Why the Trinity is a False Doctrine

[rakovsky]

You're affirming that light was not the first thing Jesus Christ created and that somehow he brought water into existence before his first utterance? How very contradictory and nonsensical. This is why it is difficult to reason with people like you, you refuse to see the how unsound your own reasonings are.

So Cgaviria,

Were you raised Jehovah's Witness or do you have some other unusual predisposition that is forcing you to read the NT as nonTrinitarian?

You've accepted somehow that the Old Testament is inspired, even though alot of scholars think it has forgeries. maybe you can do the same for the rest of the Bible.

Or whatever.

Peace.

 

[rakovsky]

What do you think?

 

[cgaviria]

So Cgaviria,

Were you raised Jehovah's Witness or do you have some other unusual predisposition that is forcing you to read the NT as nonTrinitarian?

You've accepted somehow that the Old Testament is inspired, even though alot of scholars think it has forgeries. maybe you can do the same for the rest of the Bible.

Or whatever.

Peace.

I have never been a Jehovah's Witness and nor do I intend on being one, although I will admit that they are indeed correct concerning the trinity and some other matters, but not all matters, as they have their own set of errors as well.

Now, concerning this your sarcastic remark, I don't glean scriptures and pick and choose, I accept all scripture as the inspired word of God, however, these trinitarian verses are indeed spurious and I've proven and demonstrated that they are and that they have been forged onto the scriptures. Either you will believe this or you will not believe this. Whoever ended up knowing and believing the truth or lies will be made evident on the day of judgment.

 

[rakovsky]

OK

 

[cgaviria]

How is "water" not covered by "all"? John 1:3 by your own admission means, if nothing else, our Lord created "all."

This question though is also kind of inane, in that our Lord is God. All actions attributable to God are attributable to our Lord.

Because "all" is referring to all beings, not all things. You are making it out to be things, yet the correct interpretation of "all" should be all that are alive. It should read like this,

"All through him existed..."

That is the correct translation. When you add "things", you are now contradicting the Genesis account clearly demonstrating that all things were not created by Jesus, because water had already existed before he began speaking. Common man, be smart.

 

[cgaviria]

OK

Now you're making alot of sense. Excellent response.

 

[rakovsky]

I have never been a Jehovah's Witness and nor do I intend on being one, although I will admit that they are indeed correct concerning the trinity and some other matters, but not all matters, as they have their own set of errors as well.

Now, concerning this your sarcastic remark, I don't glean scriptures and pick and choose, I accept all scripture as the inspired word of God, however, these trinitarian verses are indeed spurious and I've proven and demonstrated that they are and that they have been forged onto the scriptures. Either you will believe this or you will not believe this. Whoever ended up knowing and believing the truth or lies will be made evident on the day of judgment.

Looks like a Blue v Purple battle.

Not sure why you would pick out a few Trinitarian verses and yet be cool with all the other extreme things like an angel that Peter couldn't see in the Tomb having rolled away a huge rock. (Luke 24 and John 20 and Matthew 28).

I mean, do you think Noah's ark is for real?

 

[rakovsky]

Now you're making alot of sense. Excellent response.

I like to throw in a few comments of agreement. I think your photo is nice.

 

[cgaviria]

Looks like a Blue v Purple battle.

Not sure why you would pick out a few Trinitarian verses and yet be cool with all the other extreme things like an angel that Peter couldn't see in the Tomb having rolled away a huge rock. (Luke 24 and John 20 and Matthew 28).

I mean, do you think Noah's ark is for real?

What is the purpose in your questioning? Do you believe Noah's ark was real, yes or no?

 

[cgaviria]

I like to throw in a few comments of agreement. I think your photo is nice.

Thank you, it was taken in Mexico.

 

[rakovsky]

Because "all" is referring to all beings, not all things. You are making it out to be things, yet the correct interpretation of "all" should be all that are alive. It should read like this,

"All through him existed..."

That is the correct translation. When you add "things", you are now contradicting the Genesis account clearly demonstrating that all things were not created by Jesus, because water had already existed before he began speaking. Common man, be smart.

"Xenophon" is right. Panta means "all" as in "all things" or everything, not necessarily all people.
Click here to see all the times this is used, ie. not referring to all people:
http://biblehub.com/greek/panta_3956.htm

But I trust in your skills of denial to find a way to deny that. Maybe you will say for example that YES, lots of times in the Bible Panta means all things, but that you can tell that in John's gospel this one time it means all people. Bravo!

Onward!

 

[rakovsky]

Thank you, it was taken in Mexico.

Cool. PS don't get offended. I am just having fun with you on this thread, please.

It is like talking to someone who teaches that King Arthur was real. Perhaps if a huge percent of Americans started forming Arthurian churches, this problem would be a more important issue.

Oh well.

Peace on.

 

[rakovsky]

What is the purpose in your questioning? Do you believe Noah's ark was real, yes or no?

Ummmmm...... If it was, it was probably something like this:

Not this:

Only 1 of these two floats because of certain rules of boat design having to do with size.

OK, I went. Now it's your turn, amigo.

 

[cgaviria]

"Xenophon" is right. Panta means "all" as in "all things" or everything, not necessarily all people.
Click here to see all the times this is used, ie. not referring to all people:
http://biblehub.com/greek/panta_3956.htm

But I trust in your skills of denial to find a way to deny that. Maybe you will say for example that YES, lots of times in the Bible Panta means all things, but that you can tell that in John's gospel this one time it means all people. Bravo!

Onward!

So while I go on denying "things", I'll let you go on denying the Genesis account entirely that all things weren't created by Jesus, hence why there were "things" that already began speaking.

 

[cgaviria]

Ummmmm...... If it was, it was probably something like this:

Not this:

Only 1 of these two floats because of certain rules of boat design having to do with size.

OK, I went. Now it's your turn, amigo.

You think you're clever, I can tell by your own words. Well for your information, boat size had nothing to do with flotation, do not gigantic cruise ships exist that are certainly able to float just fine? Already not sounding so clever, hate to break it to ya amigo.

 

[cgaviria]

Cool. PS don't get offended. I am just having fun with you on this thread, please.

It is like talking to someone who teaches that King Arthur was real. Perhaps if a huge percent of Americans started forming Arthurian churches, this problem would be a more important issue.

Oh well.

Peace on.

Awful analogy, pick a better one if you're going to try to sound clever and witty and somehow try to relate "King Arthur was real" to "trinity doctrine is false".

 

[rakovsky]

I'll let you go on denying the Genesis account entirely that all things weren't created by Jesus, hence why there were "things" that already began speaking.

Woaw, now I feel grammatically handicapped.

"Things" already began speaking because all things weren't made by Jesus?
But if Jesus made all thing they wouldn't speak?
Really confused here, sorry.

Also, check out the Noah's ark info:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...d-tablet-s-instructions-build-hand-India.html

Maybe a couple pairs of animals really did float on a boat millenia ago! Who knows. What you think?

 

[cgaviria]

Woaw, now I feel grammatically handicapped.

"Things" already began speaking because all things weren't made by Jesus?
But if Jesus made all thing they wouldn't speak?
Really confused here, sorry.

Also, check out the Noah's ark info:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...d-tablet-s-instructions-build-hand-India.html

Maybe a couple pairs of animals really did float on a boat millenia ago! Who knows. What you think?

That was a typo, should read,

I'll let you go on denying the Genesis account entirely that all things weren't created by Jesus, hence why there were "things" that already existed before he began speaking.

 

[rakovsky]

You think you're clever, I can tell by your own words.

Certainly not Gaviria!
If I was clever, I would have known what you meant in your post with all the double negatives:
http://www.christianforums.com/goto/post?id=69189259#post-69189259

Well for your information, boat size had nothing to do with flotation, do not gigantic cruise ships exist that are certainly able to float just fine?

OK, this is just one more reason why I will never win arguments with you.
If I tell you the obvious difference in their construction as per their floatability it won't matter anyway.

Also I do not have to ask a second time about whether you believe in the Noah Boat Flood story. I will let that one pass too, hermano.

Anyway, getting back to basics what can we discuss... Hmm... OK, so how do you know the resurrection was real and not just made up or a "vision" like Pentecostals have today?

 

[rakovsky]

I'll let you go on denying the Genesis account entirely that all things weren't created by Jesus, hence why there were "things" that already existed before he began speaking.

Yes, I am still confused what you are talking about. This is why I am not so clever. Maybe because it's late. Say it please a little simpler for common people like me.

If Jesus is the Alpha and Omega as per revelations, something existing within created time can say something and Jesus still talked first. Why? Because Jesus is the Alpha.
But I think I missed again in my point because I don't know what you mean.

Peace.