The divider of Christians

[terraricca]

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 05 2012,12:00)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 05 2012,04:17) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 04 2012,10:31) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 05 2012,03:14) Andrew, (Although, there are many examples of God speaking of things that WILL BE as if they had ALREADY HAPPENED.) Hi Mike, Yes, like Jesus being called born “Christ” when it actually happened  A-F-T-E-R  his baptism. 25 Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. 26 It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. 27 Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, 28 Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying: 29 “Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,    you now dismiss your servant in peace. 30 For my eyes have seen your salvation, 31     which you have prepared in the sight of all people, 32 a light for revelation to the Gentiles    and for glory to your people Israel.” Now I ask you Ed, was Simeon allowed to see the Lord's Christ before he died, as promised through the Holy Spirit?  YES or NO? Hi Mike, Simeon saw Jesus, who was to become “The Christ” at his baptism. Christ means “anointed of God” – when was Jesus anointed of God? 1. At Birth 2. At his baptism 3. Other     …(if other please explain) God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

you say that you know the scriptures and yet wen presented with them you find a way to question them ,why

is it to be sure of what they say and mean or is it because your interpretation should be first then the written scriptures

[Ed J]

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 05 2012,05:00)

Hi Mike, Simeon saw Jesus, who was to become “The Christ” at his baptism. Christ means “anointed of God” – when was Jesus anointed of God? 1. At Birth 2. At his baptism 3. Other     …(if other please explain) God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Mike?
Pierre?

No answer?

[mikeboll64]

John 10
35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?

Christ and Messiah mean “anointed one”.  And “anointed one” means “one who has been set apart from the others for a specific purpose or reason”.

According to the above scripture, Jesus was “set apart/anointed” BEFORE God sent him into our world.

Of course I know you'll find another way to argue about this too, Ed.  I'm really not interested.  Like I said, I posted the scriptures that clearly teach that Simeon was allowed to see the Lord's Christ before he died.

If YOU want to change those scriptural words to “see THE ONE WHO WOULD SOMEDAY BE the Lord's Christ”, then I cannot stop you.

But neither do I have to keep discussing it with you.

[terraricca]

mike dido EDJ ask new questions to make it line up in his corner ,but truth of God does not meet mens view

[AndrewAD]

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 05 2012,02:58)

Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,16:42) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2012,02:57) Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 01 2012,15:04) Kathi, My first question about this ancient Syriac document is if it was found with one of St.Peters teeth or an angel feather to help authenticate it. Its interesting how the author uses Petrine and Johannine thought coupled with liturgical and much later theological expressions.Clearly something Peter would never preach.Compare with Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: or Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Christ was always preached as a man,the Christ,Lord and Saviour and never as God in the bible. And it's no surprise to find the words of the Eastern orthodox liturgy in this supposed sermon for they claim their liturgy and traditions such as icons and the worship of Mary,saints and angels all came from the apostles.And it's interesting how all these traditions from the apostles all came about after the Nicene creed.Jesus declared as God=Mother of God=saints and icons and statues;simply a natural progression. And one of their beloved saints John of Damascus used this argument in favor of icons…  John replied to the criticism of it being unscriptural by admitting the fact, and adding that you will not find in scripture the Trinity, the homousian or the two natures of Christ either. But we know those doctrines are true. And so, having acknowledged that icons, the Trinity and the incarnation are innovations, John goes on to urge his reader to hold fast to them as venerable traditions delivered to us by the Fathers…  a very good saint indeed Wonderful post, Andrew!   When Kathi first showed me that writing, I also seriously doubted that Peter ever wrote those words, and pointed out a few lines in it that contradicted what Peter said in scripture. But you have addressed that writing in a far better way than I ever could have. Good job and good points. Actually I've read that before many years ago when I attended a couple classes at the Antiochion Orthodox Church down the street and read a book on reasons to accept their faith.I looked into the church a bit and felt tempted to join for the food alone;there's some wealthy Greeks who can really put on a wonderful spread. But when they brought out the icons I literally felt sick to my stomach-it was eerie and I actually sensed the presence of Satan.Needless to say I've never been back. But this document is just another among thousands of bogus concoctions invented after Nicea. That document was Aramaic, not Greek. Look to the Aramaic Christian church and see their view of the trinity. It is slightly different than what you seem to misunderstand.

Yes I know it's Aramaic,I was referring to those of Greek heritage who attend the church I spoke of.There's only one Orthodox church in the town I live in.The Antiochian Orthodox Church is headquartered in Damascus,Syria but is under and united with the Patriarch of Constantinople.
And yes their view of the trinity is a bit different than that of the west-Rome,as their views are slightly different on other points as well.

[AndrewAD]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 05 2012,03:01)

Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,15:42) I looked into the church a bit and felt tempted to join for the food alone;there's some wealthy Greeks who can really put on a wonderful spread. It is said that the way to a man's heart is through his stomach!   Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,15:42) But this document is just another among thousands of bogus concoctions invented after Nicea. Agreed.

That was actually something they said,”If you become orthodox you'll eat good”they have lots of dinners for saints and other events in the church calender.

[AndrewAD]

Mike

Quote

That, coupled with the fact that Jesus WASN'T slain from the foundation of the world, but was slain in 33 AD, leans me toward the translations I've quoted.  He couldn't come to the earth as a sacrificial lamb if he had already been sacrificed a long time before that.

Quote

(Although, there are many examples of God speaking of things that WILL BE as if they had ALREADY HAPPENED.)

Right and that was the point I was referring to.Since the lambs book was before the foundation of the world then the sacrificial lamb was too.Not that Christ was actually slain then but this was God's plan-the mystery which from the beginning was hid in God.Eph 3:9 and spoke of by the prophets Lk1:68-70,1Pet 1:10-11

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2012,10:21)

John 10 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Christ and Messiah mean “anointed one”.  And “anointed one” means “one who has been set apart from the others for a specific purpose or reason”. According to the above scripture, Jesus was “set apart/anointed” BEFORE God sent him into our world. Of course I know you'll find another way to argue about this too, Ed.  I'm really not interested.  Like I said, I posted the scriptures that clearly teach that Simeon was allowed to see the Lord's Christ before he died. If YOU want to change those scriptural words to “see THE ONE WHO WOULD SOMEDAY BE the Lord's Christ”, then I cannot stop you. But neither do I have to keep discussing it with you.

Hi Mike,

I too believe Jesus was destined to be the Messiah before the
foundation of the world, but he was not officially “The Christ”
until his baptism with the “HolySpirit”; the set apart one.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[terraricca]

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 06 2012,22:51)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2012,10:21) John 10 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Christ and Messiah mean “anointed one”.  And “anointed one” means “one who has been set apart from the others for a specific purpose or reason”. According to the above scripture, Jesus was “set apart/anointed” BEFORE God sent him into our world. Of course I know you'll find another way to argue about this too, Ed.  I'm really not interested.  Like I said, I posted the scriptures that clearly teach that Simeon was allowed to see the Lord's Christ before he died. If YOU want to change those scriptural words to “see THE ONE WHO WOULD SOMEDAY BE the Lord's Christ”, then I cannot stop you. But neither do I have to keep discussing it with you. Hi Mike, I too believe Jesus was destined to be the Messiah before the foundation of the world, but he was not officially “The Christ” until his baptism with the “HolySpirit”; the set apart one. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Ed

Christ was send from the father place to earth to become on earth the onointed one ,so you are telling that he was not the special envoy to earth

Wen David was chosen and anointed by the prophet was he the new king or was he not
And yet he did not ruled as one ,right Yes

[AndrewAD]

Quote

For instance, Mike believes in the pre-existent Son of God and you don't believe in a pre-existent Son of God.

Yes I knew that from some of his statements and if you'd asked me a month ago or less I would've agreed.I'm still learning or rather re-learning.I'm not dead set on many things.And on some points I don't know that we have to be;I just want to be open to the Word.
There's certainly nothing wrong with changing ones mind when you see truth that changes it.

Quote

BTW, where in the world did you get the idea that I was 'damning' you?

It was the way you said I didn't believe in a literal Son of God.As Mike quoted and asked you the same question.
I believe Rom10:9-10 and in the foundational confession which Christ said he'd build his church upon.Matt 16:15-18
If you think that this means you have to confess the trinity,Jesus is God and an incarnation to be saved like the majority of trinitarians then I strongly disagree with you.I got the feeling you were damning me and if that's how you feel that in no way surprises me.I was an ignorant and evil judge like that too and I thank Jesus He set me free. I don't want to argue with you and go around and around constantly like I see you do with others. I would like to have some discussions about Gods Word with those who are open to truth.I'm not and I won't try to convert you to my beliefs and I don't appreciate you trying to do that to me.I've just left your beliefs and I won't ever be going back.I promise that!!! If you want to consider me as one attacking the body of Christ and your precious Roman Catholic creeds then so be it.I know I'm attacking the lies of pagan religion and philosophy that have been tyrannically imposed upon the body of Christ.

[Ed J]

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 06 2012,15:59)

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 06 2012,22:51) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2012,10:21) John 10 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Christ and Messiah mean “anointed one”.  And “anointed one” means “one who has been set apart from the others for a specific purpose or reason”. According to the above scripture, Jesus was “set apart/anointed” BEFORE God sent him into our world. Of course I know you'll find another way to argue about this too, Ed.  I'm really not interested.  Like I said, I posted the scriptures that clearly teach that Simeon was allowed to see the Lord's Christ before he died. If YOU want to change those scriptural words to “see THE ONE WHO WOULD SOMEDAY BE the Lord's Christ”, then I cannot stop you. But neither do I have to keep discussing it with you. Hi Mike, I too believe Jesus was destined to be the Messiah before the foundation of the world, but he was not officially “The Christ” until his baptism with the “HolySpirit”; the set apart one. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Ed Christ was send from the father place to earth to become on earth the onointed one ,so you are telling that he was not the special envoy to earth Wen David was chosen and anointed by the prophet was he the new king or was he not And yet he did not ruled as one ,right Yes

Hi Andrew,

How was I telling you that?      …I certainly did not say that.  

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[AndrewAD]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 05 2012,03:57)

Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,18:47) If I understand the trinity doctrine correctly they do teach Jesus was 100% God and 100% man at the same time on earth and in heaven right? Right, but then, when confronted with the scriptures that teach of Jesus praying to, obeying, and worshiping his and our God, they turn the tables and say, Well, Jesus was an emptied version of his former self when he did these things, and when he said the Father was greater than him.. I say they can't have it both ways.  They can't say he was 100% God Almighty on earth, but ALSO “a lesser version” of God Almighty on earth.  It must be one or the other. Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,18:47) And if there are three equal persons(gods) that make one God,then where or how do they get their rank? I've even heard and read that the three had a council in heaven and decided who would be who. This kind of stuff is required by those who believe in the absurd – as a way of illogically explaining the absurd thing they believe. If they had a council and decided one would play the role of “Son”, what does the word “begotten” mean in the case of Jesus? What ever happened to just believing what the scriptures teach?  We are taught in scripture, over and over, that there exists but ONE Most High God, who created the heavens and the earth, and everything in them.  We are taught that this One has a Son named Jesus.  It stands to reason then, that if Jesus does not have a son named Jesus, he can't possibly be the One who created the heavens and the earth, and everything in them. Nor is it logical to believe that the Son OF our one Almighty God could also BE the very Almighty God he is the Son OF. Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,18:47) In my studies on the trinity I haven't heard or read role playing brought up but these are my own thoughts. Nor have I read of it until your earlier posts to Kathi………… but your analogy does fit the bill – the “playbill” if you like.   Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,18:47) So when Jesus says in Mk10:6 God made them male and female,he could have just as well said I made them male and female. Then in the parallel passage of Mat 19:4 he says He made them male and female which seems to exclude himself and point to another. In Marks passage it could be said that when he said God made them he was really including himself too,but in Matthews passage how can he honestly say “He” made them and still be the God that did it………. That, my friend, is a brilliant point to consider.  I'll take your point and run a little further with it: Mark 10:6 NET Bible © But from the beginning of creation he 1  made them male and female. Their footnote #1 says: Most mss have ὁ θεός (“God”) as the explicit subject of ἐποίησεν (“he made”), while the most important witnesses, along with a few others, lack ὁ θεός (“God”). They go on with greater detail, which you can read here (by clicking on the #1 in the first translation), but then conclude by saying: Thus, both on internal and external grounds, the most probable wording of the original text here lacked ὁ θεός. It seems that both Mark 10:6 and Matthew 19:4 most likely had Jesus saying “HE created them male and female” originally. Kathi, what do you think?  Jesus said “HE made them male and female”.  Do you suppose he really meant “WE“?     (I'll add that to my list of scriptures that preclude Jesus from being the Creator.   ) Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,18:47) Does it seem to you that trinitarianism does make God an actor like modalism does only in a different way? or am I missing something? The examples could go on and on but I'm interested to know your thoughts on this. The examples most assuredly DO go on and on – all throughout scripture. There is a writing on the Trinity Doctrine by t8, the owner of this site, which you can find somewhere on the home page.  In that writing, he does a wonderful job of bringing to the forefront many of those examples.  It is a good read if you ever get the chance.

Quote

What ever happened to just believing what the scriptures teach?

Exactly,and thats why I'm so happy that I actually can now;that I really am now.I don't have to ignore,twist and explain them all away and still try to say it's all the truth.The Bible is brand new to me again and it's the Word of God.When I first got”saved” it was alive and real to me until I got indoctrinated and confused with lies from preachers.But I chose to believe them rather than what God was showing me and I lost my love and zeal.
How many preachers I've heard say”God says what He means and means what He says”But do they even believe that when One God really means three persons,Son of God really means God,God is not a man but He is a man,-Jesus never really meant alot of what he said.It all amounts to evil confusion and making both God and Jesus pretenders and liars.
The trinity is a blinding smokescreen from the devil,it's the same subtle serpent who said”Has God really said?”That's not what He really meant-He really meant this-…
I'm starting to really see now why the first and greatest commandment is The Lord our God is One-it's the foundational truth of scripture and to change such simplicity weakens,compromises and can destroy the whole structure of truth.

Quote

There is a writing on the Trinity Doctrine by t8, the owner of this site, which you can find somewhere on the home page.  In that writing, he does a wonderful job of bringing to the forefront many of those examples.  It is a good read if you ever get the chance.

Actually I spent a whole weekend and stayed up all night reading it and re-reading it right before I signed up here.It's excellent.It's what opened my eyes and got me to really seeking.I did a search on trinity after listening to a debate between James White and a oneness pentacostal,and found the article and this site.It was the spirit it was written in that kept me reading it and the more I read,the more I knew he was making valid points-that it was true.I've always intended to thank him and I will do that soon.

[AndrewAD]

Ed,

Quote

Hi Andrew, How was I telling you that? …I certainly did not say that.

Sorry Ed thats for Kathi but thanks for pointing that out and I can't even edit!!—So hey Kathi it's for you-on pg 15

[Ed J]

Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 06 2012,18:47)

Ed, Quote Hi Andrew, How was I telling you that?      …I certainly did not say that.   Sorry Ed thats for Kathi but thanks for pointing that out and I can't even edit!!—So hey Kathi it's for you-on pg 15

Hi Andrew,

That's OK, no harm, no foul.  

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Lightenup]

Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 06 2012,00:42)

Quote For instance, Mike believes in the pre-existent Son of God and you don't believe in a pre-existent Son of God. Yes I knew that from some of his statements and if you'd asked me a month ago or less I would've agreed.I'm still learning or rather re-learning.I'm not dead set on many things.And on some points I don't know that we have to be;I just want to be open to the Word. There's certainly nothing wrong with changing ones mind when you see truth that changes it. Quote BTW, where in the world did you get the idea that I was 'damning' you? It was the way you said I didn't believe in a literal Son of God.As Mike quoted and asked you the same question. I believe Rom10:9-10 and in the foundational confession which Christ said he'd build his church upon.Matt 16:15-18 If you think that this means you have to confess the trinity,Jesus is God and an incarnation to be saved like the majority of trinitarians then I strongly disagree with you.I got the feeling you were damning me and if that's how you feel that in no way surprises me.I was an ignorant and evil judge like that too and I thank Jesus He set me free. I don't want to argue with you and go around and around constantly like I see you do with others. I would like to have some discussions about Gods Word with those who are open to truth.I'm not and I won't try to convert you to my beliefs and I don't appreciate you trying to do that to me.I've just left your beliefs and I won't ever be going back.I promise that!!! If you want to consider me as one attacking the body of Christ and your precious Roman Catholic creeds then so be it.I know I'm attacking the lies of pagan religion and philosophy that have been tyrannically imposed upon the body of Christ.

Andrew,
I have addressed this post in this thread:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….y368727

The explanation as to why I moved it there is due to a desire to not become another fruitless discussion with points lost because of many people talking randomly with diversion tactics and adding their own biases.

[Lightenup]

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 06 2012,01:04)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 06 2012,15:59) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 06 2012,22:51) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2012,10:21) John 10 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Christ and Messiah mean “anointed one”.  And “anointed one” means “one who has been set apart from the others for a specific purpose or reason”. According to the above scripture, Jesus was “set apart/anointed” BEFORE God sent him into our world. Of course I know you'll find another way to argue about this too, Ed.  I'm really not interested.  Like I said, I posted the scriptures that clearly teach that Simeon was allowed to see the Lord's Christ before he died. If YOU want to change those scriptural words to “see THE ONE WHO WOULD SOMEDAY BE the Lord's Christ”, then I cannot stop you. But neither do I have to keep discussing it with you. Hi Mike, I too believe Jesus was destined to be the Messiah before the foundation of the world, but he was not officially “The Christ” until his baptism with the “HolySpirit”; the set apart one. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Ed Christ was send from the father place to earth to become on earth the onointed one ,so you are telling that he was not the special envoy to earth Wen David was chosen and anointed by the prophet was he the new king or was he not And yet he did not ruled as one ,right Yes Hi Andrew, How was I telling you that?      …I certainly did not say that.   God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Edj,
Wasn't that post meant for terraricca?

[Ed J]

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 06 2012,17:04)

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 06 2012,15:59) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 06 2012,22:51) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2012,10:21) John 10 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Christ and Messiah mean “anointed one”.  And “anointed one” means “one who has been set apart from the others for a specific purpose or reason”. According to the above scripture, Jesus was “set apart/anointed” BEFORE God sent him into our world. Of course I know you'll find another way to argue about this too, Ed.  I'm really not interested.  Like I said, I posted the scriptures that clearly teach that Simeon was allowed to see the Lord's Christ before he died. If YOU want to change those scriptural words to “see THE ONE WHO WOULD SOMEDAY BE the Lord's Christ”, then I cannot stop you. But neither do I have to keep discussing it with you. Hi Mike, I too believe Jesus was destined to be the Messiah before the foundation of the world, but he was not officially “The Christ” until his baptism with the “HolySpirit”; the set apart one. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Ed Christ was send from the father place to earth to become on earth the onointed one ,so you are telling that he was not the special envoy to earth Wen David was chosen and anointed by the prophet was he the new king or was he not And yet he did not ruled as one ,right Yes Hi Andrew, How was I telling you that?      …I certainly did not say that.   God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Oops, I mean Pierre; sorry Andrew.

[Lightenup]

About t8's 'test' on the trinity, Andrew said this:

Quote

Actually I spent a whole weekend and stayed up all night reading it and re-reading it right before I signed up here.It's excellent.It's what opened my eyes and got me to really seeking.I did a search on trinity after listening to a debate between James White and a oneness pentacostal,and found the article and this site.It was the spirit it was written in that kept me reading it and the more I read,the more I knew he was making valid points-that it was true.I've always intended to thank him and I will do that soon.

That test reflects such a bias it is amazing that so many fall for it. t8 limits his test with verses that mainly speak of the Father and no wonder replacing the word 'God' with 'God the Son' or that understanding would not make sense there.

What t8 fails to do is show verses where 'God the Father' or 'Father' would NOT fit as a substitution for 'God'

For instance, John 1:1 is not included in his list of verses.
Let's test t8's logic and his belief that God is the Father, only:

In the beginning was the word, the word was with God [the Father] and the word was God [the Father].
There, with one verse t8's logic in his test falls flat.

How about this verse (another one not on t8's list):
Romans 9:5
Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.
According to how t8's logic through HIS beliefs of the Father being the only God and substituting “God” with 'God the Father' it would go like this:
Romans 9:5
Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God [the Father] over all, forever praised! Amen.

Also, this verse which IS included in his list:
Tit 2:13, 14
looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.

Now the same passage with t8's logic according to his view of only the Father as God:

Tit 2:13, 14
looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great [Father] and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.

Another verse to look at not on t8's list:

Hebrews 1:8
8But about the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,

and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.

9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;

therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions

by anointing you with the oil of joy.”

Now Hebrews 1:8 with t8's logic and view:

8But about the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God [the Father], will last for ever and ever,

and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.

9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;

therefore God [the Father], your God [the Father], has set you above your companions

by anointing you with the oil of joy.”

Can anyone else see the bias here??

Sorry t8, but you created a test that proves your bias and faulty logic, not the inaccuracy of the trinity. No offense meant.

[terraricca]

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 07 2012,09:12)

About t8's 'test' on the trinity, Andrew said this: Quote Actually I spent a whole weekend and stayed up all night reading it and re-reading it right before I signed up here.It's excellent.It's what opened my eyes and got me to really seeking.I did a search on trinity after listening to a debate between James White and a oneness pentacostal,and found the article and this site.It was the spirit it was written in that kept me reading it and the more I read,the more I knew he was making valid points-that it was true.I've always intended to thank him and I will do that soon. That test reflects such a bias it is amazing that so many fall for it. t8 limits his test with verses that mainly speak of the Father and no wonder replacing the word 'God' with 'God the Son' or that understanding would not make sense there. What t8 fails to do is show verses where 'God the Father' or 'Father' would NOT fit as a substitution for 'God' For instance, John 1:1 is not included in his list of verses. Let's test t8's logic and his belief that God is the Father, only: In the beginning was the word, the word was with God [the Father] and the word was God [the Father]. There, with one verse t8's logic in his test falls flat. How about this verse (another one not on t8's list): Romans 9:5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. According to how t8's logic through HIS beliefs of the Father being the only God and substituting “God” with 'God the Father' it would go like this: Romans 9:5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God [the Father] over all, forever praised! Amen. Also, this verse which IS included in his list: Tit 2:13, 14 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. Now the same passage with t8's logic according to his view of only the Father as God: Tit 2:13, 14 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great [Father] and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds. Another verse to look at not on t8's list: Hebrews 1:8 8But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. 9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.” Now Hebrews 1:8 with t8's logic and view: 8But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God [the Father], will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. 9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God [the Father], your God [the Father], has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.” Can anyone else see the bias here?? Sorry t8, but you created a test that proves your bias and faulty logic, not the inaccuracy of the trinity. No offense meant.

k

Quote

Romans 9:5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God [the Father] over all, forever praised! Amen.

why do you have to add to scriptures WE ALL KNOW THAT CHRIST IS CALLED GOD IN SCRIPTURES BUT NOT THE FATHER SO DO NOT LIE WILL YOU

[mikeboll64]

Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 05 2012,22:24)

Since the lambs book was before the foundation of the world then the sacrificial lamb was too.Not that Christ was actually slain then but this was God's plan……………..

Agreed.

[Author]

Posts