- This topic has 1,826 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Istari,
The difference is that the scriptures prove there is no trinity. Yet you and I butt heads about something the scriptures prove also. Jesus IS a spirit now. And Jesus DOES have a glorious body now. So, do spirits have bodies? Well, at least one of them does.
Bye bye now. I'm sure you'll be gone by tomorrow. I will still pray for you to find that inner peace JA.
May our God continue to bless you in your pursuit of scriptural understanding as He has done me.
Peace and Love to You,
mikeQuote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 19 2011,09:51) Marty wrote: Quote Because you are teaching this doctrine without evidence, and I am praying that if there is a manuscript that will show without a shadow of a doubt that the Tri-une formula for baptism in Matthew 28:19 is not what Jesus said at all, but is a fabrication of your fellow trinitarians.
Marty,Your statement above is sheer nonsense man! You say that I am teaching the Trinity doctrine “without evidence” and that what I teach is a “fabrication.” Yet you “fabricate” a manuscript does not exist and then say that you are praying will come into existence. This is a little looney and that's putting it kindly.
The Greek says, “baptizing them UNTO the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Spirit. This is clearly a trinitarian formula. If it was not trinitarian, then you would not need to pray for a manuscript to come into existence. COME ON!
Quote See Jack, he said that these scriptures were written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you might have life through his name. He did not say that they were written so that you would believe that Jesus was God.
The expressions “God” and “Son of God” are equal terms in reference to Jesus.Quote 18This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father,making himself equal with God. John 5:18
John said that Jesus called God “HIS OWN” Father. This was equivalent to saying that He was Himself God.Jack
Hi Jack:I am saying that the Tri-une formula is a fabrication because I know that the Holy Spirit is not a “Third Person” of a Tri-une God, but is the Spirit of God my Father.
And so, even through the available manuscripts may show the Tri-une formula, because I what I have stated above, I know that this is not correct. If my understanding is correct, the available manuscripts are copies of the originals. The originals have been destroyed, but maybe there just happened to be one that did not get destroyed.
But whether or not any such manuscript exists to show that this scripture has been tampered with, if God confirms what I am teaching with miracles and signs and wonders following, that would be enough evidence for me.
Also, I pray every day that God would correct me if I am teaching anything that is not His Word or doing anything that is not His will, and I expect Him to do just that.
The Pharisees accused Jesus of saying that he was equal with God because he had healed someone on the Sabbath, and because he said that God was his Father, but if you read the scripture, he explains what he meant. He did not say that he was equal with the Father. He said that he was doing what God was showing him to do. Here is the scripture:
Quote John 5:16And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. 17But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
18Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
19Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
He said that the Son can do nothing of himself. If he were equal with God, he could do these things independent of God.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (Istari @ Jan. 20 2011,12:20) Still, you do know that they are only having a laugh in this forum!
You do know they are only winding you up?
You do know you are being taken for a ride?
That's where you and I differ, Istari. I know that KJ, SF, WJ and Francis all truly believe what they claim. They aren't just here to amuse themselves, like you think.You seem to think that anyone who differs with your understanding is “out to get you” or “hates you” or something. I don't feel that way.
Sure, it sometimes bothers me when I'm the only one saying “X” and there are four of them ganging up and ridiculing me and saying how stupid I am and such. But I know they truly BELIEVE that Jesus is God. It's not a “game” to them anymore than it is to me.
But the truth shall prevail in the end. You're just going too fast with too many subjects at once. That leaves them plenty of room to avoid any points they want to.
I inadvertently get caught up in that too, sometimes. But I try my hardest to hammer home the ONE point and stick with it to the point they all can't answer and cry, “We already answered you, but you just don't like our answer!”
And I won't let go of Hebrews 1:8 until Francis either PROVES beyond a shadow of doubt that it ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, MUST BE calling Jesus “God Almighty”…………or he admits that it doesn't NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE.
Because if there is even a shadow of a doubt, then it is certainly not a “PROOF TEXT”, but more of a “MAYBE TEXT” or a “WISHFUL THINKING TEXT”.
Istari, you should have stayed with “the Father wasn't a father until he had a son” argument. You shouldn't have be lead astray before hammering your point home. And you shouldn't think that just because YOU say “I won”, that you really won.
But………..to each his own, I guess.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 20 2011,05:36) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 19 2011,14:52) Quote Oh, but you MUST! NETNotes says it, so you MUST take those EXACT words as a real DEFINITION of “spirit”. So…………DO YOU? And if not, then how about you back off me about not accepting every single thing they say?
Diversive Exaggeration dont you think?Quote ONE SINGLE SCRIPTURE………..RIGHT NOW! GO!
John 10
= )
This debate orginated from that debate.Quote D, does the context of Psalm 45:6 make that “elohim” God Almighty?
Yes why not?
Not exaggeration at all. It says God is a TRIUNE GOD, and that one of the DEFINITIONS of “spirit” is the third member of that TRIUNE GOD. Now, do you believe that DEFINITION or don't you? It MUST be a TRUE DEFINITION, right? Isn't that the criteria you laid down for me? But now that I throw that same criteria back in your face, it's a “diversive exaggeration”. Too rich!
You mention John 10? Okay, let's do it. What exact VERSE makes it clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus is God Almighty, his Father?
You also think the “elohim” in Psalm 45:6 is God Almighty. But NETNotes says it isn't. And we MUST believe EVERYTHING that NETNotes says, right? Isn't that the criteria?
mike
1. Of course its diversive. But what your trying to do is now distract everyone into if the NETNOTES are the true source of it all.
Whats funny is that you only use it to your convience.
Mighty unfair dont you think?
Either way most of my “evidence” is not based solely on netnotes, but YOURS are.
Your whole contention is based on netnotes.
Again, I cant take your information to be certain, because I have no idea in what reference you are talking about?
LINK? BIBLICAL VERSE ?2. LOL mike we couldnt even FINISH “Elohim” so how dare you prounce around like we are going into another debate.
Lets finish “elohim”3. Lol i didnt state that. buttttt whatevverr Mike more of your Diversions.
Nicee, I already gave you many reasonings why you are wrong.
lol ya, now attack the Net Notes, and everytime you quote them ill remind you how you “reject” thier interpretation.
Soooo STOP USING THEM as your Evidence Genius!?
Actuallly From what I saw they gave a Theory but nothing for certain. IMO from my quick glance i was pretty sure they were talking about God, i dont see why not?
can you prove why not?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 20 2011,05:40) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 19 2011,14:56) notice how we are now in a NEW debate already, that he himself started with his questions without finsihing the other.
D, you proudly and childishly run around “beating your chest” saying “as soon as they said there is more than one god, the debate was over”. But you are very naive.D, are there more than one elohim mentioned in scripture? YES or NO?
How is Elohim YHVH the “Elohim of elohim” if there are no other elohim?
See? These are very SIMPLE points that you so willingly overlook. “But there is ONLY ONE GOD, Mike”. Really? Then how is Jehovah the GOD OF GODS?
mike
Lol, I did and it was true.
As soon as you admitted there was more than one god was the day the debate was over. It just took time to get through your diversions to see how you rendered “elohim”NO, There is only ONE ELOHIM.
Lol so god is a title ajective of other gods?
really mike?
There Is no other God, Supreme being as He is. and there is no other Elohims but Elohim.lol… Mike… God of gods,
Daniel 2:47
The king answered unto Daniel, and said, Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret.In the Eyes of the King other “Supreme beings” existed in his polytheism, but he realized that the God of Daniel was above all of them.
so he is the God above the supposed Gods.
CONTEXT MIKE CONTEXT.how about when the Hebrews worshipped a “golden Calf” as a God? was that a leader/judge/ruler?
Exodus 32:4
And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.
lol MIKE, CONTEXT! they were talking about a FALSE GOD, that they thought was real.
We know its false because of Gods law, and knowing who He is.Mike admit defeat already.
your defeating yourself with your nonesense.From Istari;
Mike,
I thought I was leaving you good advice concerning the secrets of those you mentioned but not even good advice honestly given is of value to you!Francis, I believe, has not debated this issue with 'us' before so it is reasonable to debate all the issues as was done with WJ.
But notice that this has just raised up WJ and Roo junior from the dead…Mike, you brought Trinity back to life when it had been dead and buried for a miriad of months. You raised up the Spirit of Trinity, like Saul raised up the 'Spirit' of Samuel (we know it was just a demon brought into shadowy being!! by the Witch). The Trinity, likewise , is delusional and those who believe in it are likewise deluded by it. On that we agree!Now, WJ and KJj have been in this life before so they know that what they say, every single Trinity proof has been shown to be false, and, hey!, by ALL who opposed their claims(I did not say that JustAskin did it all by himself)
WJ has seen your weakness in debate and discussion and is using that as fuel for their new life in the forum. I keep directing you to keep your posts tight but, of course, you can't take good advice, so you allow them to drive a truck through your arguments, you are too much into your formula of 'One point at a time, which then raises other points and you then pick “one point at a time” from these new points, so now you haven't moved from your first point but yet moved to another first point'
Many other Scriptural failings that are exploited by them and others.As for WJ, HE KNOWS WHAT INCONGRUOUS STATEMENTS he is making. Do not even begin to believe he is honest.
Mike, see I used a shortname for you, is it not clear to you the tossed off effort with which they dismiss strict and sturdy, robust and truthful statements concerning Jesus being NOT God? Mike, it is not by accident, but by design, and if by design then he is not innocent, he directly manufactured a false response designed to toy and frustrate the poster (but then you know this already because you started copying this disputable and underhanded method and now it is part of your nature, you opened yourself to the Spirit of deceit thinking it would be fun, but it trapped you, became a TarBaby, stuck to you. Maybe, rather than praying for me, you should pray, make a petition, to God through the mediator, the MAN, Jesus Christ)
When WJ is confronted with the truth of a Scripture, he moves off in a different direction to avoid a response or just accuses the one of some other distracting and often unfounded point. If you are clever enough and wise enough to ignore the distraction, then that point is seized upon as the new point of attack further moving away from the good point he is ignoring.
The problem is that whatever you accuse him of doing, he simply lays claim to you doing the same, even when it is a patent lie!
WJ has been debating Trinity in this forum for over ten years, he has written book(s), he is a Pastor, yet many many even basic fundamental aspects of Scripture are anathema to him. He completely fell apart in his debate with JustAskin from page 2 and started going off topic as an attempt of distraction. At this point the debate is over. If only page 1.2 and the antagonist has to resort to distractions, then it is clear that he has no depth to his thoughts on the topic and debating is therefore pointless!
See that since that debate was closed, he spent an enormity of energy trying to regain credibility after his faux pas. The only thing he can debate and discuss, is, TRINITY! and that, even that, extremely weakly and strongly untruthful. He HAS TO BE untruthful to maintain his status.How many warped ideas are clear in his posts: take even, the name of God: God the most high gave Moses his name, YHVH, in Hebrew, translated as 'I AM' in English.
I asked WJ, 'What is the name of God, and by the way, I'm not asking you to pronounce it, just write in your reply'WJ replies, 'We don't know the name of God because WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO PRONOUNCE IT!'
Mike, Mike, is it not clear twice over that this is deceit?
I did not ask him to pronounce it, and, He is denying absolute Scriptures and the word of God: 'This is my name for eternity'!I ask, what is the name of God? He says, 'it is Jesus'
I ask what is the name of the father, he cannot say!
What is the name of the Holy Spirit? He cannot say.
He demands that Istari tells him the name of the Holy Spirit (reverse psychology!) but when I say it does not have a name, it is the Spirit of God, does your Spirit have a name? There is no response but merely accusation from a different thread that I did not answer him and that I'm being evasive!I outlined very simple things to him but he willfully evades answering bring one single issue to the table out of context to the whole post. And Mike, you think he is honestly believing what he believes?
No, Mike, WJ does not honestly believe what you are thinking of him. Nice try though?
It seems that you are driven by the WINNING OF THE DEBATE rather than the spiritual value that comes from it, hence, you will debate a point to death, beating it into submission, even as you and it are opposed by the invisible Angel force. WJ is not that force, the force is that which is in you showing you that you are doing wrong, just like Balaam!
Anyway, my work is calling me, if I am gone by tonight, then take care and learn to take Godly advice, you could have been a good begotten brother and your eyes would have been opened to see the glory of God through the Scriptures far easier than the painful treacle plodding method you use. I could have 'fastTracked' you!
Oh, and cleared up your inability to understand dimensions and how Jesus is Spirit in Heaven AND YET Man in Flesh when on earth!
Mike, it gives me a pain in my spirit, never mind my flesh, to see you struggling with the concept and refuting that which you do not understand (better to just say that you don't understand, rather than REFUTE what you don't understand) what do you think of yourself after you do understand? Do you look back and say, 'You know what, I really was a mess back then. I can't believe the things I said, what an idiot I must have seemed, well, yes, those two, JustAskin and Istari, told me but I was too arrogant to see it!!! Ooops, sorry guys, wish I could change things but you can't change the past'
Ha ha ha, Mike, you CAN change the 'past'!! You can change what was going to be a future disaster into a future Success by ACTING NOW in the Present!!
You were going to write a huge piece refuting all I just said… Which would have led to you discrediting good advice because you were stung by Astari's revelation.
But then you suddenly realised your error! Mike, you changed your future, therefore you changed your, what WILL BE, Past!!!
(By the way, Istari, means Angel. From Tolkien's “The Silmarillions', the precursor to 'The Hobbit' and 'The Lord of the Rings').Hi Shimmer
JA Quote:
Quote “As for WJ, HE KNOWS WHAT INCONGRUOUS STATEMENTS he is making. Do not even begin to believe he is honest.
Why would you be the instrument of posting foolishness, ad hominems and lies like this? Why would you support this guy attacking me like this when he knows nothing of my heart or relationship with God?I am not sure but I believe there is probably some rule about passing this kind of diatribe around from someone who has been banned from the sight.
I have reported your post to the moderators!
You need to let this mean spirited guy go IMO!
WJ
Hi All
Mike why do you think that when someone disagrees with you they are being dishonest?
In the other debates thread Mike said….
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 19 2011,19:05) Hi Francis, You are getting very good at avoiding points and twisting things around. Maybe you should never have paid attention to the other thread. Maybe then you would have continued debating honestly and directly instead of learning how they do it.
Unless a poster has proof that another poster is being dishonest then it is morally wrong to call that poster dishonest.Those kind of accusations usually imply weakness on the part of the one making the false claim.
I personally have not seen anywhere that Francis has been dishonest and in fact has been “pithy” in his debate wih Mike.
It seems to me that the above statement is uncalled for and more like the same thing that JA was doing here.
Blessings WJ
Istari said to Mikeboll:
Quote WJ has seen your weakness in debate and discussion and is using that as fuel for their new life in the forum. I keep directing you to keep your posts tight but, of course, you can't take good advice, so you allow them to drive a truck through your arguments,
Yeap! Mike is definitely getting run over by WJ and KJ Jr. Not to mention Francis who is really kickin Mike's tush.I once said that Mike was more intelligent than JA. Boy was I wrong!
KJ Jr.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 21 2011,03:42) Hi All Mike why do you think that when someone disagrees with you they are being dishonest?
In the other debates thread Mike said….
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 19 2011,19:05) Hi Francis, You are getting very good at avoiding points and twisting things around. Maybe you should never have paid attention to the other thread. Maybe then you would have continued debating honestly and directly instead of learning how they do it.
Unless a poster has proof that another poster is being dishonest then it is morally wrong to call that poster dishonest.Those kind of accusations usually imply weakness on the part of the one making the false claim.
I personally have not seen anywhere that Francis has been dishonest and in fact has been “pithy” in his debate wih Mike.
It seems to me that the above statement is uncalled for and more like the same thing that JA was doing here.
Blessings WJ
Francis,Count it all joy bro!
Jack
JA said:
Quote WJ has been debating Trinity in this forum for over ten years, he has written book(s), he is a Pastor, yet many many even basic fundamental aspects of Scripture are anathema to him.
Which scripture is anathemma to WJ?
KJ Jr.
Quote When WJ is confronted with the truth of a Scripture, he moves off in a different direction to avoid a response or just accuses the one of some other distracting and often unfounded point.
A bold faced lie!KJ Jr.
Quote He demands that Istari tells him the name of the Holy Spirit (reverse psychology!) but when I say it does not have a name, it is the Spirit of God, does your Spirit have a name?
JA ignores that an answer was given by KJ Jr. The Holy Spirit's name is “Parakletos” (helper or comforter).KJ Jr.
Mikeboll said to francis;
Quote I guess that pretty much sums it all up. It doesn't matter what scriptures I ever bring up, because your “economic trinity” would just say, “Jesus was VOLUNTARILY placing his equal 'God-status' on a lower level than his Father in an effort to 'express his loving condescension for the sake of our salvation' at this time”.
Mike,Francis is just telling you what Paul himself said:
Quote 5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
No special pleading Mike!Jesus Himself said:
Quote 17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”
No special pleading Mike!Jack
Mikeboll said to francis;
Quote Oh, wait. I thought of one your “Economic Trinity” can't touch. 1 John 1 NIV
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.1 John 4 NIV
12 No one has ever seen God;14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world.
20 Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.
What can you do with this, Francis? No man has EVER seen God, yet many have seen Jesus.
Francis,This has been explained to Mike and he has turned a deaf ear. The word “seen” is explained by the word “exegeted.” It means that “no man has comprehended God at any time.” Jesus was “the WORD made flesh” so He could exegete God to the eye of the understanding.
Quote 18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son,[a] who is in the bosom of the Father, He has exegeted Him.
Mike likes to ignore context. Jesus is called “the Word” and “the True Light.” These are metaphors for His person and work as the One who declares and illuminates truth to men who cannot “see”, that is, who cannot comprehend God. They come to “see”, that is, they come to comprehend god because Jesus exegetes God to them.Mike's assertion that no man has seen God with their physical eyes is totally false. Jacob called the place where he wrestled with God “Peniel” because “I have seen God face to face.”
Mike is disobedient to the scriptures!
KJ
Quote (942767 @ Jan. 19 2011,21:04) I am saying that the Tri-une formula is a fabrication because I know that the Holy Spirit is not a “Third Person” of a Tri-une God, but is the Spirit of God my Father.
Please MartyThen everytime that you bring up a scripture that we disagree with your interpretation of then we can just claim “Corruption”?
You won't do to good in your Trinitarian organization by teaching the scriptures are corrupt. You ever heard the ole expressions “One bad apple spoils the whole bunch”, and a “little leaven leavens the whole lump”?
Do you realize the Tripart formula is found in the “Didache”?
Do you realize the Didache is dated back as early as the late first century and that it is believed to be the original twelve Apostles teachings. Source
It agrees with every major extant manuscript that has the formula and that means thousands. Even if they were to find one that didn't have Matthew 28:19 in its tripart formula it would be considered corrupt because all the other thousands of Manuscripts match.
If you start teaching there is corruption in the translations we have now since the dead sea scrolls then you have lost the debate my friend.
WJ
Has JA been Banned again?
He shouldnt be banned, I wanted to discuss alot of things with him after we were done with Mike.Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 21 2011,06:29) Has JA been Banned again?
He shouldnt be banned, I wanted to discuss alot of things with him after we were done with Mike.
“After we're done with Mike.” LOLKJ Jr.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
