Being Set Up by KJ

Participant

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,11:08)

Quote (terraricca @ July 28 2011,11:52)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,10:32)

Peirre

I don't disregard verse 20 but it looks like you disregard verse 19. As usual when you have no response to a certain scripture that you disagree with then you claim it shouldn't be there or it is corrupt?

You shoud read this thread and check the evidence regarding Matt 28:19 Click here!

Here is a clip from that thread…

There is overwhelming evidence that proves that Matthew 28:19 is authentic including the fact it is found in every extant Greek Biblical manuscript…

As if that is not enough damaging evidence against the ATs, the nail in the coffin is the Didache contains the tripartite phrase..

Though the date of the Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) is debated, most scholars would put it between 90 and 120 CE with some suggesting an even earlier date.

Not only is the verse found in “every extant manuscript which is in the thousands”, but it is found in the Didache which is dated between 90 and 120 AD!

So you have rejected the scriptures and Jesus own words.

If you think the Bible is corrupt then you should join the Muslims and accept the Koran over the scriptures!

so there only could be trinity if you change the meaning of the gospel of Christ and the teachings of the apostles ,

Pierre

I answered your question by refuting your claim that Matt 28:19 is not a legitimate and inspired scripture.

Now do you reject Jesus words over the Apostles?

Or do you have a contradiction?

Click Here and learn that there is no contradiction and in fact Matt 28:19 and the Apostles teaching in Acts are the word of God.

Either you reject one or the other and believe the Bible is corrupt or you accept they are all inspired and that there is no contradiction and that Jesus spoke of a “Trinity”.

Pierre, do you believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

If you do then you believe in a Trinity.

where does it say they all three are God the father ,or part of him ?

Pierre

July 28, 2011 at 8:13 pm#254205

KangarooJack

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ July 29 2011,04:20)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,11:08)

Quote (terraricca @ July 28 2011,11:52)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,10:32)

Peirre

You shoud read this thread and check the evidence regarding Matt 28:19 Click here!

Here is a clip from that thread…

There is overwhelming evidence that proves that Matthew 28:19 is authentic including the fact it is found in every extant Greek Biblical manuscript…

As if that is not enough damaging evidence against the ATs, the nail in the coffin is the Didache contains the tripartite phrase..

Though the date of the Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) is debated, most scholars would put it between 90 and 120 CE with some suggesting an even earlier date.

Not only is the verse found in “every extant manuscript which is in the thousands”, but it is found in the Didache which is dated between 90 and 120 AD!

So you have rejected the scriptures and Jesus own words.

If you think the Bible is corrupt then you should join the Muslims and accept the Koran over the scriptures!

so there only could be trinity if you change the meaning of the gospel of Christ and the teachings of the apostles ,

Pierre

I answered your question by refuting your claim that Matt 28:19 is not a legitimate and inspired scripture.

Now do you reject Jesus words over the Apostles?

Or do you have a contradiction?

Click Here and learn that there is no contradiction and in fact Matt 28:19 and the Apostles teaching in Acts are the word of God.

Either you reject one or the other and believe the Bible is corrupt or you accept they are all inspired and that there is no contradiction and that Jesus spoke of a “Trinity”.

Pierre, do you believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

If you do then you believe in a Trinity.

where does it say they all three are God the father ,or part of him ?

Pierre

Trinitarians do not say that all three are God the Father. You should know at least this about trinitarianism.

July 28, 2011 at 8:33 pm#254207

Worshipping Jesus

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ July 28 2011,12:20)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,11:08)

Quote (terraricca @ July 28 2011,11:52)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,10:32)

Peirre

You shoud read this thread and check the evidence regarding Matt 28:19 Click here!

Here is a clip from that thread…

There is overwhelming evidence that proves that Matthew 28:19 is authentic including the fact it is found in every extant Greek Biblical manuscript…

As if that is not enough damaging evidence against the ATs, the nail in the coffin is the Didache contains the tripartite phrase..

Though the date of the Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) is debated, most scholars would put it between 90 and 120 CE with some suggesting an even earlier date.

Not only is the verse found in “every extant manuscript which is in the thousands”, but it is found in the Didache which is dated between 90 and 120 AD!

So you have rejected the scriptures and Jesus own words.

If you think the Bible is corrupt then you should join the Muslims and accept the Koran over the scriptures!

so there only could be trinity if you change the meaning of the gospel of Christ and the teachings of the apostles ,

Pierre

I answered your question by refuting your claim that Matt 28:19 is not a legitimate and inspired scripture.

Now do you reject Jesus words over the Apostles?

Or do you have a contradiction?

Click Here and learn that there is no contradiction and in fact Matt 28:19 and the Apostles teaching in Acts are the word of God.

Either you reject one or the other and believe the Bible is corrupt or you accept they are all inspired and that there is no contradiction and that Jesus spoke of a “Trinity”.

Pierre, do you believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

If you do then you believe in a Trinity.

where does it say they all three are God the father ,or part of him ?

Pierre

As Jack has pointed out to you we do not believe that the three are the Father.

That is not an answer to my question is it?

Please answer…

Pierre, do you believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

If you do then you believe in a Trinity.

July 28, 2011 at 8:38 pm#254208

Participant

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 29 2011,14:13)

Quote (terraricca @ July 29 2011,04:20)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,11:08)

Quote (terraricca @ July 28 2011,11:52)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,10:32)

Peirre

You shoud read this thread and check the evidence regarding Matt 28:19 Click here!

Here is a clip from that thread…

There is overwhelming evidence that proves that Matthew 28:19 is authentic including the fact it is found in every extant Greek Biblical manuscript…

As if that is not enough damaging evidence against the ATs, the nail in the coffin is the Didache contains the tripartite phrase..

Though the date of the Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles) is debated, most scholars would put it between 90 and 120 CE with some suggesting an even earlier date.

Not only is the verse found in “every extant manuscript which is in the thousands”, but it is found in the Didache which is dated between 90 and 120 AD!

So you have rejected the scriptures and Jesus own words.

If you think the Bible is corrupt then you should join the Muslims and accept the Koran over the scriptures!

so there only could be trinity if you change the meaning of the gospel of Christ and the teachings of the apostles ,

Pierre

I answered your question by refuting your claim that Matt 28:19 is not a legitimate and inspired scripture.

Now do you reject Jesus words over the Apostles?

Or do you have a contradiction?

Click Here and learn that there is no contradiction and in fact Matt 28:19 and the Apostles teaching in Acts are the word of God.

Either you reject one or the other and believe the Bible is corrupt or you accept they are all inspired and that there is no contradiction and that Jesus spoke of a “Trinity”.

Pierre, do you believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

If you do then you believe in a Trinity.

where does it say they all three are God the father ,or part of him ?

Pierre

Trinitarians do not say that all three are God the Father. You should know at least this about trinitarianism.

I am raised Catholic until i was 12 years old then i stopped
believing in them and go there,

to be honest I really do not care for the trinity ,it is untrue not in scriptures , never preach by Christ or his disciples nor the prophets

so why should i carry that load of lies

Pierre

July 28, 2011 at 11:56 pm#254224

Participant

Quote

WorshippingJesus,July 29 2011,01:15]

I remember you prefer the quote inside a quote, however, I find it terribly painful to the eye, plus something or other to do with technical side for T8, so I will reference your quote, as noted above.

First off I should recieve a gold star, I think I am the only one you have ever declined a debate with, has to be something. Lets see if this one makes into the debate log.

Heaven Net
http://www.heaven.net.nz/Similar
A place for testing doctrine, teaching, and learning.

More results from heaven.net.nz »
►The Book of Enoch – Heaven Net
http://www.heaven.net.nz/writings/thebookofenoch.htmSimilar
Online version of The Book of Enoch including verse numbers.

What was your definition of heaven net again, pretty sure the book of enoch is not cannonized. You do know that BD is muslim right, Stuart is an atheist so on and so on, and please do not use the your in the believers section, the thread was place in the skeptics at first, T8 moved it here. So lets continue with you post.

Quote

But I know full well you cannot prove that the Trinity was based on “ancient beliefs”.

That is what makes you WJ, I have with one post proved that triad belief has been around alot longer then the catholic trinity belief. I do not accuse anyone of anything, well maybe your forefathers, however what message did christ teach really WJ.

Technically, for one to believe in the trinity, their catholic, due to the creed and all. You know the one, in order to enter into heaven one must be catholic ect. ect…

Mat 28.19 is the best you have got, you know full well WJ that the verse is laced with contraversy, stick with something solid, not shaky.

For you to state that you can find similiarites but proves nothing is quite the statement, don't you use that line to prove jesus is god, with the similiarities?

christ did not speak of a trinity, he spoke of god, his father, he told parables, taught lessons, oh but wait, i know you don't have to say it, when jesus ascended into heaven the whole of scripture changed, old paul just stepped right up and said, hey what you heard from jesus was not exactly right, I have the truth. Paul should have been the one who head was on a platter, not John.

July 29, 2011 at 4:50 am#254254

kerwin

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 28 2011,09:38)

Wow, I should just walk away. You seem to take every single thing I say the wrong way Princess.

I said NOTHING about the spirituality of children. I was speaking of a three year old's grasp of language. For at about that age, they are only beginning to know the difference between a “HE” and a “THEY”, and what it means to be “OF” something or someone. My comment was that it seems Trinitarians have the same troubles with language skills.

And YES, our God is a HE. And HE created man first, and then woman as a companion/possession OF man. It seems a little odd to our modern culture – but then again so does killing a one year old lamb who had done nothing wrong as a way to atone for OUR OWN sins.

Hey, I didn't make the rules, but I completely trust the One who did. I trust HIM with my whole being. Perhaps your friend Shimmer could help you find some humility in this matter – for she seems to be on top of this issue.

I'm leaving now, for you and I are like water and oil.

peace to you and yours,
mike

Mike,

I remember woman being created to be a help mate to man because man was lonely but I do not remember women being a possession. A slave is a possession.

July 29, 2011 at 4:55 am#254256

kerwin

Participant

Quote (princess @ July 28 2011,18:31)

Quote (kerwin @ July 28 2011,15:14)

Quote (princess @ July 28 2011,06:39)

the Hindoo bible, in which it was found was compiled fourteen hundred years before Christ, and written at a still earlier period. And we find the same doctrine very explicitly taught in the ancient Brahmin, Persian, Chaldean, Chinese, Mexican and Grecian systems—all much older than Christianity.

O you three Lords!” ejaculated Attencion, “know that I recognize only one God. Inform me, therefore, which of you is the true divinity that I may address to him alone my vows and adorations. The three Gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, becoming manifest to him, replied, “Learn, O devotee, that there is no real distinction between us. What to you appears such is only by semblance. The single being appears under three forms by the acts of creation, preservation and destruction, but he is one.”

St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, “All the ancient nations believed in the Trinity.

Princess,

The Hindu's also believe that human being are part of God.

It is simply a corrupt view of the unity of the Spirit.

All you have pointed out is that there is a common root to many religions and that artistic liberties have been exercised by various human beings in their service to the evil one.

You can see the same thing in the multiple sects of Christianity.

Exactly Kerwin.

In having such information, should one take heed not follow such or mirror the belief.

Princess,

One should always test the spirit of what you observe and/or believe.

July 29, 2011 at 5:21 am#254261

Participant

Quote

Please answer…

Pierre, do you believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

If you do then you believe in a Trinity.

I believe that God exist yes, I also believe that he as a son , and that the truth and power come trough his spirit and that that spirit is holy because God is holy,

but all of those two beings the father and the son are one in will ,the son lives in the will of his father so he obey the will but he love to please his father ;

do you ?

Pierre

July 29, 2011 at 10:12 am#254285

Participant

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,01:23)

Quote (princess @ July 27 2011,19:16)

Quote

Genesis 1 tells us God is plural when he said “Let us” make man in “our image”.

So woman is the image of man, and then the whole of scriptures due to it is 'man this and man that, we get a free pass or woman don't enter into the kingdom, we have a seperate place we go to.

Hey you know WJ, the gospel of thomas has a verse in it that states ” in order for a woman to enter into the kingdom, she must become a man”
Now by what I understand your forefathers took this physically, as they do with all things, and was one of the main reason the book did not make it.

So either, you have to go outside your cannon and accept the verse, or you believe that woman have no place in heaven.

what say you?

Princess

There is neither male nor female in Christ. but it seems that you have an agenda agianst men for you pull that card a lot.

Does it bother you that the woman was made from the rib of a man?

WJ,

So have many ribs do you have, how many do I have? SAME.
Now we know there are many versions of creation of man and woman, the first being 'they' were created in the image of us, then the whole rib version comes in, now for one like myself, I prefer I am created just as you are created.

So with your thought process, males were the only thing in heaven at the time of creation? So when female was made, they all of sudden were in heaven, kinda like Stuart's boom bang the gang is all here theory.

So just as much as you are the image, as am I. I don't think it is me who has the agenda to put male or female in their place. Is it?

July 29, 2011 at 10:23 am#254286

Participant

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,01:33)

Quote (princess @ July 27 2011,19:39)

St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, “All the ancient nations believed in the Trinity.

Princess

Now show us where St Jerome “unequivocally” states that he derived his Trinitarian beliefs from the “ancients”.

I think he is just stating that the “ancients” were onto something.

WJ,

Seriously, do you really need a lesson on the meaning of the word.

What you think and what the sentence means are two different things. I would add a third however, I am at a loss for words.

You really do not know much about your churchs history do you? To even make a comment as such.

July 29, 2011 at 10:38 am#254287

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ July 29 2011,01:56)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 29 2011,08:26)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 27 2011,19:17)

But I'd be willing to bet that his first two “proof” points about “Let us make man” and “plural Elohim” – which are easily refuted – will be the best he has to offer.

peace

Mike

Not at all! Matt 28:19 is a good start also, and there are many more.

Mt 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Mt 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mt 28:20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

the words;Therefore go and make disciples of all nations

make disciples for whom ? for them self ? so that they can profit of the wealth of the world ?

My Hebrew version do not have Mat 28,19,

and did any of the disciples made those requirements that Christ requested ?I do not think so

Now in verse 20 Christ recommend to teach them to obey all what he as commented them to do,

is this not strange that during all Christ gospel he never teaches what is in verse 19

and strange enough it is only trinitarians who apply that scripture and disregard verse 20

unbelievable but true

Pierre

Hey T,

when one does not have the discernment of truth and only relies on what he sees, then it is really difficult to try to explain it to them.

I am telling you T, WJ needs to be catholic, they would love him, he most likely would make priest hood in no time.

Father Worshippping Jesus, at your service, the name is even trinitarian. LOL.

Love you much T.

July 31, 2011 at 6:30 pm#254569

Blocked

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 28 2011,08:26)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 27 2011,19:17)

But I'd be willing to bet that his first two “proof” points about “Let us make man” and “plural Elohim” – which are easily refuted – will be the best he has to offer.

peace

Mike

Not at all! Matt 28:19 is a good start also, and there are many more.

Keith,

I didn't say you wouldn't have any more. But your mention of Matt 28:19 helps to prove my point that your first two will likely be your best two. It will only go downhill from here as your “proofs” get weaker and weaker and start to rely much more on confusion and twisting the minds of the weak than they do on any scriptural teaching.

Come on Keith – who do you think you're talking to here? I've already been down this road with you many times. I'm speaking from experience here. There is NOTHING in the whole of scripture that teaches the Son that God created is the same God who created him. And try as you might, you'll never be able to change that FACT.

But go ahead and play your game of mass confusion with Princess for a while if you want to.

peace,
mike

July 31, 2011 at 6:54 pm#254571

Blocked

Quote (kerwin @ July 28 2011,22:50)

Mike,

I remember woman being created to be a help mate to man because man was lonely but I do not remember women being a possession. A slave is a possession.

Well Kerwin,

Were wives romanced and courted and made to fall in love with their suitors? Or were they GIVEN to their husbands as possessions?

They were given BY men to other men all the time. Sometimes they were offered up to bad people to keep the MEN from becoming abused. And they called their husbands, “my lord”, which means “my master”.

Like I told Princess, I didn't make the rules. But I'm not about to go changing the truth of the scriptures just because it's not politically correct in our day and age.

peace,
mike

July 31, 2011 at 6:57 pm#254572

Blocked

Quote (princess @ July 29 2011,04:12)

then the whole rib version comes in, now for one like myself, I prefer I am created just as you are created.

So then you pick and choose which scriptures you WANT to believe. Okay Gene!

(Note to Gene: Just as when Jesus said to Peter, “Get behind me Satan”, and didn't LITERALLY means Peter WAS Satan, I also don't LITERALLY mean that Princess is now you.)

July 31, 2011 at 8:43 pm#254584

Participant

Mike

How many versions are there of creation, you are being a traditionalist in your belief, I am not. How will that deter my path, how will it deter yours.

Quote

Like I told Princess, I didn't make the rules.

however, does not say how much you enjoy them, to be so as you say.

Tell me what do you think the MEN called Debra?

Mike I fully do not know what you believe, most of your post I read are with triad's. So don't know what to tell you other than yes, one does have to discern what one reads.

July 31, 2011 at 9:53 pm#254588

Blocked

There is only one story of the creation that I'm aware of, Princess. And that one involves a woman being produced from the rib of a man for the purpose of being the man's companion.

I don't enjoy this discussion at all, since I can see that it truly hurts and insults you to be in the position you are in. In fact, I almost deleted my previous posts just to avoid hurting your feelings or making you feel bad, sad, or angry. But one can't run away from truth, for it will always catch up to him in the end.

I will tell you this: In the beginning, the woman came FROM man and was created FOR man. It is not long after this creation that it becomes clear from the scriptures that women were the possessions of men, who could do with them whatever they pleased. Was this because God held Eve accountable for giving the forbidden fruit to Adam? I don't know. I only know what I read in the scriptures, and they tell me that women were given away to others like property. They tell me that Israelite men were warned about the women of other nations, because those women would lead their hearts away from God. It was never told the other way around, Princess. The scriptures tell me that if a man raped a woman and decided not to marry her, he had to pay her dad a little money and all was forgiven.

But then we have stories of important women in scripture, through whom God saved Israel many times. And by the time of Jesus' earthly ministry, women were not pushed away from the gospel, but rather were welcomed members of the audience and seemingly just as loved and respected by Jesus as the men were.

At that time, no women were allowed to be Apostles, or even preach in the synagogues…………..but it was clear that women were in a higher place in the NT than in the OT.

And today we have many women preachers and minsters. Is this the course God intended? Was it always meant to be a gradual equalization? Or should we stick with the last words we consider to be inspired of God?

I don't know the answers, Princess. I don't personally understand how I could be any more loved by God, or be considered more worthy of Him than you are. I don't consider men to be smarter than women. Or more spiritual. Or understand why men would have a firmer grasp on heaven than women. Etc.

I can only go by what the scriptures teach me. And it seemed that you were letting your personal feelings veer you away from those scriptures. Accept yourself as the most humble little slave girl of God that there is – like Mary did – and I suspect that all will go well with you.

peace,
mike

July 31, 2011 at 9:59 pm#254591

Participant

Quote (princess @ July 27 2011,15:11)

Believe it or not, at one time i really tried to figure out that verse, however to no avail, limits the many different hair styles one can have, now mind you hats are all the rage, which I must admit a slight fetish has overcome me.

No need for KJ to retract his statement, I hold nothing against him.

By the by, why is WJ all bent out of shape over you posting, what did you do T?

PRINCESS

i have no idea what I did to him it is more what he does to scriptures the word God,

He also claim that he study scriptures for 37 years and that he as the holy spirit ,but I do not believe that he has the holy spirit

because he disregard all scriptures and he does not accept the words of Christ when Christ says that he is the son of God ,

wj,has is own believe on that and so Christ should listen to him and not the other way around ,

and so it is , there is no truth in the ones that reject Christ teachings.

Pierre

July 31, 2011 at 10:02 pm#254592

Blocked

Quote (terraricca @ July 31 2011,15:59)

wj,has is own believe on that and so Christ should listen to him and not the other way around ,

:laugh:

July 31, 2011 at 11:15 pm#254600

Proclaimer

Participant

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 28 2011,08:29)

Here is another anti Jesus is God fallacy. It goes like this,

“Jesus cannot be God because God cannot anoint God.”

God cannot appoint God because there is only one God, the Father. He can only appoint himself, that is as close as that statement can get to truth.

July 31, 2011 at 11:18 pm#254601