Trinity discussion with St Worm2

[Bible Highlighter]

1 John 5:7
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

This verse is so obviously spurious, modern translations don't even include it!!!

Right. So God's people were left in the dark for hundreds of years in having the KJV before the Modern Translations came onto the scene. That definitely makes a lot of sense.


...

 

[Dartman]

There is no point in replying. You are just going to mindlessly hit the disagree button until it is broke. No matter what I show you with Scripture, you see that as a means to prove your personal belief about God. Those who have ears to hear, let him hear. I have provided more than enough ample evidence with Scripture that Jesus is God and that the Trinity is true. I have also answered your so called problem passages with what Scripture says, as well.
...

Your "answers", as illustrated above, don't work. The simple truth is, the Bible clearly, consistently and plainly, states Jehovah/YHVH God is the ONLY God, and is creator of the universe. Jesus, a direct descendant of Eve, Abraham, Judah, David and Mary, is a Jew, is a man, is Jehovah's servant, son, anointed and prophet. That Jesus worships Jehovah (John 4:22) that Jehovah is his God (John 20:17, Rev 3:12) and that the logos/words Jesus spoke are NOT his, they ARE Jehovah's words, his Father's words.

 

[Dartman]

Right. So God's people were left in the dark for hundreds of years in having the KJV before the Modern Translations came onto the scene. That definitely makes a lot of sense.
...

.... do you think there were no translations BEFORE the KJV? Perhaps this article would be helpful;

The Textual Problem in 1 John 5:7-8

 

[danny ski]

Deut 18:15-19 Jehovah thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
16 according to all that thou desiredst of Jehovah thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of Jehovah my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
17 And Jehovah said unto me, They have well said that which they have spoken.
18 I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

For a prophet to be "like unto Moses", they have to be a Law giver.... Jesus was.

Daniel 9 laid out the timeline, and the details. From the decree to rebuild Jerusalem's walls and streets, and temple unto Messiah the Prince was 483 years. Jesus preached for 3 1/2 years to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel". The apostles then preached for another 3 1/2 years to Israel, before Cornelius.
After that, Israel was in the process of being rooted out of their land, and scattered to the nations, and a time of tribulation such as no other, which we still see today.
We are getting close to the "time of the Gentiles" being fulfilled.
Jesus will return, and conquer this planet, rescuing Israel from the destruction described in the first 3 verses of Zech 14. Jesus will then command that Israel be regathered (Isa 66:20) and then before Israel can actually enter the land, they will be purged (Eze 20:33-38, Zech 13:8,9)
And thus, all Israel shall be saved (Rom 11:25-27)

The Mosaic Law codified every aspect of our lives. Which laws written down by Jesus should I follow? You know, just to be on the safe side.

 

[danny ski]

Of course there is a source. The source of Scripture is Jehovah. The source of all other written works are man. Jesus warned against "teaching as doctrine, the commandments of men". I am utterly convinced he was specifically discussing the Talmud.

You do realize, I hope, that the Talmud was not written down yet, in the time of Jesus.

 

[Dartman]

The Mosaic Law codified every aspect of our lives. Which laws written down by Jesus should I follow? You know, just to be on the safe side.

All of them.... you know, just to be on the safe side.
John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
John 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

 

[Dartman]

Of course there is a source. The source of Scripture is Jehovah. The source of all other written works are man. Jesus warned against "teaching as doctrine, the commandments of men". I am utterly convinced he was specifically discussing the Talmud.

You do realize, I hope, that the Talmud was not written down yet, in the time of Jesus.

So, no one was teaching it?

 

[Dartman]

By the way, here we are, 16 pages into this discussion, and not ONE text that shows;
1) ANY sermon, where a trinitarian "Jesus" is preached.
2) ANY text explaining the trinity.
3) ANY text, commanding belief in ANY tenet unique to the trinity.

 

[DawnStar]

Right. So God's people were left in the dark for hundreds of years in having the KJV before the Modern Translations came onto the scene. That definitely makes a lot of sense.

What did God's people believe for well over a thousand years before the printing of the KJV?

Dogs are awesome!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What did God's people believe for well over a thousand years before the printing of the KJV?

Dogs are awesome!

The world was predominantly Latin speaking before English would then become the world language. Before Latin, the majority of the world spoke Greek.

In other words, God's Word was preserved perfectly in the Latin Vulgate (Not the Catholic version), before the KJV.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

.... do you think there were no translations BEFORE the KJV? Perhaps this article would be helpful;

The Textual Problem in 1 John 5:7-8

The Bible was perfectly preserved in the Latin Vulgate (not the Catholic version) before the KJV. The point is that according to you: The English speaking world (which would include you) did not have the correct Bible for hundreds of years later.

Absolute silliness.


...

 

[DawnStar]

In other words, God's Word was preserved perfectly in the Latin Vulgate (Not the Catholic version), before the KJV.

Really? Who declared that?

Dogs are awesome!

 

[ExodusMe]

By the way, here we are, 16 pages into this discussion, and not ONE text that shows;
1) ANY sermon, where a trinitarian "Jesus" is preached.
2) ANY text explaining the trinity.
3) ANY text, commanding belief in ANY tenet unique to the trinity.

Matthew 28:19

There I did it! What did I win?

 

[Dartman]

The Bible was perfectly preserved in the Latin Vulgate (not the Catholic version) before the KJV. The point is that according to you: The English speaking world (which would include you) did not have the correct Bible for hundreds of years later.

There were several English translations preceding the KJV.
What do you mean "the Latin Vulgate (not the Catholic version)?

 

[Dartman]

By the way, here we are, 16 pages into this discussion, and not ONE text that shows;
1) ANY sermon, where a trinitarian "Jesus" is preached.
2) ANY text explaining the trinity.
3) ANY text, commanding belief in ANY tenet unique to the trinity.

Matthew 28:19

There I did it! What did I win?

Perhaps a sympathy enrollment in

 

[ExodusMe]

Perhaps a sympathy enrollment in

Oh okay, so you have no response to the passage I cited in that case?

 

[Dartman]

Oh okay, so you have no response to the passage I cited in that case?

Better yet, please explain how you think that verse answers ANY of the criteria!!
By the way, here we are, 16 pages into this discussion, and not ONE text that shows;
1) ANY sermon, where a trinitarian "Jesus" is preached.
2) ANY text explaining the trinity.
3) ANY text, commanding belief in ANY tenet unique to the trinity.

It's a great verse, but it doesn't make ANY 'trinitarian" point!
Without trinitarian brainwashing, this verse simply commands the apostles to baptize disciples, and mention Jesus, his God, and his God's power, by name, when baptizing. This isn't trinitarian!!

 

[ExodusMe]

Better yet, please explain how you think that verse answers ANY of the criteria!!
By the way, here we are, 16 pages into this discussion, and not ONE text that shows;
1) ANY sermon, where a trinitarian "Jesus" is preached.
2) ANY text explaining the trinity.
3) ANY text, commanding belief in ANY tenet unique to the trinity.

It's a great verse, but it doesn't make ANY 'trinitarian" point!

Why is the criteria you listed important? Please forgive me for not reading up on the previous discussion.

It sounds like you are saying that the trinity is non-biblical because of the criteria you listed, but I don't see your criteria as significant.

1) Matthew 28:19 is a clear teaching of the doctrine of the Trinity. I don't see what you mean by sermon, but as for a reference verse I think it is sufficient
2) Are you talking about biblical text? Why is this significant? There is no text explaining what books should be considered "The Bible". According to your logic "The Bible" doesn't actually meet your criteria also. Not sure if this is important for you as I don't know where your heresy officially ends.
3) Why would there need to be a command for belief in the Trinity? There is no command to believe in the alphabet but we need to use the alphabet to read the pages. Likewise, the doctrine of the Trinity is the best explanation to how we understand Matthew 28:19 - I just don't see the significance here either.

I don't mean to be rude. I just need further information. Thanks

 

[Dartman]

Why is the criteria you listed important? Please forgive me for not reading up on the previous discussion.

It sounds like you are saying that the trinity is non-biblical because of the criteria you listed, but I don't see your criteria as significant.

1) Matthew 28:19 is a clear teaching of the doctrine of the Trinity. I don't see what you mean by sermon, but as for a reference verse I think it is sufficient
2) Are you talking about biblical text? Why is this significant? There is no text explaining what books should be considered "The Bible". According to your logic "The Bible" doesn't actually meet your criteria also. Not sure if this is important for you as I don't know where your heresy officially ends.
3) Why would there need to be a command for belief in the Trinity? There is no command to believe in the alphabet but we need to use the alphabet to read the pages. Likewise, the doctrine of the Trinity is the best explanation to how we understand Matthew 28:19 - I just don't see the significance here either.

I don't mean to be rude. I just need further information. Thanks

Hmmmm .... where do I begin.
There are clear texts commanding us to believe in, obey, and seek God.
There are clear texts commanding us to believe in Jesus, and his death burial and resurrection.
There are clear texts commanding us to accept the Gospel, (which includes Jesus and his God, and the literal kingdom of God on the earth, and resurrection to immortality as a victory over death).

By contrast, there are ZERO texts commanding us to believe in the trinity ... or EXPLAINING the trinity.

Paul commands us, very explicitly to hold fast to the "Jesus" actually preached in the Scriptures;
2 Cor 11:3,4 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached ...

So, if you are going to persuade me to believe in a DIFFERENT "Jesus", you are going to have to show your "Jesus" being preached in the Scriptures.
By contrast, the "Jesus" of the trinity is VERY different than the "Jesus" actually preached.

 

[ExodusMe]

Hmmmm .... where do I begin.
There are clear texts commanding us to believe in, obey, and seek God.
There are clear texts commanding us to believe in Jesus, and his death burial and resurrection.
There are clear texts commanding us to accept the Gospel, (which includes Jesus and his God, and the literal kingdom of God on the earth, and resurrection to immortality as a victory over death).

By contrast, there are ZERO texts commanding us to believe in the trinity ... or EXPLAINING the trinity.

Paul commands us, very explicitly to hold fast to the "Jesus" actually preached in the Scriptures;
2 Cor 11:3,4 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached ...

So, if you are going to persuade me to believe in a DIFFERENT "Jesus", you are going to have to show your "Jesus" being preached in the Scriptures.
By contrast, the "Jesus" of the trinity is VERY different than the "Jesus" actually preached.

The bible commands us to believe in God. The Trinity is God. Why would you need a seperate command to believe in the Trinity? That just seems useless. If God has always been three persons in one being, then the bible has always commanded us to believe in the Trinity. Read Genesis 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.

Further, how do you make sense of passages where it is stated that the world was created through Jesus and that all things came to be through him and that he existed with God in the beginning? John 1:1-18