Trinitarians: Which part of the Trinity is Jehovah?

[LoveofTruth]

They are using older manuscripts. Older = more reliable.

If you have 5308 people all agreeing together and you have a few old men who disagree among themselves who will you listen to ?

 

[ob77]

A trinitarian brother on another thread refused to answer this question.

Can anybody give me an answer?

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD*God made the earth and the heavens,

* יְהֹוָה
yehôvâh
yeh-ho-vaw'
From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: - Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.
​

YHVH = Yahaveh. Never to be pronounced as Jehovah. There is no "J" sound in the Hebrew alphabet period. There is also no "O" in the original, so , phonically is sounds thus: Yah-hav-vay. Some pronounce it as Yah-Way, but even that is closer to the original than Jeehoavaa is. Watch out also for the word "Lord" as lord is also used of Baal- one can look this up in the Hebrew dictionary of the Strong's Concordance. Now, the trinity is simply the three offices that our Father holds. He is Spirit, He also possesses a body, and He possesses His mind. He was in the form of Christ, incarnate, being the Spirit of God in a flesh body, no different than Adam or any of Adam's descendants to this day. Fact is, He was a son of God only in the fact that He came through Adam after the flesh, as Adam was a son of God (Luke 3-38). So, God has a spiritual body, different than the flesh one, and dwelled in a flesh body, as Christ, and possesses His own Spirit.
This is no different than those through Adam. We have a spiritual body (on hold in heaven), we dwell at present in a flesh body and we have our spirit which will dwell in both. We came from there, and to there we will return, where you will exchange this aged, disease ridden flesh body for the one you left, one that is incorruptible by anything, which lives and abides forever. Hope this helps.

 

[Meowzltov]

But I think you didn't really read my post carefully I showed that many of the Znti-Nicean fathers and so called church fathers quoted the textus receptors often in their writings way before the so called older manuscripts were found

One of the best arguments against teh Johannine comma is the fact that Ante-Nicene fathers did NOT quote it.

 

[Meowzltov]

This being the case your entire argument falls to the ground and you should get a good king James Bible and beer use another one

Never. The King James version is one of the worst translations out there. I'll stick to the New American Bible.

 

[Meowzltov]

If you have 5308 people all agreeing together and you have a few old men who disagree among themselves who will you listen to ?

Huh? The majority of scholars are against you. You have only a minority of scholars, a severe minority of scholars, who agree with you.

 

[LoveofTruth]

One of the best arguments against teh Johannine comma is the fact that Ante-Nicene fathers did NOT quote it.

I showed you that it was quoted around 250 ad and that should have silenced your argument but no you , like all who try to hide from truth that exposed them in error will grasp at straws and ask things like "what if" or "maybe" question, doubt , cast false concern about it etc.

 

[LoveofTruth]

Huh? The majority of scholars are against you. You have only a minority of scholars, a severe minority of scholars, who agree with you.

The Textus Receptus, Majority Text are about 5308 the so called older text are about a handful and two main ones

 

[LoveofTruth]

They are using older manuscripts. Older = more reliable.

• Textus Receptus agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Peshitta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc. These Bibles were produced some 200 years before the minority Egyptian codices favoured by the Roman Church. Remember this vital point.

 

[Meowzltov]

I showed you that it was quoted around 250 ad and that should have silenced your argument but no you , like all who try to hide from truth that exposed them in error will grasp at straws and ask things like "what if" or "maybe" question, doubt , cast false concern about it etc.

You provided one instance, which had NO CITATION. It is more likely to be the source of the johannine comma than the other way round, given that no other author quotes the comma.

 

[Meowzltov]

The Textus Receptus, Majority Text are about 5308 the so called older text are about a handful and two main ones

The point is not how many, but which are the oldest.

 

[LoveofTruth]

The point is not how many, but which are the oldest.

No it's not the point you miss it all together

 

[LoveofTruth]

You provided one instance, which had NO CITATION. It is more likely to be the source of the johannine comma than the other way round, given that no other author quotes the comma.

Cyprian quote

"The Lord warns, saying, "He who is not with me scattereth." He who breaks the peace and the concord of Christ, does so in opposition to Christ; he who gathereth elsewhere than in the Church, scatters the Church of Christ. The Lord says, "I and the Father are one;" and again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit," And these three are one." And does any one believe that this unity which thus comes from the divine strength and coheres in celestial sacraments, can be divided in the Church, and can be separated by the parting asunder of opposing wills? He who does not hold unity does not hold God's law, does not hold the faith of the Father and the Son, does not hold life and salvation."

 

[LoveofTruth]

You provided one instance, which had NO CITATION. It is more likely to be the source of the johannine comma than the other way round, given that no other author quotes the comma.

bibleversiondiscussionboard

 

[Meowzltov]

• Textus Receptus agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Peshitta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc. These Bibles were produced some 200 years before the minority Egyptian codices favoured by the Roman Church. Remember this vital point.

Actually only the gospels were translated that early into the peshitta. The rest of the NT was not translated into Syriac until the start of the 5th century. The Vulgate was written in 382. I couldn't find anything substantial about an "OLD" latin vulgate or italic bible except references on KJV only websites, so I'm duly suspicious.

 

[Meowzltov]

No it's not the point you miss it all together

It IS the point. Oldest = most reliable. Quantity simply means most copied.

 

[donfish06]

If you all had the Holy Spirit then you wouldn't have to search for the oldest texts, the Lord would just reveal it to you. So sad to see everyone arguing using logic and intellect. Do you think Peter knew which scrolls were the oldest and which dipthong meant what? He didn't have to because the One who authored the text lived in him. THAT is the problem with Christianity everyone thinks they've got it and they've no clue what it is. Some think that being in the majority is a good thing!!? Show me ONE time in ALL of scriptures where the TRUE way was popular? You all rely too much on man's wisdom.

 

[LoveofTruth]

If you all had the Holy Spirit then you wouldn't have to search for the oldest texts, the Lord would just reveal it to you.

No, all true believers have the anointing which teaches them all things. But Holy scripture was also given by the Spirit and so we are told to study to show ourselves approved unto God and to prove all things as we walk in that anoiinting

Some think that being in the majority is a good thing!!? Show me ONE time in ALL of scriptures where the TRUE way was popular?

I'll show you a few verses

"11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; 12 saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing. 13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever." (Revelation 5:11-13)

 

[donfish06]

No, all true believers have the anointing which teaches them all things. But Holy scripture was also given by the Spirit and so we are told to study to show ourselves approved unto God and to prove all things as we walk in that anoiinting



I'll show you a few verses

"11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; 12 saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing. 13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever." (Revelation 5:11-13)

Keep in mind that is the believers from ALL AGES that are in heaven. Never were they a majority on earth. Jesus said straight is the gate and narrow is the way, and FEW will find it.

If everyone had the Holy Spirit that teaches, then they wouldn't have 44000 different understandings! Did Peter and John and Paul and Jude and James etc argue about doctrine after receiving the Holy Spirit? NO. if 2 people have the Holy Spirit, and both believe the Bible totally different, then either God is the author of confusion, OR one or both don't REALLY have it. We are to study, but the scriptures are of NO private interpretation. What you all are presenting are private interpretations, NOT what the spirit has revealed.

 

[Meowzltov]

If you all had the Holy Spirit then you wouldn't have to search for the oldest texts, the Lord would just reveal it to you.

Rediculous. God gave us brains for a reason: he expects us to use them.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

There is no precedent in it for the Bible! NEVER did ANYONE ever pray to anyone but God. Paul said though an angel from heaven tell you something other than what I have taught you, let him be accursed. Paul never taught praying to Saints.

The Bible says not to add one word to or take one word from, or your name will be taken from the book... There is not one word saying to pray to Saints, therefore your church has added it. I'll stick with the scriptures on this.

I would argue there is precedent from scripture. Clearly it calls for us to be One Body and pray for one another- even pray without ceasing. After spending our life here praying for others, especially for the faithful, it should seem at least odd to imagine those who have gone on to the next life our suddenly released from that responsibility of offering up prays for others.

And such activity would also explain why/how Saint John depicts those already with Him right now offering up the prayers of the living. A prayer is a request and asking someone to pray for you is a request for them to ask God for something on you behalf. The elders with Him right now cannot offer up something not possessed, which means Saint John is depicting them possessing prayer requests that they are offering up to God on the behalf of the living.