Trinity proofs that have been refuted

[KangarooJack]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 08 2011,04:56)

Quote (david @ Mar. 06 2011,01:23) OK, you started this thread on Feb 23d.  Do you remember roughly how many days it was before He said that, and you started this new thread.  Was it right away?  Or was it a matter of weeks?  Any ideas? I'm not opposed to wading through many pages of material, but if there is way to narrow it down.  (Even a guess, like between pages 125 and 170 would be helpful.) Because WJ never denied saying it, I of course know he said it.  I just would like to see it myself, and in context. David Thanks for noticing that my words were taken out of context because Mike purposely left off this part… “We have been telling you all along it is all about context”. Mike has been misrepresenting me by claiming I am saying that Jesus is never referred to as “The True God” when in fact I was saying because of the context he is God. WJ

Keith,

I knew that Mike must have misrepresented you because this is what he does. But I cannot look all over to find context so I thank you for clarifying it. David knows you and so he did not automatically accept Mike's use of a fragmented quote. David knew better to make sure first. I have always respected David. But I wouldn't give you 2 cents for Mike.

Mike misrepresents me too. He recently misrepresented me as saying that Christ was God's servant in the sense that Mike thinks He was God's servant. But I have repeatedly said that Christ was God's child-servant and that He became the fully investitured Son. As God's fully investitured Son Christ is contrasted from a servant (Hebrews 1:1-3). I have said this many times and Mike continues to lie through his teeth.

When someone has truth he does not need to misrepresent because his truth will stand no matter what.

Mike thinks he's cute but he is not.

Jack

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (david @ Mar. 08 2011,11:46)

SF, I said as much a couple posts back: “I think you [WJ] have probably actually always said this, but it is just interesting to hear it actually said clearly.  You of course would argue that every place where Jesus is called god has context that means he is “The” god of the Bible.  So, really, nothing has changed.”

You also said this David:

Quote

Yet, it will be so easy for people to quote your words, which on the surface appear to greatly weaken your arguments. I myself may do this if you ever appear to cross the line and use that argument. But then, you would probably just quote these words back to me. Oh well. Let the quoting begin.

Couldnt i also say that you and Mike believe in Many Gods as well?
This ALL STARTED with the fact that Mike believes in MANY Gods, when there is only one God.
So couldnt i also quote mike on that assertion and everytime he tries to argue that he believes in one God, Ill just quote that place where he said that he believes in many gods?

Lol.
Actually let me go find that quote.
Maybe that willl appear to weaken his case as well.

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Mar. 08 2011,22:00)

Mike thinks he's cute but he is not. Jack

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

[SimplyForgiven]

Where it ALL started:
Irene Said pg16:

Quote

Keith, I happen to know what you are after. Just because both are called God, that still makes Jehovah God greater. Satan and others were called God, so are they too to be worshiped??? Of course not……..

Mike Said in pg19

Quote

D, it is not Irene and I who are just making this stuff up. There are many gods mentioned in the scriptures.

Also:

Quote

Jesus and Paul aren't saying there is only one in existence that has the title “god”. Jesus points out that God called men by that title, and Paul calls Satan by the same title.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Dennison

Here is some of Mikes quotes and my counter question to his…

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,14:16)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,04:32) When Jesus is referred to as “elohim” or “theos” does it absolutely and positively mean he is “Not” God Almighty? I BELIEVE I SAID: “NO!

 

Found Here!

So what has Mike proved?  Mike also has made these statements…

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 06 2011,17:00)

And I don't know of a scripture that calls Jesus “the true god”, but I agree that he is.

Found Here!

And…

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 05 2011,18:35)

Jesus is the god, or “powerful ruler” of all in heaven right now, and of the believer's on earth.

So Thanks Mike for admitting that the word “God” in referring to Jesus can mean that Jesus is The True God and that he is your “true god”!  

WJ

[mikeboll64]

Quote (david @ Mar. 08 2011,00:15)

Mike.  There are thousands of threads speaking about John 1:1.  This is the only thread that discusses WJ saying: Everyone[,] not just [myself, is] saying that just because Jesus is called God does not mean he is God. They will try to bury those words.  If I were you, I would create a new thread called: “Just because Jesus is called God does not mean he is God.”   I would then base the entire discussion on those words.  The first post should be WJ's post, with a little more context.  Then, perhaps that nice enlarged version of the words in question, the underlined words above. I believe that the idea (the underlined words) do deserve a thread, and the fact that they are WJ's words directly, makes it that much more interesting.

Thanks David,

I will do it tonight.

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 08 2011,12:39)

Where it ALL started: Irene Said pg16: Quote Keith, I happen to know what you are after.  Just because both are called God, that still makes Jehovah God greater.  Satan and others were called God, so are they too to be worshiped??? Of course not…….. Mike Said in pg19 Quote D, it is not Irene and I who are just making this stuff up.  There are many gods mentioned in the scriptures. Also: Quote Jesus and Paul aren't saying there is only one in existence that has the title “god”.  Jesus points out that God called men by that title, and Paul calls Satan by the same title.

Listen to yourself D.  

Do you EVER check into what the scriptures actually say before spouting off?  You got busted on the fact that there ARE many messiahs mentioned in scripture just last week.  You pop into my discussion with Keith, laughing at me about the other messiahs, yet when I SHOWED you clear scriptural EVIDENCE of the many other messiahs, you just tucked your tail and ran away.  Where is the “I'm sorry Mike, you were right”?

And you do it now to David and I.  There ARE many gods mentioned in the scriptures.  Are you daft?  

David sings praises to Jehovah before the gods.  God judges in the assembly of gods.  God says, “You are gods” to His judges.

How in the world can Jehovah be “the God of gods” if there are no other gods?  How can He be “the Most High God” if there are no others?  And what does Paul mean here:

1 Corinthians 8:5 (King James Version)

5For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

Do you call Paul a liar?  

You're like a little ignorant kid taunting me:  “He he, Mike thinks there are many messiahs, what a dope!  Ha ha, Mike thinks there are many gods, what an idiot!”

Yet I'M the one who is right on both counts.  And if I'M right, then who's the idiot?

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Mar. 08 2011,11:00)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 08 2011,04:56) Quote (david @ Mar. 06 2011,01:23) OK, you started this thread on Feb 23d.  Do you remember roughly how many days it was before He said that, and you started this new thread.  Was it right away?  Or was it a matter of weeks?  Any ideas? I'm not opposed to wading through many pages of material, but if there is way to narrow it down.  (Even a guess, like between pages 125 and 170 would be helpful.) Because WJ never denied saying it, I of course know he said it.  I just would like to see it myself, and in context. David Thanks for noticing that my words were taken out of context because Mike purposely left off this part… “We have been telling you all along it is all about context”. Mike has been misrepresenting me by claiming I am saying that Jesus is never referred to as “The True God” when in fact I was saying because of the context he is God. WJ Keith, I knew that Mike must have misrepresented you because this is what he does. But I cannot look all over to find context so I thank you for clarifying it. David knows you and so he did not automatically accept Mike's use of a fragmented quote. David knew better to make sure first. I have always respected David. But I wouldn't give you 2 cents for Mike. Mike misrepresents me too. He recently misrepresented me as saying that Christ was God's servant in the sense that Mike thinks He was God's servant. But I have repeatedly said that Christ was God's child-servant and that He became the fully investitured Son. As God's fully investitured Son Christ is contrasted from a servant (Hebrews 1:1-3). I have said this many times and Mike continues to lie through his teeth. When someone has truth he does not need to misrepresent because his truth will stand no matter what. Mike thinks he's cute but he is not. Jack

(Copied for my own protection, just so words don't get edited later.)

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote

Listen to yourself D.   Do you EVER check into what the scriptures actually say before spouting off?  You got busted on the fact that there ARE many messiahs mentioned in scripture just last week.  You pop into my discussion with Keith, laughing at me about the other messiahs, yet when I SHOWED you clear scriptural EVIDENCE of the many other messiahs, you just tucked your tail and ran away.  Where is the “I'm sorry Mike, you were right”?

woah woah woah
hold your horses there buddy.
Your TOTALLY WRONG.
there is only one Messiah, and my arguement is the same as to there only being ONE ELOHIM.

I never ran away, i just dont have the time.
ACtually if u want to know whats going on.
I still have to deal with the debate on the other site, and when i came back from NC i got really sick and was in bed for awhile.

So how about you take your foot out your mouth and get the facts straight.

Quote

And you do it now to David and I.  There ARE many gods mentioned in the scriptures.  Are you daft?

Not really david, because he never made that claim. but you have.

Quote

How in the world can Jehovah be “the God of gods” if there are no other gods?  How can He be “the Most High God” if there are no others?  And what does Paul mean here:

dude. lol There is no Other God but God.

Quote

Do you call Paul a liar?   You're like a little ignorant kid taunting me:  “He he, Mike thinks there are many messiahs, what a dope!  Ha ha, Mike thinks there are many gods, what an idiot!” Yet I'M the one who is right on both counts.  And if I'M right, then who's the idiot? mike

Not At all.  Paul is right, many are called Gods, but there is only one God.
RA is called a God, and Zeus is called a God. doesnt mean they are really gods.

You ignorant old man who cant see past the end of his nose.

Lets be serious did i ever say those things?
I never said that you were a dope or idioit.
I have said that you are plain wrong, confused, a heretic, and many other nice things, but not so directly have i said you are a idioit    Not that im saying that you are not.

And for the one who claims he is right you sure are conceited, i wonder what the bible says about those who get so puffed up.

And if your wrong on both counts after all your conceited comments who looks like a loser?

DEliquent

[mikeboll64]

Hey D,

Come back when you're ready to base your scriptural understanding on the actual scriptures, okay?

There are many gods, lords and messiahs mentioned in the Bible.  And almost all of them are vice regents of the Most High God, Jehovah.

But I'll tell you what:  If you DO insist on claiming there is only ONE God in scripture, then at least claim the right One, okay?

John 17
1 After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:
  “Father, the hour has come………….

3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

1 Corinthians 8:6
yet for us there is but one God, the Father

Both Jesus and Paul tell us the ONE God you insist upon is THE FATHER.  Who do YOU say it is?

mike

[david]

Quote

Couldnt i also say that you and Mike believe in Many Gods as well?

–SF

“There are many gods and many lords.”–the Bible.

The question is, is this statement true? Or, should I say, do we believe it? If you believe it SF, then I could similarly say that of you.

I don't think you understand the relevance of what WJ said. The point, is that WJ very directly and clearly said something that Seems to knock down trinity thinking, or at least, what many trinitarians who aren't as well learned as WJ would consider evidence. I mean, I think he went against what 100's of millions of trinitarians would consider evidence. But WJ knows more than they do. It's just refreshing to see him say that. It is so easy to use propaganda, and take the low road. Of course, everything depends on context. But to admit that, when on first glance, seeing any scripture where Jesus is called “god,” many naturally consider this in itself proof, regardless of context.

[david]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Mar. 09 2011,04:00)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 08 2011,04:56) Quote (david @ Mar. 06 2011,01:23) OK, you started this thread on Feb 23d.  Do you remember roughly how many days it was before He said that, and you started this new thread.  Was it right away?  Or was it a matter of weeks?  Any ideas? I'm not opposed to wading through many pages of material, but if there is way to narrow it down.  (Even a guess, like between pages 125 and 170 would be helpful.) Because WJ never denied saying it, I of course know he said it.  I just would like to see it myself, and in context. David Thanks for noticing that my words were taken out of context because Mike purposely left off this part… “We have been telling you all along it is all about context”. Mike has been misrepresenting me by claiming I am saying that Jesus is never referred to as “The True God” when in fact I was saying because of the context he is God. WJ Keith, I knew that Mike must have misrepresented you because this is what he does. But I cannot look all over to find context so I thank you for clarifying it. David knows you and so he did not automatically accept Mike's use of a fragmented quote. David knew better to make sure first. I have always respected David. But I wouldn't give you 2 cents for Mike. Mike misrepresents me too. He recently misrepresented me as saying that Christ was God's servant in the sense that Mike thinks He was God's servant. But I have repeatedly said that Christ was God's child-servant and that He became the fully investitured Son. As God's fully investitured Son Christ is contrasted from a servant (Hebrews 1:1-3). I have said this many times and Mike continues to lie through his teeth. When someone has truth he does not need to misrepresent because his truth will stand no matter what. Mike thinks he's cute but he is not. Jack

KJ, since you say you have always respected me in this post, I have great difficulty critiquing it. …. Yet, I will.

It's not really because I know WJ better than Mike does that I wanted to check the context of what he said and see the quote in full.

It's because what he said seemed to me, and Mike, and maybe others to be extremely damaging to trinitarian belief as a whole, (not to what WJ believes. WJ has a slightly better set of evidence than the Catholics, etc.)

Here, again, much like WJ, you take my words to mean that Mike misrepresented WJ. I never said that. I simply said I wanted to see those words myself (because of the gravity of what he said.)

The truth of course is just as WJ said, that just because Jesus is called god, does not IN ITSELF mean he is God Almighty. But I see a lot of trinitarians that would see that and use that as evidence. So, what he said was, in my opinion, something that is both on the side of truth, but is also on the side of non-trinitarians in this general argument.

[david]

Quote

Not really david, because he never made that claim. but you have.

–SF, page 5. 12:32

I don't really understand this sentence. I think it was meant to be directed to Mike. it was in response to something mike said, although my name was mentioned in Mike's words.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 08 2011,05:15)

t8 And I didn't say that Jesus is the Father did I? Notice how you change it up using a “name” that identifies Jesus rather than using a title like “human” or “man” that identifies his nature as being like us, human. That was a sleight of hand as usual with your words. If you were honest you would have said… “You do not say that those who sit on Christ's throne are [human].”

Um, what? You appear to be mixed up WJ.

First off, which is the throne of God, the Father's or Christ's?

Hebrews 12:2
fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Revelation 22:3
No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him.

See the Father's throne is God's throne and Jesus sits at the right hand of God's throne.

So:

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Mar. 09 2011,04:00)

But I wouldn't give you 2 cents for Mike.

What about 1 cent?

[mikeboll64]

How about one RED cent?

[mikeboll64]

About Keith's “big blue quote” I've been posting:
Context is required to establish what ANY scripture is about.  I didn't feel it necessary to posts Keith's words about “context”, since that is a given in ANY scripture.

About Jack's “servant” post:
For two years, Jack has flat out REFUSED to acknowledge Jesus was called a “servant” of God in Acts.  The KJV has “child”, and Jack INSISTED that's what it should be, even though virtually every newer translation recognizes and renders “pais” as SERVANT 4 time in Acts, in reference to Jesus.

He has been FIRM on this issue for two years, so it shocked me when he actually acknowledged that God exalted His SERVANT, Jesus Christ.  He can address any “explanations” of this whenever he wants, but I did not LIE or do anything deceitful by posting his very words.

About the quote of mine that Keith has been plastering everywhere:
I did mistakenly say Jesus was “THE” true god.  I explained to Keith in my next post, after he brought to my attention what I had posted, that I MEANT, and should have said “A” true god.

It was WEEKS ago when I CLARIFIED to him that I made a typo.  He has accidentally posted things that say he DOESN'T believe Jesus is God.  But I realize they were typos, and would never go plastering them around as if he really believed his mistaken words.  This is what he is doing to me.

Just setting the record straight.

mike

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (david @ Mar. 09 2011,11:09)

Quote Not really david, because he never made that claim. but you have. –SF, page 5.  12:32 I don't really understand this sentence.  I think it was meant to be directed to Mike.  it was in response to something mike said, although my name was mentioned in Mike's words.

David,
It was directed towards Mike.

In other words i meant to say.

“Im not really focused on david, so not really him because he has never made that claim publically. But You (Mike) have. “

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (david @ Mar. 09 2011,10:52)

Quote Couldnt i also say that you and Mike believe in Many Gods as well? –SF “There are many gods and many lords.”–the Bible. The question is, is this statement true?  Or, should I say, do we believe it?  If you believe it SF, then I could similarly say that of you.   I don't think you understand the relevance of what WJ said.  The point, is that WJ very directly and clearly said something that Seems to knock down trinity thinking, or at least, what many trinitarians who aren't as well learned as WJ would consider evidence.  I mean, I think he went against what 100's of millions of trinitarians would consider evidence.  But WJ knows more than they do.  It's just refreshing to see him say that.  It is so easy to use propaganda, and take the low road.   Of course, everything depends on context.  But to admit that, when on first glance, seeing any scripture where Jesus is called “god,” many naturally consider this in itself proof, regardless of context.

David,

As you said, taking the low road and using such quotes out of context in means o propaganda when we all know thats not the case here.

So Do you consider this thread that Mike created as propaganda?

Everything must be interpreted by context and the true meaning of terms.
So to admit to such a things, doesnt really mean anything.
We are still on the same boat.
Nothing has changed, execpt that Mike believes in many gods.

[mikeboll64]

Bump for D

Hey D,

Come back when you're ready to base your scriptural understanding on the actual scriptures, okay?

There are many gods, lords and messiahs mentioned in the Bible. And almost all of them are vice regents of the Most High God, Jehovah.

But I'll tell you what: If you DO insist on claiming there is only ONE God in scripture, then at least claim the right One, okay?

John 17
1 After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:
“Father, the hour has come………….

3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

1 Corinthians 8:6
yet for us there is but one God, the Father

Both Jesus and Paul tell us the ONE God you insist upon is THE FATHER. Who do YOU say it is?

mike

[Author]

Posts