The Problem With The Trinity

[bbyrd009]

I just reviewed your entire discussion with Dave and only found one inconsequential question asked by you; "How might you feel "doing greater things" than the High Priest you worship, though?" While I disagree with Dave's position, I agree with him about you being so unclear. I also don't understand your refusal to quote the "questions" you are referring to. I can only assume you won't quote them because you never asked them. All you asked was one irrelevant question.

one is enough i guess; one is plenty. But just for you i'll say that i have been in a couple of pretend conversations with Dave before, and it's more like 20 Qs ok. Btw how did you like his answer to my Q?

 

[bbyrd009]

If you cannot make yourself clear it is either an act or a condition. If it is an act, I'm not impressed. If it is a condition, I'll make more of an effort to understand what you say.

Dave, if you still can't reply to the post is it an act or a condition ok
talk to gadar, and i'll go away, and everyone's happy

 

[Dave L]

Dave, if you still can't reply to the post is it an act or a condition ok
talk to gadar, and i'll go away, and everyone's happy

Which post?

 

[bbyrd009]

Which post?

ha, you're killin me Dave, now i gotta clean sugared coffee off the whole screen lol

 

[Dave L]

ha, you're killin me Dave, now i gotta clean sugared coffee off the whole screen lol

So what kind of person makes an obscure challenge and then mocks those who cannot understand his manner of speech?

 

[bbyrd009]

So what kind of person makes an obscure challenge and then mocks those who cannot understand his manner of speech?

i'm going to let someone else point the post out to you this time wadr Dave--if it even exists that is--bc you are right i obv have issues and we should not even be talking i guess. It's only one irrelevant Q anyway, even if there are 2 or 3 other observations in it you might have acknowledged, but again you don't have to on my acct ok

 

[Dave L]

i'm going to let someone else point the post out to you this time wadr Dave--if it even exists that is--bc you are right i obv have issues and we should not even be talking i guess. It's only one irrelevant Q anyway, even if there are 2 or 3 other observations in it you might have acknowledged, but again you don't have to on my acct ok

??????????????

 

[gadar perets]

Are you an original language expert?

One does not need to be an original language expert to compare the NA 27 Greek text to the NA 28 Greek text. NA 27 has the article as do the majority of all mss. and NA 28 doesn't.

 

[Dave L]

One does not need to be an original language expert to compare the NA 27 Greek text to the NA 28 Greek text. NA 27 has the article as do the majority of all mss. and NA 28 doesn't.

Have you considered the critical apparatus in NA 27? It's all there.

 

[bbyrd009]

??????????????

ha well maybe someone will tell me how i could possibly make it any clearer Dave, i mean gadar has refed it and i have quoted it again, dunno what else to do bro sry

 

[gadar perets]

Have you considered the critical apparatus in NA 27? It's all there.

Please direct me to a link.

I would also add that the texts in question date from the fourth century or later. Well after the false teaching of the trinity was adopted. Texts containing "Iesous" are no doubt corrupted, especially since the Son is nowhere to be found in the Exodus account anywhere else in Scripture. To use that questionable verse to teach Yeshua preexisted and saved Israel out of Egypt when Scripture clearly teaches Yeshua's Father, Almighty YHWH, did that is utterly absurd.

 

[Dave L]

Please direct me to a link.

I would also add that the texts in question date from the fourth century or later. Well after the false teaching of the trinity was adopted. Texts containing "Iesous" are no doubt corrupted, especially since the Son is nowhere to be found in the Exodus account anywhere else in Scripture. To use that questionable verse to teach Yeshua preexisted and saved Israel out of Egypt when Scripture clearly teaches Yeshua's Father, Almighty YHWH, did that is utterly absurd.

I have it in the critical apparatus of my NA 27 hard copy. No internet link as of yet.

 

[justbyfaith]

To you, what I teach is false doctrine because you are so indoctrinated into trinitarianism or something similar that you can no longer discern the truth.

I know the truth...that Jesus Christ is the God who made each and every last one of us. To deny this plain fact of scripture is not only to teach false doctrine...it is to place one's self in a situation wherein if he died tonight, it would be in his sins.

Where do people go in eternity, who die in their sins...heaven or hell?

 

[gadar perets]

I know the truth...that Jesus Christ is the God who made each and every last one of us. To deny this plain fact of scripture is not only to teach false doctrine...it is to place one's self in a situation wherein if he died tonight, it would be in his sins.

Where do people go in eternity, who die in their sins...heaven or hell?

No, you don't know the truth. What you know is based on faulty translations, additions to the text and reading the Son into various texts so that he becomes our Creator rather than his Father YHWH who created everything all by Himself via speaking everything into existence with His own words.

Also, my salvation is not based on believing Yeshua is God. It is based on believing he is the SON OF GOD (John 3:16; 1 John 5:5, etc.). "God" is Yeshua's Father.

 

[bbyrd009]

Where do people go in eternity, who die in their sins...heaven or hell?

nope, but ty for playing

"you and your sons will be here with me"

 

[bbyrd009]

ha well maybe someone will tell me how i could possibly make it any clearer Dave, i mean gadar has refed it and i have quoted it again, dunno what else to do bro sry

now maybe it becomes clearer why it is pointless to make the truth too available to ppl, just puts them on the spot, etc

 

[Helen]

Where do people go in eternity, who die in their sins...heaven or hell?

Whether they are actually "in sin" is not our call, neither is where to go or don't go....we are not all wise and neither can we 'see the heart' as God can.

 

[bbyrd009]

someone pls tell me what a critical apparatus is, ty

"A critical apparatus is often a by-product of textual criticism."

ah nevermind, pass, ty

 

[justbyfaith]

Whether they are actually "in sin" is not our call, neither is where to go or don't go....we are not all wise and neither can we 'see the heart' as God can.

Right...however we know from scripture that if someone denies that Jesus is the great I AM, they will die in their sins (John 8:24)...so scripture makes the call for us and determines that the Deity of Christ is essential doctrine as pertains to our salvation.

 

[gadar perets]

Right...however we know from scripture that if someone denies that Jesus is the great I AM, they will die in their sins (John 8:24)...so scripture makes the call for us and determines that the Deity of Christ is essential doctrine as pertains to our salvation.

Scripture does not say what you interpret it to say. That is your personal, erroneous interpretation of John 8:24 by taking Yeshua's words out of context and adding in your own words.