbers 23:19 -- King James Version) POST 405, PARAGRAPH 4: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063229758 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Logicman POST 410, LAST TWO PARAGRAPHS: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063249155 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Alter2Ego You obviously realize that Jesus Christ as God in the flesh is a contradiction of Numbers 23:19, which says God is not a man. Here is why? The Judeo-Christian Bible does not contradict itself. So clearly, Jesus Christ/the Word was not "God in the flesh." The only argument you are left with is to tell me the following in your latest response. POST 412, PARAGRAPH 1: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063250396 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Logicman The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#9
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:11 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman Originally Posted by Alter2Ego Question for you: Why did the New World Translation change John 14:26 to read "that one," instead of "he"? The Holy Spirit is God (i.e. Acts chapter 5). Trying to make him into some kind of Star Wars force so as to deny the Trinity is disingenuous and self serving. Obviously, you have a vivid imagination. Whenever people have been shown where they are wrong by Biblical context but they insist on claiming victory, it is a sign of desperation, a refusing to face reality. For the benefit of others reading this thread, I will now summarize. 1. The Bible says God is not a man. “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?” (Numbers 23:19 -- King James Version) 2. At Post 405, you tried to talk your way around Numbers 23:19 by arguing that because Numbers 23:19 was written before Jesus Christ appeared on earth, the statement "God is not a man" no longer applies. Originally Posted by Logicman 3. You were debunked by a verse from the same book of John which says the following: "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (John 1:18 -- King James Bible) 4. You are still claiming that Jesus is God despite the fact John 1:18--which was written after Jesus showed up on earth--confirms what Numbers 23:19 says. Below is your fallacious claim. Originally Posted by Logicman http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063040172 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#10
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:13 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman We have discussed that three different times already. This is the fourth round. You giving me wash, rinse, and repeat will not change a thing. So I have nothing else to say to you regarding Numbers 23:19 and John 1:18, except for the fact that both of those verses confirm that Jesus Christ could not possibly be God. The next time I post anything to you in this thread, it will be the debunking of another of your supposed "Trinity" verses from Post 196. http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063040172 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#11
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:16 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
Originally Posted by Alter2Ego Well I hope you try to explain this one, because it's a crusher for you. Isaiah 43:10,11 says that “I, even I, am the LORD; and there is no savior besides Me. Jesus is the Savior (Matthew 1:21, Titus 2:13; 2 Peter 1:1, etc., etc.). Jesus must be God the Savior. Notice your comments above that I bolded in red. That is the attitude you have displayed throughout this thread with everyone who has directed you to Biblical context. It is the attitude of someone not interested in reasoning on the scriptures and whose sole objective is to refuse to acknowledge he/she is wrong. Let me inform you that I do not hold out much hope for you in terms of your willingness to be corrected by scripture. I have debated dozens of Trinitarians, and from my experience, the ones that show up posting walls of out-of-context scriptures and weblinks to third-party websites (where more out-of-context "trinity" verses are posted) are dead set against being corrected by God's word. They do not care what the Bible actually says. They will fight tooth and nails to win arguments over human philosophies that are in conflict with scripture. That is the reason why I refused to debate you unless you started quoting the verses and telling me why you believe as you do. I wanted to see how you really feel, as opposed to you telling what some third-party source had posted at an internet blog. Your behavior is very revealing. Again, my debunking of your supposed "Trinity" verses are for all those reading this thread and not necessarily for your benefit. That is the reason why I moved away from your arguments over Numbers 23:19. After you were debunked by John 1:18, you still kept insisting that Jesus is God--proof positive that you do not care what the Bible says. That said, I will now debunk the third "trinity" verse from the list you presented at Post 196. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#12
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:19 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
As a reminder, I have already dealt with John 1:23 at Post 400, at the following weblink: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063228150 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) And I addressed Isaiah 44:8 at Post 401, at the following weblink. http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063228202 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Logicman You conveniently skipped past Colossians 1:15, which says in plain English that Jesus Christ is a created being. Verse 15 says Jesus was "born" and places him among "all creation." One who is born is automatically a created being. Jehovah (the Father) was the power behind the creating. He simply worked through the prehuman Jesus Christ (the Son). Notice the full quotation of Colossians 1:15-16 below from the King James Bible, which is a known Trinitarian Bible translation. "{15} Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstBORN of all CREATION: {16} 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:" (Colossians 1:15-16 – King James Bible) Did you see that? Even the KJV--with their habit of mistranslating scripture to make it appear to be talking Trinity--even they could not get past the words "born" and "all creation." To top it off, Jesus Christ himself made it clear that he could not do anything without assistance from Jehovah the Father. "Therefore, in answer, Jesus went on to say to them: 'Most truly I say to you, The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son also does in like manner." (John 5:19) CONCLUSION: Jehovah was the power behind the creating that is mentioned at Colossians 1:15. He created Jesus Christ before everything else, and then He did the creating of all other things by means of or through the prehuman Jesus Christ. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#13
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:20 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
Numbers 23:18, doesn't say God has not YET become man, it doesn'nt say that, it says God is NOT man, yes it precludes any future incarnation because it's talking about the nature of God himself (singular personal), not just a state of God's existance. Daniel 7:13, is not describing a second person of yahweh, it's describing a person seperate and distinct from Yahweh RECIEVING something from Yahweh that only Yahweh can give .... if God gives someone dominion it doesn't make that person yahweh, you can't GIVE yahweh anything. Also the "worship" Jesus recieves is NEVER, latreau, or sacred service, the religious worship that ONLY yahweh recieves. Isaiah 43:10,11 says that “I, even I, am the LORD; and there is no savior besides Me. Jesus is the Savior Why does God have to be GIVEN all Power and authority? And why does Jesus submit himself to God the Father? if he is God? remember everything is submitted to Jesus ... EXCEPT GOD? 1 Corinthians 15: 24 Then comes the end,[g] when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For “God[h] has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#14
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:25 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by phattonez The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#15
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:25 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman Originally Posted by Alter2Ego Jesus is God! ALTER2EGO -to- LOGICMAN: Right. At John 1:18 it says in clear language that no one has seen God. And by all accounts, every Tom, Dick, and Harry with eyesight that were around Jesus Christ were able to see him. Remember, you claimed that Numbers 23:19 which says "God is not a man" only applied before Jesus/the Word became manifest in the flesh. POST 405, PARAGRAPH 4 WEBLINK: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063229758 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Logicman QUESTION #5 to LOGICMAN: Since you claim Jesus is Almighty God in the flesh and therefore Numbers 23:19 no longer applies, why does John 1:18 say "No man has seen God at anytime"? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#16
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:26 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
You stated above that Jesus is the Word but "God then, refers to the Father." So are you saying that only the Father is God? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#17
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:27 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
Originally Posted by Alter2Ego Your present explanation does not fly considering that you insisted earlier on that Numbers 23:19, which says "God is not a man," was canceled out by John 1:1. "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?" (Numbers 23:19) "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1 -- King James Version) As you put it, Numbers 23:19 was written before Jesus/The Word became God in the flesh. In other words, you were convinced that Jesus Christ was being seen as God in the flesh, which, in you mind, rendered Numbers 23:19 as being in the past tense and no longer applicable. POST 405, PARAGRAPH 4 WEBLINK: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063229758 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Logicman QUESTION #6 to LOGICMAN: Why did you present me with the explanation above for why Numbers 23:19 is no longer relevant? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#18
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:28 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
Originally Posted by Alter2Ego This is my 3rd Request to you: Who specifically do you say Jesus was BEFORE his incarnation? You'll need to answer that one before you get anything else from me. You are in no position to demand answers from me, especially since you have thus far ran from every single question I asked you by giving me intellectually dishonest responses. If you do not want anymore questions from me, just do not write anything else to me and we can both go our separate ways. If you write to me, I will continue to corner you with questions. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#19
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:31 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
I informed you that I will keep peppering you with questions if you continue to write to me. All those reading this thread can safely assume that you are willing to be questioned. So let us pick up where we left off. You claimed that Numbers 23:19 which says "God is not a man" was cancelled out by John 1:1 when Jesus supposedly appeared as God in the flesh. POST 405, PARAGRAPH 4 WEBLINK: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063229758 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Logicman "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (John 1:18 -- King James Bible) Your attempt at dancing around John 1:18 by claiming that the verse is talking about God the Father does not provide you with any escape. Here is why: According to the trinity dogma, the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit are all supposedly the same God. So when John 1:18 says no man has seen God at anytime, it does not exclude Jesus whom you insist is God in the flesh. But that is only one of the problems for Christendom's trinity exposed by John 1:18. I will direct you to the next problem with Question #7. Are you brave enough to answer Question #7? The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#20
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:35 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman ALTER2EGO -to- LOGICMAN: I am now at the fifth and sixth verses from your original list that you claim are proof of Christendom’s Trinity. As a reminder, this is what took place with the other verses that I debunked from your above list. I dealt with John 1:23 at Post 400, at the following weblink: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063228150 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) I addressed Isaiah 44:8 at Post 401, at the following weblink. http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063228202 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) I debunked Isaiah 44:24 and Colossians 1:16 within the same Post 422, at the following weblink. http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063264202 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) I will now present evidence that Jeremiah 10:10 and I John 5:20 are not saying what you claim they are saying. POST 196 WEBLINK: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063040172 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Originally Posted by Logicman "But the LORD is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting king: at his wrath the earth shall tremble, and the nations shall not be able to abide his indignation." (Jeremiah 10:10 -- King James Version) "And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." (1 John 5:20 -- King James Version) Notice that Jeremiah 10:10 presented the title "LORD" in all caps. Whenever you see the titles "LORD" or "GOD" in all caps, that is the signal that the Divine name YHWH aka Jehovah originally appeared in that location and it was deliberately removed by the English translators. So we know that Jeremiah 10:10 is talking about Jehovah, the Father. Now look at 1 John 5:20. That verse is talking about two different Beings or Persons. It is talking about Jesus Christ (the Son) as well as Jehovah (the Father). The verse says Jesus Christ (Person #1) came that we may know "him that is true" (Person #2). The verse goes on to explain that "him that is true" is the Father and that the Father "is the true God, and eternal life." CONCLUSION: Neither Jeremiah 10:10 nor 1 John 5:20 are talking Trinity. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#21
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:36 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian
Not only were pagan trinities around for centuries before Jesus Christ arrived on the earthly scene, but they were in existence while Jesus was on earth, and they continue to exist in Indian and Buddhist religions to this day. Christendom simply borrowed an old idea and presented its version of trinity. But in order to pretend they are worshipping a singular god, they insist that the three “persons” (Father, Son, and holy ghost) are actually just one god. I am still waiting for a Trinitarian from Christendom to explain to the rest of us how 1 + 1 + 1 = 1 The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#22
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:38 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman I am now at the next set of supposed "Trinity" verses from the list you presented at Post 196, which you can find by clicking the following weblink: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063040172 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Notice that you failed to fully quote any of the four verses that you listed above. That is the routine of Trinitarians when they want to claim scriptures support their fallacious claims. They avoid quoting the complete verses, and in many instances, do not quote the verses at all. Below are the full quotations. "{10} ‘You are my witnesses,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘even my servant whom I have chosen, in order that you may know and have faith in me, and that you may understand that I am the same One. Before me there was no God formed, and after me there continued to be none. {11} I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.’ " (Isaiah 43:10-11 -- New World Translation) Notice that Isaiah 43:10-11 clearly identifies Jehovah, the Father, as the speaker and that he says that he is the only savior. Notice that the other three verses indicate that Jehovah does the saving by means of or through his beloved Son, Jesus Christ. In fact, Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:2 even mentions Almighty God at the same time as it mentions Jesus. "She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." (Matthew 1:21 -- New International Version) "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God, and our Savior Jesus Christ;" (Titus 2:13 -- Webster's Bible Translation) "Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ:" (2 Peter 1:2 -- King James Bible) CONCLUSION: As stated at Isaiah 43:11, Jehovah is the only Savior. He does the saving by means of/through his beloved Son, Jesus Christ. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#23
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:40 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman
I did not ask you any questions at Post 460. I simply debunked another of your supposed "Trinity" verses. So get over yourself. This is not about you. There are other people reading this thread that are being benefited every time I debunk another of your out-of-context "Trinity" verses. Frankly, I could care less if you ever respond to anything else I post in this thread. Your input, or lack thereof, will not stop me from debunking more of your "Trinity" verses from time to time. But I will continue to address you whenever I do so, because it is your quotation that I am debunking. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#24
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:41 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by Logicman Notice the above misapplication of scripture by a Trinitarian. You will find the verse at Post 196 at the following weblink amidist other out-of-context verses that I have already debunked. http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063040172 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Below is the full quotation of Psalm 147:5 and John 16:30, along with part of their context. Remember, context refers to surrounding words, verses, and chapters. "{5} Our Lord [Jehovah] is great and is abundant in power; His understanding is beyond recounting. {6} Jehovah is relieving the meek ones; he is abasing the wicked ones to the earth." (Psalms 147:5-6 -- New World Translation) "How great is our Lord! His power is absolute! His understanding is beyond comprehension!" (Psalms 147:5 -- New Living Translation) "Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite." (Psalm 147:5 -- King James Version) Notice the quotation of Psalms 147:5 from three different Bibles. None of the Bibles say that "Jehovah knows all things." Instead, all three Bibles simply state that Jehovah has perfect understanding. Knowledge and understanding are two entirely different things. Keep in mind that the NLT and the KJV are Trinitarian Bible translations, and even they could not twist the words sufficiently to make it say what Logicman is claiming. Now, notice the contrast when Jesus Christ is mentioned along with the expression "know all things" at John 16:30. I included verses from a surrounding chapter (John chapter 13), which is part of the context to John 16:30 because it is part of the exact same conversation that made it all the way to John 16:30. To get the complete context, you need to read John chapter 13 all the way through John chapter 16. I will quote a few choice verses from chapter 13 to give you an idea of some of the things Jesus knew among the "all things." "{1} Now, because he [Jesus] knew before the festival of the passover that his hour had come for him to move out of this world to the Father, Jesus, having loved his own that were in the world, loved them to the end. {21} After saying these things, Jesus became troubled in spirit, and he bore witness and said: 'Most truly I say to you, one of you will betray me.' {22} The disciples began to look at one another, being at a loss as to which one he was saying it about. {26} Therefore Jesus answered: 'It is the one to whom I shall give the morsel that I dip.' And so, having dipped the morsel, he took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot." (John 13:1, 21, 22, 26) "{23} 'And in that day you will ask me [Jesus] no question at all. Most truly I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything he will give it to you in my name. {28} I came out from the Father and have come into the world. Further, I am leaving the world and am going my way to the Father.' {29} His disciples said: 'See! Now you are speaking with plainness, and are uttering no comparison. {30} Now we know that you know all things and you do not need to have anyone question you. By this we believe that you came out from God." (John 16:23, 28-30) Notice the context within which the disciples of Jesus Christ said Jesus "knows all things." It was specifically with reference to what he had just told them in the all of the preceding verses, starting at chapter 13 verse 1 all the way through to John 28:30. Included among Jesus statements was what he said at verse 23, that the disciples could not get anything from Jesus himself but that they had to ask Jehovah, and then Jehovah the Father would give it to them by means of Jesus Christ the Son (John 16:23). That verse alone shows that Jesus could not possibly be Jehovah. CONCLUSION: Psalm 147:5 and John 16:30 do not support the false Trinitarian claim that Jesus is also Jehovah. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#25
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:43 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by peaceBwithU When Jesus' disciples used the expression: "Now we can see that you know all things," the context (surrounding words, verses, and chapters) explains what they meant by "all things." I demonstrated this at Post 465 directly above when I quoted part of the context (John 13:1, 21, 22, 26 and John 16:23, 28-30). Here is the weblink to Post 465: http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063438403 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) Additionally, the Bible makes it clear that only Almighty God Jehovah (the Father of Jesus Christ) knows every single thing in terms of prophetic events related to God's heavenly kingdom. Notice the words bolded in the quotations below. "Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father." (Matthew 24:36 -- New World Translation) "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." (Matthew 24:36 -- King James Version) The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#26
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:45 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by peaceBwithU Excellent point. Jesus' closest human associates who traveled around with him during his time on earth, they did not view Jesus Christ as Almighty God. Such an idea is not found anywhere in Scripture. It was not until the 4th century AD--more than 300 years after Jesus Christ left the earthly scene and more than 300 years after the last book of the Judeo-Christ Bible was written--only then did the false dogma about three co-equal and co-eternal persons becomeofficial "Christian" teaching The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#27
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:47 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by tosca1
Originally Posted by Alter2Ego  Yes....There are other people reading this thread that see you cannot answer his question. You're avoiding his question! That's what's clear to everyone here. You disappeared from this thread three months ago, so clearly you have not been taking note of the fact that Logicman has been running from every single question I asked him/her thus far. I asked Logicman at least 7 questions that help debunk his/her supposed "Trinity" verses that he/she plastered into Post 196 at the following weblink. http://www.debatepolitics.com/religi...post1063040172 (Where Did The Trinity Teaching Come From?[W:200]) It was after Numbers 23:19 vs. John 1:18 blew up in Logicman's face that he/she decided to divert attention away from that reality by asking me repeatedly if I believe Jesus Christ is the Archangel Michael. Of course everybody reading this thread knows perfectly well that neither a "yes" nor a "no" answer to that particular question will change the fact that Logicman is now boxed into a corner by the implications of Numbers 23:19 vs. John 1:18. Originally Posted by tosca1 Originally Posted by Alter2Ego Answer his question first....and then, present your argument. That's how it's supposed to be in a discussion. You're trying to do a monologue - ignoring challenges and questions to your arguments. The TITLE "El" is is applied to every single god (including false gods), as well as to humans and angels. But you do not want to hear that. So you went to Wikipedia--a source that is known to post errors--and they told you what you wanted to hear: that "El" can also be a name. Pitiful. FYI: My above comment to Logicman—that I could care less whether or not he/she answers anything else I ask—is a direct result of my observation of Logicman's Artful Dodger routine: his/her habit of running from every single question that I asked in connection with his/her supposed "Trinity" verses. In my next few posts, I will provide examples of Logicman on the run from my last question, which involves Numbers 23:19 and John 1:18. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#28
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:49 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by tosca1
Originally Posted by Alter2Ego I think I'd put my money on Logicman for being sensible - you've already shown your hand that you either have problems understanding what you read, or you just tend to dismiss references. Considering that both you and Logicman believe in Christendom's fictional 3-prong god, of course you would "put your money on Logicman"--get this--for running from every single question I asked him/her specifically dealing with the supposed "Trinity" verses that Logicman presented at Post 196. Logicman has been running from my questions, to the tune of at least 7-8 questions, because he/she realizes the implication of the questions: that they debunk his/her supposed Trinity verses. Logicman then tried to cover up the fact that he/she is running from my 7-8 Trinity busting questions by asking me repeatedly if I believe Jesus Christ is the Archangel Michael. The expectation is that if I answer either "yes" or "no," Logicman will then make an issue of whatever answer I give along that line, and thereby divert attention away from the topic of the thread and successfully evade my questions. I am slick to Logicman's game. Originally Posted by tosca1 Originally Posted by tosca1 So along with everything else, I am having to deal with your double-standards. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#29
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:50 AMCopy HTML ALTER2EGO to TOSCA1:
So, what point are you attempting to make? That you cannot accept correction? The inclusion of qualifying words with the Hebrew word "EL" does not change the fact that "El" is translated G-O-D and does not change the fact that G-O-D is nothing more than a title. One could use a similar argument with the title "president". In order to clarify which president is being spoken of, one would say, for example: "Barack Obama of the United States." Would that change the fact that the title "president" is still not his personal name? Of course not. It would simply enable others to realize which president is being spoken about. Likewise, the titles "El" and "Elohim" will always remain titles even when they are accompanied by qualifying words. Qualifying words do not change a title to a personal name. Instead, qualifying words are used to distinguish different ones with the same title from one another. Again, the personal name of the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible is YHWH and translated Jehovah or Yehovah or Yahweh. It was written almost 7,000 times in the Hebrew Scriptures/Old Testament portion of the Bible, but it was deliberately removed by wicked translators and replaced with the title "G-O-D". By removing Jehovah's name from the very book he inspired, this enabled Trinitarian translators to convince the masses that Jesus Christ is God. How so? Because Jehovah the Father was rendered nameless and confined to the title "G-O-D." The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
|
jcan071
|
Share to:
#30
|
|
Re：THE ROSE Date Posted：05/07/2016 6:51 AMCopy HTML Originally Posted by tosca1 The Hebrew word "Elohim" is not a name. It is a title, just as "El" is a title. It plays the same role as the Hebrew word "El," except whereas "El" is always singular god, Elohim can be singular god as well as plural gods--including false gods. And just as "El" refers to humans and angels, likewise, Elohim also refers to beings that are considered to be in positions of power such as angels and humans (e.g. king, magistrate, judge). This is confirmed by the following source: "H430 ????? '?l?h??ym el-o-heem' Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionallyapplied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great,judges, X mighty." (Source: Strong's Concordance) Strong's Hebrew Lexicon Search Results The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
|
This is a forum for all those that profess to be Christian. We are a very diverse group, and the views that are presented, are not necessarily that of the Management. Lord bless ya'll, in Jesus name. All Christians are welcome. Warning: this group may be addictive.
Copyright © 2000- Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.
