Trinity is wrong.

[Der Alte]

What's funny is that your verses quoted about the Holy Spirit either are a direct reference to God or a pronoun, "He," added by the translators where "it" could have been placed. They could have easily put "it" if it so suited the translators' religion. You run into the same problem here that one does with punctuation in the Bible. There originally was no punctuation in the old scrolls which contained the Word; thus, translators as they were translating into English and so forth could easily put a comma here and there to make a sentence say something totally different than what was originally intended.

Funny thing is you have not proved anything you said here. None of the scripture cited refers to God! None of the scripture cited relies on a pronoun! None of the scripture cited relies on or is affected by punctuation!

 

[Der Alte]

No one called the son of Mary Emmanuel, nor was that prophesy about her son. He was called Y'shua, translated into English as Joshua. That name means God will save. GOD, not the son of Mary. Oh yeah... Isaiah did not use the word VIRGIN, (Bethulah), he used ALMAH (which means young girl). So Matthew and Luke were in error when they used this prophesy about the conquering of Judah, to say something about Mary and her son.

Logical fallacy, argument from silence. Also the Hebrew says "she will call." We do not know what private name Mary had for Jesus. Maybe your Bible is full of errors mine is not. The LXX which is quoted most often in the NT, translates Isaiah as parthenos, Virgin!

This is not about the son of Mary, either, nor does reflect any name by which he was called.

Making an assertion without any proof or evidence.

So you are taking the emotional outburst of a bunch of peasants in Nain as the truth about the nature of Y'shua?

Did Jesus object or correct them?

Y'shua was born in 4BC (or there abouts)

And Yeshua was aware of having glory with the father before the world was.

When Jesus is quoted as saying "I and my father are one", apparently they are not separate "persons" as the trinity declares. So who was Jesus praying to? Who was he telling his disciples to pray to? OR... he is using a common idiom to mean they are of one purpose... they are identical in purpose... they are on the same team.

You just can't have it both ways...
No one has seen the father, but you have seen Jesus so you have seen the father...
does that strike as you as rather... well... contradictory?

Going off on an irrelevant tangent, not addressing my post.

 

[KCDAD]

Logical fallacy,

I will address this later.. YOU ARE TOO FUNNY!


Using the LXX to substantiate the Hebrew!!!!!! Parthenos is Greek, meaning young person AND virgin. The Hebrew does not have the same double meaning to a word. The Dead Sea Scrolls are clear ALMAH is the word in 7:14...meaning young girl, not BETHULAH, meaning virgin.

 

[Der Alte]

I will address this later.. YOU ARE TOO FUNNY!

Using the LXX to substantiate the Hebrew!!!!!! Parthenos is Greek, meaning young person AND virgin. The Hebrew does not have the same double meaning to a word. The Dead Sea Scrolls are clear ALMAH is the word in 7:14...meaning young girl, not BETHULAH, meaning virgin.

Please do enlighten us how the Jewish scholars, who translated the LXX, got it wrong, 250 years +/- before the Christian era.

παρθενος, ou, hJ and oJ ( Hom. +; inscr. , pap. , LXX ; En. 98, 2; Philo ; Jos. , Ant. 4, 244, Vi. 414; Sib. Or. 3, 357).

1. virgin Mt 25:1 , 7 , 11 ; 1 Cor 7:25 (FStrobel, NovT 2, ’58, 199-227), 28, 34; Pol 5:3; Hv 4, 2, 1; s

9, 1, 2; 9, 2, 3; 5; 9, 3, 2; 4 f ; 9, 4, 3; 5 f ; 8 a1. After Is 7:14 ( hr;h; hm;l]x'h; ; on this ASchulz, BZ 23, ’35, 229-41; WHBrownlee, The Mng. of Qumran for the Bible, esp. Is, ’64, 274-81) Mt 1:23 ( cf. Menand ., Sicyonius 372 f parqevno" gÆ e[ti, a[peiro" ajndrov" ). Of Mary also Lk 1:27 a, b; ISm 1:1 and prob. Dg 12:8 (the idea that the spirit of a god could father a child by a woman, specifically a virgin, was not foreign to Egyptian religion: Plut. , Numa 4, 6, Mor. 718 B ; Philo , Cher. 43-50 [on this ENorden, D. Geburt des Kindes 78-90]. Cf. further the lit. on jIwshvf 4 and OBardenhewer, Mariä Verkündigung ’05; EPetersen, Die wunderbare Geburt des Heilandes ’09; HUsener, Das Weihnachtsfest 2 ’11; ASteinmann, D. jungfräul. Geburt des Herrn 3 ’26, D. Jungfrauengeburt u. die vergl. Religionsgeschichte ’19; GHBox, The Virgin Birth of Jesus ’16; OECrain, The Credibility of the Virgin Birth ’25; JG Machen, The Virgin Birth of Christ 2 ’32 [on this FKattenbusch, StKr 102, ’30, 454-74]; EWorcester, Studies in the Birth of Our Lord ’32; KLSchmidt, D. jungfrl. Geb. J. Chr.: ThBl 14, ’35, 289-97; FXSteinmetzer, Empfangen v. Hl. Geist ’38; RGBratcher, Bible Translator 9, ’58, 98-125 [Heb., LXX , Mt]; TBoslooper, The Virg. Birth ’62; Hv Campenhausen, D. Jungfrauengeburt in d. Theol. d. alten Kirche ’62.—RJCooke, Did Paul Know the Virg. Birth? ’27; PRBotz, D. Jungfrausch. Mariens im NT u. in der nachap. Zeit, Diss. Tüb.’34; DEdwards, The Virg. Birth in History and Faith ’43.- Clemen 2 114-21; ENorden, D. Geburt des Kindes 2 ’31; MDibelius, Jungfrauensohn u. Krippenkind ’32. As a contrast to Dibelius’ Hellenistic emphasis cf. OMichel and OBetz, Beih, ZNW 26, ’60, 3-23, who stress Qumran parallels.). Of the daughters of Philip parqevnoi profhteuvousai Ac 21:9 . Of the virgins who were admitted to the church office of ‘widows’ ISm 13:1 ( cf. AJülicher, PM 22, ’18, 111 f. Differently LZscharnack, Der Dienst der Frau ’02, 105 ff
).—On 1 Cor 7:36-8 cf. gamivzw 1 and s. also PKetter, Trierer Theol. Ztschr. 56, ’47, 175-82 ( parq. often means [virgin] daughter: Apollon. Rhod. 2, 86 parq. Aijhvtew and the scholion on this has the following note: parqevnon ajnti; pou` qugatevra ; Lycophron vss. 1141, 1175; Diod. S. 8, 6, 2; 16, 55, 3; 20, 84, 3 [ pl. beside uiJoiv ]. Likewise Theod. Prodr. 1, 293 H. th;n sh;n parqevnon =‘your virgin daughter’; in 3, 332 t. eJautou` parqevnon refers to one’s ‘sweetheart’; likew. 6, 466, as well as the fact that parq. can mean simply ‘girl’ [ e.g. , Paus. 8, 20, 4]). RHSeboldt, Spiritual Marriage in the Early Church, CTM 30, ’59, 103-19; 176-86.—The Christian Church as parqevno" aJgnhv ( aJgnov" 1) 2 Cor 11:2 (on this subj. s. FCConybeare, Die jungfräul. Kirche u. die jungfräul. Mutter: ARW 8, ’05, 373 ff ; 9, ’06, 73 ff ; Cumont 3 283, 33).

2. Also used of men who have had no intercourse w. women; in this case it is masc. gender chaste man ( CIG IV 8784b; Proseuche Aseneth 6 and 8 Batiffol uses p. of Joseph; Pel.—Leg. 27, 1 uses it of Abel; Suidas of Abel and Melchizedek; Nonnus of the apostle John, who is also called ‘virgo’ in the Monarchian Prologues [ Kl. T. 1 2 ’08, p. 13, 13]) Rv 14:4 .— JMFord, The Mng. of ‘Virgin’, NTS 12, ’66, 293-9; GDelling, TW V 824-35. M-M. B. 90.**

A Greek-English Lexicon Gingrich & Danker​

Another pre-Christian Jewish translation.

Targum Isaiah 7:13 And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; is it a small thing to you that ye are troublesome(4) to the prophets, that ye refuse also the words of my God?
14 Therfore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son and she shall call His name Inmanuel.(5)

(4) Or “refuse the prophets.”
(5) i.e., “God with us.”​

 

[KCDAD]

Please do enlighten us how the Jewish scholars, who translated the LXX, got it wrong, 250 years +/- before the Christian era.

Egyptian scholars... those for whom neither Greek nor Hebrew were their primary language.

Why are you taking it from Matthew? He plagiarized Isaiah incorrectly... Isaiah uses Almah for Lass and Bethulah for A Chaste Woman. Whether the Egyptian translators used one word or another is irrelevant. What is in the OLDEST copies of Isaiah? ALMAH.

Thank for bringing up another mistake of Matthew... Emmanuel? You shall call his name Jesus, meaning God saves... NOT Emmanuel meaning God is with us.
What was the prophet from Nazareth's name? Y'shua... translated into English as JOSHUA. Not Jesus (Greek) and not Emmanuel (Hebrew). Everlasting Father... nope. No one ever called Jesus the father of anything.

But he really didn't mean it, did Isaiah?

If ... just IF Mary experienced a "virgin birth"... how exactly is Jesus a male child again???? Male chromosomes just appeared ( spontaneous generation) in Mary's fallopian tube?

I don't mind you having irrational beliefs... just keep them to yourself.

 

[KCDAD]

Logical fallacy, argument from silence. Also the Hebrew says "she will call." We do not know what private name Mary had for Jesus.

We don't know anything about Mary... do we?

You really think Mary called her son God with us? Would that be God for short? (BTW...The short version of Y'shua is "Chewy" or "Choo Choo")

Your argument is "just make something up" ... something doesn't make sense so the explanation is ... something that doesn't make any sense. Isaiah said the child will be called Emmanuel, but the Angel said to name him Jesus SOOOOOOOO he was named Jesus but everyone (in private) called him Emmanuel. EVEN though there is ABSOLUTELY NO RECORD of anyone ever referring to him as anything other Jesus.

"Maybe your Bible is full of errors mine is not."

Well. let me just say, that the LXX was translated for non-Hebrew reading persons... who would that be? Was there a Jew anywhere that wasn't taught Hebrew? Try reading the Hebrew version of Isaiah 7:14... Actually read the entire chapter in context and see who the prophesy is really about and why...

Your Bible is FULL of errors. Not only copy errors, but factual errors, as well.

 

[Christos Anesti]

Egyptian scholars... those for whom neither Greek nor Hebrew were their primary language.

They were Alexandrian Jews . Greek was the primary language of Alexandria.

The Dead Sea Scrolls are clear ALMAH is the word in 7:14...meaning young girl, not BETHULAH, meaning virgin.

The Septuagint was translated in stages in the 3rd and 1st centuries BC. It's not like the Dead Sea Scrolls come from a much earlier date. In fact the Dead sea scrolls have been dated from 150 BC to 70 AD.

 

[Christos Anesti]

I don't mind you having irrational beliefs... just keep them to yourself.

Would you say that to the founder of the Methodist movement? I ask because I see you have a Methodist icon next to your name.

"I believe that He was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin."

-John Wesley
​

 

[KCDAD]

Christos Anesti;They were Alexandrian Jews . Greek was the primary language of Alexandria.

I stand corrected. Thank you.
"Soon many of them no longer understand Hebrew. But they refuse to let this diminish their strong sense of a shared identity as God's special people, according to the covenant revealed in a book which they now cannot read. They commission, with Ptolemy's support and approval, the first translation of the Bible, the famous Greek version known as the Septuagint"

Read more: History of ALEXANDRIA
​

The Septuagint was translated in stages in the 3rd and 1st centuries BC. It's not like the Dead Sea Scrolls come from a much earlier date. In fact the Dead sea scrolls have been dated from 150 BC to 70 AD.

I beg to differ about the Qumran scrolls. Although I found the same dates you did on Wiki, other sources, here's one: The Dead Sea Scrolls

-They hold a different opinion. Note the later texts were not scriptural, but they were mostly community oriented.
"Today scholarly opinion regarding the time span and background of the Dead Sea Scrolls is anchored in historical, paleographic, and linguistic evidence, corroborated firmly by carbon 14-datings. Some manuscripts were written and copied in the third century B.C.E., but the bulk of the material, particularly the texts that reflect on a sectarian community, are originals or copies from the first century B.C.E.

The major advantage is that they were written in... ???? Yes, Hebrew.

 

[KCDAD]

Would you say that to the founder of the Methodist movement? I ask because I see you have a Methodist icon next to your name.

"I believe that He was made man, joining the human nature with the divine in one person; being conceived by the singular operation of the Holy Ghost, and born of the blessed Virgin Mary, who, as well after as before she brought Him forth, continued a pure and unspotted virgin."

-John Wesley​

...and he was infallible? Wesley suggested that reason and experience were ALSO essential to understanding faith and experiencing God. Do you think if he knew that Isaiah 7:14 was a mistranslation and Matthew and Luke told two completely different stories of Jesus conception, gestation and birth and that he would have written what you quoted? Do you think he realized that Jesus had brothers? Wesley is as much a victim of Roman Catholicism as Luther, Galileo and the thousands of heretics burned and excommunicated over the centuries... MEMES have a strange ability to color the way we read, and understand things... the virgin birth meme is one of those. The Son of God one is another.

I am not a Wesleyan, I am a Methodist. Charles Wesley, although I love some of his music was a terrible theologian, and his brother wasn't much better. But theology is not what made Wesley great... it was ministry. One can be totally wacked as it pertains to beliefs and doctrines ... who cares as long as you feed the hungry, cloth the naked and visit the imprisoned.

Please tell me one time Jesus questioned someone about their beliefs before loving them, or just plain talking and listening to them?
​

 

[Christos Anesti]

...and he was infallible?

No. I like the man myself but I can't say I agree with him on everything either. It was just odd to see a person in a denomination that had its origin in his methodist movement speak out so strongly against what he considered to be a very basic teaching of Christianity. It's one thing to say " I disagree with it" but to say that it's irrational and people should keep it to themselves ?

. who cares as long as you feed the hungry, cloth the naked and visit the imprisoned.

God cares. Thats why he warns us so often about false teachers and preserving the doctrines handed down to us. Seeing Christ in our neighbor and feeding him, etc are all wonderful things but so is right doctrine. You don't have to sacrifice the one for the other. They should go hand and hand.

Please tell me one time Jesus questioned someone about their beliefs before loving them, or just plain talking and listening to them?

Never. I wouldn't suggest that one do otherwise either.

 

[KCDAD]

Christos Anesti; It's one thing to say " I disagree with it" but to say that it's irrational and people should keep it to themselves ?

I would prefer EVERYONE keep their irrational beliefs to themselves. I don't care if it is professional sports, global manmade warming, evolution, abortion or the trinity... If you don't have reason to believe what you do , keep it to yourself.

God cares.

Since when? How many children die of starvation while evangelists get rich and fat? How many people die each day never having heard the 4 spiritual laws "turn or burn" message of salvation? God doesn't care.

Thats why he warns us so often about false teachers and preserving the doctrines handed down to us.

That's why he allowed or sent so many false teachers...

Never. I wouldn't suggest that one do otherwise either.

Then leave the beliefs and doctrines out of it altogether. God doesn't care about beliefs and doctrines.

 

[Christos Anesti]

That's why he allowed or sent so many false teachers

He also notes that this would take place and stresses the importance of not following them. Why would he mention false teachers at all if it didn't matter?

The Church is a hospital for the whole man. The dogmas of the Church are medicine and they are supposed to help us grow in the likeness of God and thus be able to love and serve our fellow man in the grace of the Holy Spirit. All these aspects of the Church (helping the poor, right doctrine, asceticism, tradition, prayer, peace making, the Bible, etc..) are integral and should not be separated. By separating them or even throwing out the aspects we consider less important we weaken the therapeutic effectiveness of the Church.

Then leave the beliefs and doctrines out of it altogether. God doesn't care about beliefs and doctrines.

Belief effects action because it effects our mind. Even the pagan sages like the Buddha knew this "Mind is the forerunner of all actions. All deeds are led by mind, created by mind". Sin, hatred, strife, all start in the mind. Belief is the minds programing...its software so to speak.

 

[KCDAD]

The Church is a hospital for the whole man. The dogmas of the Church are medicine and they are supposed to help us grow in the likeness of God and thus be able to love and serve our fellow man in the grace of the Holy Spirit.

...and how is that working after 2000 years of Christianity?

 

[Der Alte]

Egyptian scholars... those for whom neither Greek nor Hebrew were their primary language.

It has already been shown that you do not know what you are talking about here.

Why are you taking it from Matthew? He plagiarized Isaiah incorrectly... Isaiah uses Almah for Lass and Bethulah for A Chaste Woman. Whether the Egyptian translators used one word or another is irrelevant. What is in the OLDEST copies of Isaiah? ALMAH.

I note you have produced no evidence for anything you have said, and you have ignored my post above.

Thank for bringing up another mistake of Matthew... Emmanuel? You shall call his name Jesus, meaning God saves... NOT Emmanuel meaning God is with us.
What was the prophet from Nazareth's name? Y'shua... translated into English as JOSHUA. Not Jesus (Greek) and not Emmanuel (Hebrew). Everlasting Father... nope. No one ever called Jesus the father of anything.

You keep using words like "mistake" and "plagiarized" etc. but NO, ZERO, NONE evidence. Joshua and Jesus are not translations but transliterations. Do you know the difference? The better translation of "abi ad" is father of [i. e. "creator of "] eternity.

But he really didn't mean it, did Isaiah?

Is this supposed to mean something?

If ... just IF Mary experienced a "virgin birth"... how exactly is Jesus a male child again???? Male chromosomes just appeared ( spontaneous generation) in Mary's fallopian tube?

I don't mind you having irrational beliefs... just keep them to yourself.

Since you argue with virtually every tenet of Christianity why do you have a Christian icon? I don't mind anyone having anti-Bible, anti-Christ views but they should keep them to themself, especially on a Christian forum.

 

[Der Alte]

[ . . . ]Since when? How many children die of starvation while evangelists get rich and fat? How many people die each day never having heard the 4 spiritual laws "turn or burn" message of salvation? God doesn't care.[ . . . ]

What are you doing about it? Why are you here on a regular basis arguing against God, Jesus, and the Bible instead out there doing what you think the evangelists should be doing? How many 100s of missionaries are on the mission fields squeezing every bit of worth from every penny, doing without, while a handful of TV preachers do get rich?

 

[Der Alte]

We don't know anything about Mary... do we?

You really think Mary called her son God with us? Would that be God for short? (BTW...The short version of Y'shua is "Chewy" or "Choo Choo")

Is any of this supposed to mean something? What was that you said about "just make something up?"

Your argument is "just make something up" ... something doesn't make sense so the explanation is ... something that doesn't make any sense. Isaiah said the child will be called Emmanuel, but the Angel said to name him Jesus SOOOOOOOO he was named Jesus but everyone (in private) called him Emmanuel. EVEN though there is ABSOLUTELY NO RECORD of anyone ever referring to him as anything other Jesus.

Logical fallacy, argument from silence. There was no son born in the entire O.T. who was ever called Immanuel. If anyone called their son "Immanuel" that would be saying "God with us," so what is your point?

Well. let me just say, that the LXX was translated for non-Hebrew reading persons... who would that be? Was there a Jew anywhere that wasn't taught Hebrew? Try reading the Hebrew version of Isaiah 7:14... Actually read the entire chapter in context and see who the prophesy is really about and why...

Here you contradict your previous post where, according to you, Egyptians who did not know Hebrew translated the LXX. So did they or did they not know Hebrew. I think this is a more reliable source for information on the LXX.

Jewish Encyclopedia - The Septuagint.

The oldest and most important of all the versions made by Jews is that called "The Septuagint" ("Interpretatio septuaginta virorum" or "seniorum"). It is a monument of the Greek spoken by the large and important Jewish community of Alexandria; not of classic Greek, nor even of the Hellenistic style affected by Alexandrian writers. If the account given by Aristeas be true, some traces of Palestinian influence should be found; but a study of the Egyptian papyri, which are abundant for this particular period, is said by both Mahaffy and Deissmann to show a very close similarity between the language they represent and that of the Septuagint, not to mention the Egyptian words already recognized by both Hody and Eichhorn. These papyri have in a measure reinstated Aristeas (about 200 B.C.) in the opinion of scholars. Upon his "Letter to Philocrates" the tradition as to the origin of the Septuagint rests. It is now believed that even though he may have been mistaken in some points, his facts in general are worthy of credence (Abrahams, in "Jew. Quart. Rev." xiv. 321). According to Aristeas, the Pentateuch was translated at the time of Philadelphus, the second Ptolemy (285-247 B.C.), which translation was encouraged by the king and welcomed by the Jews of Alexandria. Grätz ("Gesch. der Juden," 3d ed., iii. 615) stands alone in assigning it to the reign of Philometor (181-146 B.C.). Whatever share the king may have had in the work, it evidently satisfied a pressing need felt by the Jewish community, among whom a knowledge of Hebrew was rapidly waning before the demands of every-day life.

Read more: JewishEncyclopedia.com - BIBLE TRANSLATIONS:​

Your Bible is FULL of errors. Not only copy errors, but factual errors, as well.

If you believe that why are you here with a Christian icon? How about producing some evidence, and I don't mean the standard copy/paste from the usual anti-Christian websites.

 

[Der Alte]

...and how is that working after 2000 years of Christianity?

Measure what you think you know against Muslim, Hindu, and pagan 3d world countries.

 

[it'sme]

Scriptures which show that the Holy Spirit is a distinct person.

The Holy Spirit is the third person in the Trinity. He is fully God. He is eternal, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, has a distinct will, a distinct mind, a distinct self, and can speak. He is alive. He is a person. He is not particularly visible in the Bible because His ministry is to bear witness of Jesus (John 15:26).

It was not untill fourth century did the idea that the holy spirit was a person get into Christianity. Justin Martyr of the second century taught that the holy spirit was an ‘influence or mode of operation of the Deity’; Hippolytus likewise ascribed no personality to the holy spirit. If you use all the Scriptures they show that the holy spirit is not a person but is God’s active force by which he accomplishes his purpose and executes his will. (JW publication)

Genesis 1:2 Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God’s active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters.

Act 6:5 And the thing spoken was pleasing to the whole multitude, and they selected Stephen, a man full of faith and holy spirit, and Philip and Proch′o‧rus and Ni‧ca′nor and Ti′mon and Par′me‧nas and Nic‧o‧la′us, a proselyte of Antioch;


Genesis 8:1 After that God remembered Noah and every wild beast and every domestic animal that was with him in the ark, and God caused a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters began to subside.

The Holy Spirit is just a force that God uses, and is not a person. "Stephen, a man full of faith and holy spirit," he was not possessed, Jehovah conciders that as not natural. That is what Satan's angels did.
If you think the Holy Spirit is a being, then this scriptures contradict with that.

 

[it'sme]

Since when? How many children die of starvation while evangelists get rich and fat? How many people die each day never having heard the 4 spiritual laws "turn or burn" message of salvation? God doesn't care.

Actually God does care.
There are many false religions even in Christianity. Jesus condemded religions that were only after money. It is a sign of a false religion. The starvation of over half the world in man's fault not Gods. People that die in this world will get a resurrection , with a chance of ever lasting life.
The time for God to step in was set up with Adam and Eve, the time does not change. Man basicly said to God through their actions of disobedience , that man wanted to rule himself, God has given man that opportunity , we can see how this worked out. God cares, but most men don't.