the trinity

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Boy how I love biblical scholars and know-it-alls. The truth is the Bible was written in Hebrew, Chaldean, and Greek. Prior to the King James Version, all Bibles were retranslations of the Latin Vulgate. The Dead Sea Scrolls, by the by, were translated using the Ethiopian Bible, not the newer Latin Vulgate. The KJV was translated from available manuscripts and is not cannonized as some claim. It is amazing how little Bible . . . ss . . . sss . . . scholars . . . know about the Bible.

[turtle]

Turtle:

That is nice but what you describe is self serving and does not fit, any more than I could say in English about yours truly; Me, Myself and I, are one and the same and it is true! However that is NOT what the Bible states about God, nor his Son Jesus! Also, nor is that what is represented or meant by the Trinity or Oneness so your analogy, example does not fit!

If you are to compare this appropriately, you should say something like, I am a Father, and I have a Son, yet me as a person-Father, and my as a person-Son and oh yea, I have another person, to part of me, that is really ONLY ME IN ONE PERSON, as that is NOT what the Bible states plainly states at all!!!!

Think about it: You believe in this and have no scripture that plainly, clearly, simply and grammatically states this and I have many, many scriptures that show that Jesus has a God and Father and more!!! No fanciful explanations needed!!!

I wish you well in your beliefs!!!

TP

Toilet paper,

Exodus 24:9-11 KJV
(9) Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel:
(10) And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.
(11) And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

turtle

[turtle]

Boy how I love biblical scholars and know-it-alls. The truth is the Bible was written in Hebrew, Chaldean, and Greek. Prior to the King James Version, all Bibles were retranslations of the Latin Vulgate. The Dead Sea Scrolls, by the by, were translated using the Ethiopian Bible, not the newer Latin Vulgate. The KJV was translated from available manuscripts and is not cannonized as some claim. It is amazing how little Bible . . . ss . . . sss . . . scholars . . . know about the Bible.

ATAM you really know very little. Here we go I answered this somewhere else but i well put it hear again.

original manuscripts 100 A.D. of the new testament in greek - 1500bc, Then the three codex (alexandrianus 425AD., Vaticanus 340ad, sinaitious 330 ad. Vulgate 400 AD Wycliffe 1380, tyndale 1525, coverdale 1535, Matthews 1537, Geneva 1560, Bishops 1568, douay 1610, King James 1611, revised version 1881, amerian standard 1901, 1952 RSV, berkley1959, amplied 1965, jb 1956,NEB1970, Nasb 1971, TEV1976, Niv 1978 and NKJV 1982

Reference source Thompson Chain Reference Bible one of the best on the market today for study and research on your own.

And to add insult to injury to predator, the KJV used Hebrew and greek test but used wyecliffe as a guide language wise. See something that you loose over time is language. language changes. And has it changes so does context and meaning of words. That means alot of strange jargon. So I am old school and some of you knew school but the word of God does not change and if you study NASB, NKJV or any of them you are going to get the same message. Of course some KJV onliest do not agree with this. I am not a stickler if someone wants to use something else but I teach from KJV.

[truth_child]

pretoriumm dont you use the new world trans?

[praetorian]

What a fraud!! How udderly arrogant you are indeed. I like this verse!!!

"For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie." Revelation 22:15 KJV

Shall we talk about the many end of the world perdiction your religion has made? hehehehhehehehehehehee


TATM:

I thought you would like that, as again, your post does nothing to reply and or establish that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” from the Bible! In fact, you have not (nor ever will be able) shown ONE scripture that plainly, clearly, simply and grammatically states “Jesus is God” and that “God is Triune” as opposed to the many ones posted above that simply state that Jesus has a “God and Father!”

Now, should you which to discuss what the Bible mentions as end time prophesies, I will be more than happy to do so, and even more particular, what you “believe” (since I am sure you have verified those sources, as you know everything, just ask you) the JW’s did, though state two things here: 1. Start a New Thread as this is another subject and or place it as a sub section to the Jehovah’s Witnesses here in fact and of course let me know as your topic (current flavor of avoidance) does nothing to address the fact that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” and; I have a surpise for your, the JW’s have NEVER EVER written a “prediction” that the “World would Come to an End” as this claims are not only exaggerated, and repeated and added to by others, over time, but have in fact, discussed and placed in print matters related to Bible Chronology which again is Bible and not Dogma!

So have it as you seem to have a propensity to make yourself look like cow poop!!!

Dogma, I have some Dogma for sale! Oops, sorry you already bought stocks in The Anathasian Creed!

TP

[praetorian]

Tp, there are Translationed translated from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Which is older then caldean text. How do you explain this. As far as new testament it as you know translated from greek and old testament from the Hebrew. Some Bibles are translated by the old roman text that is what you use.

Turtle:

You should really make up your mind and stick to it, when you say I will NOT post, I will, as it sounds like you suffer, from among other things, schizophrenia!

Now, your statement is simply not complete so I will have to guess at what I think it is (really slippery ground) and presume you are referring to the King James Version of the Bible! If so, you are not ONLY DEAD WRONG HERE---FACT, however, it goes to clearly establish that you do not know what you are writing about!!!!

You know, it is in the NAME King James Version, and it is VERSION and NOT a TRANSLATION why? This is part of your problem, you want to create an explanation for things, like this and your Trinity and others, despite evidence to the contrary! It is a VERSION because for example the New Testament of the KJV was translated from the “Textus Receptus” which itself is a Latin translation from the Greek!!!!!! FACT!!!!!! What is wrong with you!!!!!! Everyone knows this!!!!

And as for your claim that the (again presuming) the KJV Old Testament was translated from the “Dead Sea Scrolls” is INSANE as they Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered between 1947 and 1956, which is nearly 300 HUNDRED YEARS AFTER THE KJV was written in 1611!!!!!! Do the math!!!!

YOu wonder why what you believe is so WRONG! You need to get the basics straight FIRST BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH AND WRITE SOMETHING!!!!!

Please get real!!!!!

I do not use any Bible from a “Roman Text” what in the world are you talking about here?

And you wonder why you can’t see the TRUTH! You are totally misinformed to an outrageous degree that is beyond comprehension and words!!!!

TP

[praetorian]

Toilet paper,

Exodus 24:9-11 KJV
(9) Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel:
(10) And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.
(11) And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

turtle


Turtle:

What in the world are you attempting to express here, that you did not use toilet paper when writing this? It makes no sense at all!

Please, unless you can’t show me clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically that what you believe, “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” like I can show you clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically I any BIBLE of your choosing, that Jesus has a God and Father, and that Jesus is God’s Servent, and that the Head of Jesus is God and that Jesus is Subject and Obedient to his God and Father, then why are you insisting in writing things that make no sense?

If you are attempting to use Exodus 24:9-11 as some sort of proof that these three along with Moses, actually “saw God” then know that at Exodus 33:20, God told Moses, (KJV) “And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” So which one of these verses is correct?

First the Bible does not contradict, as though God made a mistake. Second you cannot ignore this second verse I pointed out above as that allows you to then pick and choose, which scripture you want to believe to suit your purpose nor is this a proper way to analyze or research a Bible subject or question. Third, similar expressions as the one you refer to above at Exodus 24: 9-11, are used in the Bible demonstrating what how these verses in Exodus 24: 9-11, are to be understood! Note Genesis 32: 1-32, as verse 1 in the KJV states, “And Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him” and then verse 30 states “And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.”

Therefore you are unable to use this to establish anything with relation to someone anyone actually seeing God, as no one (meaning HUMAN) can see him and live!!!!!

Go away and learn the Bible from truthful sources as your waste time making statements about things you know nothing about!!! While it is OK to no nothing it is NOT OK to act as though you do as this is a LIE!!!!!

Not to mention the lies you then repeat to others, even though you are sincerely wrong!!!! Sincerity does not make a wrong right no matter how strongly or honestly you believe something, WRONG IS WRONG!!!

TP

[praetorian]

pretoriumm dont you use the new world trans?

TC:

Yes, I do, use the New World Translation, though as one of many, several others that I have in my home and office library!

And if you have a question about it I will be more than happy to address it, however, if you choose to take a position against it, then before you open your mouth write something you know nothing about that you take from the internet, and ASSUMME it is right, why don’t you do the research yourself? Do you have a NWT?

If you plan on repeating like a parrot things you do not know, then, know that Polly will get more than the crackers she bargained for!!!!

TP

[turtle]

Turtle:

What in the world are you attempting to express here, that you did not use toilet paper when writing this? It makes no sense at all!

Please, unless you can’t show me clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically that what you believe, “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” like I can show you clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically I any BIBLE of your choosing, that Jesus has a God and Father, and that Jesus is God’s Servent, and that the Head of Jesus is God and that Jesus is Subject and Obedient to his God and Father, then why are you insisting in writing things that make no sense?

If you are attempting to use Exodus 24:9-11 as some sort of proof that these three along with Moses, actually “saw God” then know that at Exodus 33:20, God told Moses, (KJV) “And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” So which one of these verses is correct?

First the Bible does not contradict, as though God made a mistake. Second you cannot ignore this second verse I pointed out above as that allows you to then pick and choose, which scripture you want to believe to suit your purpose nor is this a proper way to analyze or research a Bible subject or question. Third, similar expressions as the one you refer to above at Exodus 24: 9-11, are used in the Bible demonstrating what how these verses in Exodus 24: 9-11, are to be understood! Note Genesis 32: 1-32, as verse 1 in the KJV states, “And Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him” and then verse 30 states “And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.”

Therefore you are unable to use this to establish anything with relation to someone anyone actually seeing God, as no one (meaning HUMAN) can see him and live!!!!!

Go away and learn the Bible from truthful sources as your waste time making statements about things you know nothing about!!! While it is OK to no nothing it is NOT OK to act as though you do as this is a LIE!!!!!

Not to mention the lies you then repeat to others, even though you are sincerely wrong!!!! Sincerity does not make a wrong right no matter how strongly or honestly you believe something, WRONG IS WRONG!!!

TP

Who did God see then TP. I mean think about it who did Moses see?

Exodus 33:11-12 KJV
(11) And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
(12) And Moses said unto the LORD, See, thou sayest unto me, Bring up this people: and thou hast not let me know whom thou wilt send with me. Yet thou hast said, I know thee by name, and thou hast also found grace in my sight.

There is a simple answer TP I understand your confusion and it is simple I John 4 explains it.

1 John 4:12-21 KJV
(12) No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
(13) Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
(14) And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
(15) Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
(16) And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
(17) Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
(18) There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.
(19) We love him, because he first loved us.
(20) If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
(21) And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.

God is Spirit, God the Father and God the Son are Flesh. They both sit on the thrown. God the Holy Spirit is over the Thrown. And the key point is love. God is love. Love must be taught and not hate. When Moses and the elders receive God's spirit

Numbers 11:16-27 KJV
(16) And the LORD said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee.
(17) And I will come down and talk with thee there: and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone.
(18) And say thou unto the people, Sanctify yourselves against to morrow, and ye shall eat flesh: for ye have wept in the ears of the LORD, saying, Who shall give us flesh to eat? for it was well with us in Egypt: therefore the LORD will give you flesh, and ye shall eat.
(19) Ye shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, neither ten days, nor twenty days;
(20) But even a whole month, until it come out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome unto you: because that ye have despised the LORD which is among you, and have wept before him, saying, Why came we forth out of Egypt?
(21) And Moses said, The people, among whom I am, are six hundred thousand footmen; and thou hast said, I will give them flesh, that they may eat a whole month.
(22) Shall the flocks and the herds be slain for them, to suffice them? or shall all the fish of the sea be gathered together for them, to suffice them?
(23) And the LORD said unto Moses, Is the LORD'S hand waxed short? thou shalt see now whether my word shall come to pass unto thee or not.
(24) And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the LORD, and gathered the seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the tabernacle.
(25) And the LORD came down in a cloud, and spake unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease.
(26) But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad: and the spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were written, but went not out unto the tabernacle: and they prophesied in the camp.
(27) And there ran a young man, and told Moses, and said, Eldad and Medad do prophesy in the camp.

If you go the Exodus 32 you find out why God will no longer appear to Moses or others. They did the worse offense they could. The story of the golden calf. Levitical tribe killed.

Exodus 32:26-35 KJV
(26) Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD'S side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him.
(27) And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.
(28) And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.
(29) For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves to day to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day.
(30) And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.
(31) And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold.
(32) Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.
(33) And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.
(34) Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them.
(35) And the LORD plagued the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.

Moses still lead the people to the promise land with his angels leading. This one command concerning Moses and Levitical tribe who killed. That is why King David could build the temple because he was a killer.

[turtle]

Now understand if a person kills can they see God today. I have heard so many say yes and so many say no with no prooff. Yet you and me will do we know better, I think you know not. Christ came to wash away all our sins. Including killing. But killing is wrong. Soldiers out there only need to confess Jesus Christ is Lord. His blood does what the law can not do it protect us from ourselves.

[truth_child]

and the new world trans is jw and is an abnomanation period

[turtle]

TC you know I try to be nice to everyone, so chill well you. This is a discussion with a JW. He is entitled to his beliefs even though we disagree. Your attitude stinks. You refuse to back up what you say with your Bible. You need to know why you believe what you do. Arron, not just mimick like a parrot.

[turtle]

Arron the Love of God is not one to take revenge that is man's way. God's spirit is love. Hate is not of God. I seen some that seem to have love that you wonder how they could not know Christ. And yet they know the Love of God that Father, and did not know of the Savior or that He was for them as well. It is the hate the bigotry that goes around condemning and not loving that will force people into hell. One needs to love even when one wants to hate. God of course knows the heart and even if you put on the face of love unless you have love in your heart you will never completely show love. There be a falseness about you. We all have that problem to some degree for we are human take time to study Romans7

[praetorian]

Turtle:

There is something wrong with you! First, you cannot actually believe (though with you, it is quote possible) that Moses actually saw God’s face as the scriptures (so don’t kill the messenger, and DO NOT IGNORE WHAT IS SAYS ALSO) at Exodus 33:20 clearly stats, “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” So if you believe that Moses did see God’s face then you need to reconcile thjis scripture that says that Moses or any other humans simply cannot! NOTE: Your ignoring the scripture while trying to prove your point is absolutely insane!!!!! It is NOT reasonable!!!!!

Therefore in answer to your question, “Who did God see then TP. I mean think about it who did Moses see?” no one, as Moses or any other Human cannot literally SEE GOD and Live!!!!!!! Therefore it MUST mean something else! You are a very interesting person you; The term “face to face” in Hebrew implies direct communication not that he Moses saw God’s ACTUAL FACE!!!! No more than when it speaks of God’s hands, as he does not have hands in the human sense, these are expressions, used in order for God who is a spirit being, to communicate! This expression of “Seeing God” is also used in the Bible in the sense of figuratively speaking, not literally, as one who does what God wants him to do, thus obedient or faithful can be “said” (again figuratively) as living while seeing God! People today often say, that you can “See God” in his creation, or in nature, but that does not mean they literally see God like in a sandwich or something!!!!!

You then state “There is a simple answer TP I understand your confusion and it is simple I John 4 explains it” and NO it doesn’t!!!! Are you on drugs?

You then state, “God is Spirit, God the Father and God the Son are Flesh. They both sit on the thrown. God the Holy Spirit is over the Thrown. And the key point is love. God is love. Love must be taught and not hate. When Moses and the elders receive God's spirit” and I reply; The Bible tells us clearly that God is a spirit, but no where does it state that “God the Father and God the Son are Flesh” in fact, these terms, “God the Father” and “God the Son” are not Bible terms but are found outside the Bible in dogma, creeds and theology, NOT BIBLE! You are much mistaken! Yes, the Bible tells us that God and Jesus sit on thrones; however it does not state that they sit in the same exact throne and also that other faithful Christians will also sit on thrones in heaven with God to judge people, therefore Jesus shares ruling his Father and God’s Kingdom with them!!!!! If you say, “God the Holy Spirit” is over anything, then they cannot be the same, as someone is over someone else!!!!! And the term “God the Holy Spirit” is NOT found in the Bible but is, in dogma, creeds and theology, outside the Bible! You and the folks here love to choose words and beliefs outside the Bible that are not taught explicitly in the Bible and I don’t! However you should be either man or woman enough to admit it!!!! Good for you!!!!

Your reference to Numbers above and in fact nothing in your post, does anything to prove that the Bible clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states, that “God is Jesus” or that “God is Triune” you are having issues comprehending this clear FACT, because the dogma you believe in, outside the Bible tells you otherwise, and that is your problem and not mine!!!!

You state, “If you go the Exodus 32 you find out why God will no longer appear to Moses or others. They did the worse offense they could. The story of the golden calf. Levitical tribe killed” and reply, NO, as nothing in this account even remotely comes close to addressing the statement which I quote here, which is based on the wrong understanding if scripture and state opinion that is NOT correct as it is not at all correct in the Bible!!!!

You then end your post with “Moses still lead the people to the promise land with his angels leading. This one command concerning Moses and Levitical tribe who killed. That is why King David could build the temple because he was a killer” and I ask you; what does this have to do with the price of tea in China? In other words, nothing here discusses the matter at hand, and that is, where in the Bible do you see plainly, simply, clearly and grammatically state that “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” as clearly as it states that Jesus has a God and Father, and therefore are not the same!!!!!

TP

[praetorian]

and the new world trans is jw and is an abnomanation period

And you can say this because you are an expert right? Also, since it is only of many, are all others that I use an abomination also? Lastly, your bizarre post here as no place as I have NEVER quoted from the NWT here to prove any point, as if I did that or did so ONLY you point or opinion, may make sense, however, since what you state is emotional and baseless opinion, then what makes your opinion better than mine? Watch yourself, in the answer to the last question, as you certainly cannot be suggesting you are better than anyone else, JW or NOT!

In conclusion what does that make scholars, both Jewish and not, that have praised the NWT as compared to you a non scholar?

Get a life and mental help!

TP

[truth_child]

turtle my dear friend if you think there is something false about me then tell me so i can correct it ( if there is any thing wrong like you say )
i dont beleive one can know THE FATHER OR THE SON OR THE HOLY GHOST unless they have a personal relationship with them. as far as hating any one i dont. i do not like those who are the enemies OF GOD and i do belevive in fighting for the freedoms of our country or my family and i dont mimic like a parrot why do you say such things

[praetorian]

TC you know I try to be nice to everyone, so chill well you. This is a discussion with a JW. He is entitled to his beliefs even though we disagree. Your attitude stinks. You refuse to back up what you say with your Bible. You need to know why you believe what you do. Arron, not just mimick like a parrot.

WELL DONE! Even if we don't agree, making bizarre statements does not mean you are right and I am wrong!!!

I could see if in my replies I did not use as a reference easy to understand scriptures, you felt crazy, but, since I do you should deal with the scriptures I quote and try to understand them before you open your mouth!!!

TP

[truth_child]

what bizarre statement have i made. if i give you scripture you dont beleive it and tell me to look it up in such and such a tras or some other book

[truth_child]

i think you just want to argue to prove your point and i want do that

[praetorian]

turtle my dear friend if you think there is something false about me then tell me so i can correct it ( if there is any thing wrong like you say )
i dont beleive one can know THE FATHER OR THE SON OR THE HOLY GHOST unless they have a personal relationship with them. as far as hating any one i dont. i do not like those who are the enemies OF GOD and i do belevive in fighting for the freedoms of our country or my family and i dont mimic like a parrot why do you say such things

TC:

I am not your friend but a person that exchanges posts with you! If you perceive me as an enemy then I am in good company as I do not alter the word of my Father and God and of his Christ in order to suit my needs, you do this!!!!

Do you want to talk freedom TC.

There is more than one way to fight for the rights of the US and it’s freedoms! You and no one you know fought cases before the US Supreme court to have the rights and freedoms you enjoy under the freedom of the press and speech!!! Do you who did? JW’s!!!!

As to respect for this country. A teacher once conducting an experiment called a child who was known to be a from a patriotic family (maybe yours) to the front of a class and told the child to spit on the US Flag! And the child did! The teacher then called one of Jehovah’s Witnesses to the front of the class and told the child to do the same thing! Guess What? The child refused and answered that just because the child did not salute or worship it, that the child respected it!!! Now, which one of these folks do you want as a neighbor? I know who you would, the one who by mouth respected the county but crapped all over it’s people and nation!!!! Good for you!!

One more thing oh enlightened ignorant one (how is that for an oxymoron) among JW’s are former solders that served their country not ONLY in the US but in all other countries too, so you do not know what you are speaking about!!!!

TP

[turtle]

Turtle:

There is something wrong with you! First, you cannot actually believe (though with you, it is quote possible) that Moses actually saw God’s face as the scriptures (so don’t kill the messenger, and DO NOT IGNORE WHAT IS SAYS ALSO) at Exodus 33:20 clearly stats, “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” So if you believe that Moses did see God’s face then you need to reconcile thjis scripture that says that Moses or any other humans simply cannot! NOTE: Your ignoring the scripture while trying to prove your point is absolutely insane!!!!! It is NOT reasonable!!!!!

Therefore in answer to your question, “Who did God see then TP. I mean think about it who did Moses see?” no one, as Moses or any other Human cannot literally SEE GOD and Live!!!!!!! Therefore it MUST mean something else! You are a very interesting person you; The term “face to face” in Hebrew implies direct communication not that he Moses saw God’s ACTUAL FACE!!!! No more than when it speaks of God’s hands, as he does not have hands in the human sense, these are expressions, used in order for God who is a spirit being, to communicate! This expression of “Seeing God” is also used in the Bible in the sense of figuratively speaking, not literally, as one who does what God wants him to do, thus obedient or faithful can be “said” (again figuratively) as living while seeing God! People today often say, that you can “See God” in his creation, or in nature, but that does not mean they literally see God like in a sandwich or something!!!!!

You then state “There is a simple answer TP I understand your confusion and it is simple I John 4 explains it” and NO it doesn’t!!!! Are you on drugs?

You then state, “God is Spirit, God the Father and God the Son are Flesh. They both sit on the thrown. God the Holy Spirit is over the Thrown. And the key point is love. God is love. Love must be taught and not hate. When Moses and the elders receive God's spirit” and I reply; The Bible tells us clearly that God is a spirit, but no where does it state that “God the Father and God the Son are Flesh” in fact, these terms, “God the Father” and “God the Son” are not Bible terms but are found outside the Bible in dogma, creeds and theology, NOT BIBLE! You are much mistaken! Yes, the Bible tells us that God and Jesus sit on thrones; however it does not state that they sit in the same exact throne and also that other faithful Christians will also sit on thrones in heaven with God to judge people, therefore Jesus shares ruling his Father and God’s Kingdom with them!!!!! If you say, “God the Holy Spirit” is over anything, then they cannot be the same, as someone is over someone else!!!!! And the term “God the Holy Spirit” is NOT found in the Bible but is, in dogma, creeds and theology, outside the Bible! You and the folks here love to choose words and beliefs outside the Bible that are not taught explicitly in the Bible and I don’t! However you should be either man or woman enough to admit it!!!! Good for you!!!!

Your reference to Numbers above and in fact nothing in your post, does anything to prove that the Bible clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states, that “God is Jesus” or that “God is Triune” you are having issues comprehending this clear FACT, because the dogma you believe in, outside the Bible tells you otherwise, and that is your problem and not mine!!!!

You state, “If you go the Exodus 32 you find out why God will no longer appear to Moses or others. They did the worse offense they could. The story of the golden calf. Levitical tribe killed” and reply, NO, as nothing in this account even remotely comes close to addressing the statement which I quote here, which is based on the wrong understanding if scripture and state opinion that is NOT correct as it is not at all correct in the Bible!!!!

You then end your post with “Moses still lead the people to the promise land with his angels leading. This one command concerning Moses and Levitical tribe who killed. That is why King David could build the temple because he was a killer” and I ask you; what does this have to do with the price of tea in China? In other words, nothing here discusses the matter at hand, and that is, where in the Bible do you see plainly, simply, clearly and grammatically state that “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” as clearly as it states that Jesus has a God and Father, and therefore are not the same!!!!!

TP

TP your view is base on the NWT and not on the scripture and for that reason it my text seems like ties to you. But if you closely examine what as been posted in scripture and read it in context with what I said in explanation you will see you are wrong with understanding from mainstream Christianity, not JW Christianity. I see JW Christianity built on lies. You refute what I give you proof of in a translation you and I both agree on. So you are the one with the problem and I feel sorry for you. That even though you disagree you can not see how well the Bible speaks truth from point A to point whatever. So TP lets not discuss our differences concerning faith any longer, but we do have to live in this world together and make it a better place. So let us focus on love and keeping of the law of this land. Protecting it from killers, theives, child molestors, rapiest and so forth. We do not have to agree religiously we do have to agree to protect each other rights other wise we become distinct. Not just ourselves but all of mankind.

[praetorian]

what bizarre statement have i made. if i give you scripture you dont beleive it and tell me to look it up in such and such a tras or some other book

If the scripture you refers to clearly simply states that Jesus is God and that God is Triune, I will convert to your religion, however, if by clear, and simply you have to interpret it, or add to it, and or turn to outside the Bible in order to understand it, then NO, you have not shown a scripture, not you nor anyone on this board, not a ONE that does so, and you have the audacity to state I am wrong, when I quote MANY scriptures that tell you that Jesus is NOT the same as his God and Father!!!

Get bent!

TP

[turtle]

TC it is time you start walking with God and not copy other leaders. Read the word for yourself and read it daily. Christian leaders are to keep us on track but not to be worshipped. Arron, I have to decide to cut the strings or you may never fly. I have caught you to often like a momma bird, it is time you to start answer the question like praetorian and backing them with scripture. And if you can not then you need to go to another board where you can fellowship and gain more knowledge of who God is. This place is not necessarily a Christian site but some of are running around.

[truth_child]

pretorium did i say you were my firend? no i dont beleive i did although you are as far as i am concerned and yes i beleive that i have the same right as you do gaurenteed me by the constituion of the UNITED STATES and BY GOD HIMSELF

[turtle]

Tp how is looking at hebrew and greek manuscripts of the Bible going outside the Bible. using a greek or Hebrew dictionary to look up a word so you know what it is smart. So what I can't read hebrew or greek but I can look up those words in a translator so I can interpet what I am reading and compare it with english translation of the Bible KJV. Do you even bother to do that. No. I say you have those dictionaries available to you if nothing more on line. You are the hypocrite if I ever seen one.

[truth_child]

TURTLE YOU HAVE NEVER "CAUGHT ME LIKE A MAMA BIRD" AND PRETORIUM YOU DONT KNW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BY SAYS JESUS IS NOT EQUAL WITH THE FAOTHER. and also are you and turtle the same person for you both seem to think i am talking to you when i am not

[turtle]

No tC I have caught you not defending your true beliefs. Nothing more nothing less or least not hte one's you practice. Mammon and God.

[truth_child]

when and where ? i know i dont aways give scripture but i give people credit (especially if they are christian or pretending to be one ) to know what im talking about

[turtle]

TC forgive me I got you mixed up with someone else it been a bad year. Especially the last four months

[praetorian]

TP your view is base on the NWT and not on the scripture and for that reason it my text seems like ties to you. But if you closely examine what as been posted in scripture and read it in context with what I said in explanation you will see you are wrong with understanding from mainstream Christianity, not JW Christianity. I see JW Christianity built on lies. You refute what I give you proof of in a translation you and I both agree on. So you are the one with the problem and I feel sorry for you. That even though you disagree you can not see how well the Bible speaks truth from point A to point whatever. So TP lets not discuss our differences concerning faith any longer, but we do have to live in this world together and make it a better place. So let us focus on love and keeping of the law of this land. Protecting it from killers, theives, child molestors, rapiest and so forth. We do not have to agree religiously we do have to agree to protect each other rights other wise we become distinct. Not just ourselves but all of mankind.

Turtle:

Your statement here, “TP your view is base on the NWT and not on the scripture and for that reason it my text seems like ties to you” is NOT only wrong it is ignorant! I will prove it! Show me, one time, ONE TIME, again ONE TIME that what I discuss above and or anywhere on these board, anything by referring to the NWT Bible and then maybe you have a point! If you cannot, then you are mistaken!!!! Everything I have showed you is from other Bibles some from the KJV and others NOT, but NEVER EVER THE NWT!!!!! Thus your position is false!

The Bible texts you quote are not the issue, please get this, it is your “interpretation” that is wrong, and I do not do that, I have used scriptures and take the position that what the scripture states is what I believe!!!! Thus it is not your text that lies, but what you state that is NOT true! Oh it may agree with one a few scriptures, but it does not agree with other scriptures and that is how one gets to the truth of something, that what you believe is in total harmony with the ENTIRE Bible not just part, or some of it, or it does not!!!! Nor do I do what you do, and that is take from sources OUTSIDE the Bible in order to explain my beliefs!!!! You do this!!!!

You are right about one thing, that I is plainly stated in the Bible is against what is taught in “mainstream Christianity” and that is the POINT!!!!! That like the Jews that killed Jesus were of Jesus same religion, and had the SAME BIBLE, meant nothing as the majority of Bible believe in the wrong thing despite their believing or saying they did!!!!

FACT: God’s people have never EVER been mainstream or majority in anything and there is a lesson in this for all of us!!! If you using this as some sort of guide for someone to find the truth or tell you that what someone believes is truth, you are then completely mistaken!!!! Therefore I am in good company to believe in what the Bible states over what most people in Christendom believe!!!!

You state, “I see JW Christianity built on lies” and I respect that, however there are about seven million JW Christians in the world that come from all sorts of places and even from the things you believe in, and NOT the other way around!!!

I do not understand what you mean here as it is not a cohesive sentence or rather does not make sense; “You refute what I give you proof of in a translation you and I both agree on.”

You have no basis in the Bible to state, “So you are the one with the problem and I feel sorry for you” but do in feelings and opinions and I too am entitled to mine that feels the reverse for you!

You have taken this position before, where you state, “So TP lets not discuss our differences concerning faith any longer, but we do have to live in this world together and make it a better place” and know that it is YOU that have always ignored your own words and keep coming back either in mailings here or in posts!!! And as to making the world a better place, I have and continue to study the Bible with people of all sorts that have indeed changed their lives for the better, which is a benefit to society and the world in general, everyday!!!

Turtle you are a hypocrite, go to the prisons and see, how many JW’s you find as opposed to Pentecostal, Protestants, Catholics, Born Again etc. etc. etc. people so if you want to protect it from those who break the “law of this land” or from killers, thieves, child molesters, rapists and so forth” you should consider, or people should consider becoming a JW!!!!

You are indeed right that “We do not have to agree religiously we do have to agree to protect each other rights other wise we become distinct. Not just ourselves but all of mankind” and I say AMEN to that and do so as a JW!!!

TP

[truth_child]

all fogiven turtle

[praetorian]

TC forgive me I got you mixed up with someone else it been a bad year. Especially the last four months

NO issues and NO need!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Amazing how little some people have to do all day.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come, Rev. Ms. Turtle, I perfer the Word of God to Thompson Chain, or the garbage your religion spews out. Here do some research, "My God why has thou forsaken me?"

[praetorian]

No tC I have caught you not defending your true beliefs. Nothing more nothing less or least not hte one's you practice. Mammon and God.

I don;t know what that means!

NO need to explain as it does nothing for us in our discussion regarding the Bible not cleary, plainly, simply and grammatically telling us that Jesus is God or that God is Triune as the Bible tells us clearly the opposite!!!

TP

[praetorian]

I posted a few replies above on purpose to establish how people here do this to me, by replying with words that make no sense and then take positions that they actually make sense!

LOL

TP

[truth_child]

pretorium i bleive when she was talking she was answering me for she said tc and not tp

[praetorian]

pretorium i bleive when she was talking she was answering me for she said tc and not tp

TC I must have made a mistake!!! LOL TC, take a good look at my post right about yours, as I did this on purpose to demonstrate that from the simple words used, I should have "known" clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically that Turtle posted that for you! Wow, now if you can use that same ability to read, what it says in the Bible note not interpret, but read, then you will clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically see that the Bible tells you that Jesus has a God and Father and that they are not the same, and that the Bible does not plainly state that Jesus is God nor that God is Triune!!! Bravo!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

For anyone willing to read, I have already posted the Trinitarian doctrine of the first century Christians. The doctrine of the Trinity was not questioned until the fourth century. Do some research on Arius. What some people can never do is tell the truth.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Mr. Tonyp:

I did not say anything about endtime prophecies. I asked if you would like to discuss the false end of the world perdictions your religion has made. For anyone willing to know the truth, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society has perdicted the end of the world several times, including 9/11.

[turtle]

When one is surround you find the nice mouse hole, good by guys. And TP and TC have a good life. I chores need doing bye.

[praetorian]

For anyone willing to read, I have already posted the Trinitarian doctrine of the first century Christians. The doctrine of the Trinity was not questioned until the fourth century. Do some research on Arius. What some people can never do is tell the truth.

Your own words here clearly show, that you need to go outside the Bible to human teachers in order to prove your beliefs as if they were contained in the Bible, you would not need to do this in the first place!

TP

[praetorian]

Mr. Tonyp:

I did not say anything about endtime prophecies. I asked if you would like to discuss the false end of the world perdictions your religion has made. For anyone willing to know the truth, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society has perdicted the end of the world several times, including 9/11.


You apparently can't read well. Have at it, and you will see that what you will "attempt" to establish is based on several lies!!! I have seen many a so called copy of a Watchtower or like the JW letter to Hitler etc that have all been proven lies, however in the end, a person will believe what they want to believe!!! If you want to let's play!!! You apparently like looking foolish even when you are given advance warning! And it is prediction not perdiction!

Oh I just can't wait for this, especially 911 "perdiction" as this will all be NEW FOR ME! TATM Nostradamus is NOT a JW!!!!

TP

[easeltine]

Jesus, the Word, is God vs. Jesus, the Word, is "a" god

Tony,

Thank you for taking the time to reply to the Scriptures that I posted. I have read your reply post several times. I know that your convictions are very strong on this subject. I think that you can understand where I disagree with the ideas of The Watchtower Society based from these Scriptures and you seem well studied with a response from the alternative viewpoint.

For me I choose not to agree with the cardinal idea that separates the ideas of Arius, and The Watchtower Society, from orthodox Christianity, namely that Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh. I choose not to agree with The Word Translation's addition of the article "a" to God of John 1:1:

1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.

My concept of the ideas of these passages in John are very different than yours. You know where I am coming from.

Turtle,

I think that you need to rethink your post on the idea of the Father having a body like we do. It sounded a bit Mormon to me.

TATM,

You have been on my ignore list, but I cheated, and your posts are very good the subject of the Trinity...now if Truth, Turtle, and I could lay are hands on you and pray for you to receive The Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues your spirit would be lifted up...

[oneway]

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


Praetorian, the first thing one needs to ask themselves, in the beginning of what? The only logical conclusion, and since God has no beginning, the beginning would be the beginning of creation. Nothing else works!!

So, the next question might be, who was there at the beginning of creation?
Verse one tells is that the Word was there, and that the Word was already with God. When? At the beginning of creation.

So, who was/is the Word? Verse 14 tells us the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. Well this can only be talking about Jesus. I'm sure you don't disagree with that, correct?

Getting back to verse 1 and since you're one to keep to what the text clearly states, then why are you denying what the text clearly states?

Verse 14 has already proven that the Word is indeed Jesus. Verse 1 tells us that the Word was God. So, how can you argue with what the text clearly states?

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

By whom? The Word...IOW God. And we already know from verse 14 that God was made flesh, and that He dwelt among us.

I realize that your NWT has done a diservice to this passage by altering it's meaning. And I also know that not one thing I've stated here is going to mean anything to you, because I know that you've heard this all before. But me, I'm going to stick to what the Scriptures are plainly saying here, and I'm going to believe exactly what it states here..that the Word AKA Jesus is God. It can't get any plainer than this. Any Bible believing Christian can plainly see the truth contained in this text, and any Bible believing Christian wouldn't dare try to change that truth into a lie for any reason.

Now, before I'm even going to consider other things that you have posted, you're going to have to show me how Jesus is not God according to the first ch of John, and how the beginning would not be the beginning of creation. What other beginning would there be? There is only one beginning, not several.

[turtle]

Good post oneway good post.

[truth_child]

and see it says and THE WORD WAS GOD THE WORD IS JESUS so there for HE IS CALLED GOD there . pretorium

[oneway]

and see it says and THE WORD WAS GOD THE WORD IS JESUS so there for HE IS CALLED GOD there . pretorium



Arron, keep in mind, this is how Praetorian interptets verse 1, according to his religion.

John 1:1-51

1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in [the] beginning
with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.

http://www.watchtower.org/bible/joh/chapter_001.htm

Notice how the Word was a god, and not God. Huge difference there, don't you think?

If one looks at this ch in the Greek, Theos is used at least 11 times. It's funny how they would alter the meaning in verse 1 to mean a god, yet the other 10 times Theos means God, even in the first part of verse 1.

[turtle]

Lol TC keep praising.

[truth_child]

yeah i haave read where in the new world trans it says a god and not GOD . the jws need to read GODS WORD not the nw trans

[oneway]

yeah i haave read where in the new world trans it says a god and not GOD . the jws need to read GODS WORD not the nw trans



Arron, yes I assumed you already knew this, wasn't trying to imply that you didn't. The point is, the Word of God clearly tells us that Jesus was/is God. The NWT tells us that isn't true. So until Praetorian can prove otherwise, I'm sticking to what the Word of God clearly states in the first ch of John..and that is..Jesus is God, and that's with a capital 'G'.

[turtle]

Arron, yes I assumed you already knew this, wasn't trying to imply that you didn't. The point is, the Word of God clearly tells us that Jesus was/is God. The NWT tells us that isn't true. So until Praetorian can prove otherwise, I'm sticking to what the Word of God clearly states in the first ch of John..and that is..Jesus is God, and that's with a capital 'G'.

Truth child at least you got 101 correct of John 1:1. very good I am proud and well pleased, but my opinion means nothing.

[easeltine]

The following is a section from, The Life of Antony, by Athanasius 356 A.D.

He taught the people that the Son of God is not a creature, and that He did not come into existence from nonbeing, but rather that He is eternal Word and Wisdom from the essence of the Father. "So," he asserted, "it is sacrilegious to say 'there was when He was not' for the Word coexisted with the Father always. Therefore you are to have no fellowship with the most ungodly Arians, for there is no fellowship of light with darkness.
You are God-fearing Christians, but they, in saying that the Son and Word of God the Father is a creature, differ in no way from the pagans, who serve the creature rather than the Creator. Be assured that the whole creation itself is angered at them, because they number among the creatures the Creator and Lord of all, in whom all things were made."

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

You apparently can't read well. Have at it, and you will see that what you will "attempt" to establish is based on several lies!!! I have seen many a so called copy of a Watchtower or like the JW letter to Hitler etc that have all been proven lies, however in the end, a person will believe what they want to believe!!! If you want to let's play!!! You apparently like looking foolish even when you are given advance warning! And it is prediction not perdiction!

Oh I just can't wait for this, especially 911 "perdiction" as this will all be NEW FOR ME! TATM Nostradamus is NOT a JW!!!!

TP

True-believerism-syndrome? Ever hear of that mental illness?

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

TATM,

You have been on my ignore list, but I cheated, and your posts are very good the subject of the Trinity...now if Truth, Turtle, and I could lay are hands on you and pray for you to receive The Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues your spirit would be lifted up...

Save your breathe. I don't buy into Rev. Ms. Turtle's oneness theory, nor the nine part trinity of the pseudo-christian cult of pentecostalism.

[truth_child]

who beleive in a nine part trininity i never heard of that one

[turtle]

aTAM all I ask is you read the Bible for yourself before making any decisions. see the Bible is true whether you beleive anything I said or not. God is a good God and can change the world at his finger tips or by just speaking the word. The problem is you fail to answer any of our questions and we been patient answer yours. You must know it is sad to think after three years of talking to you that you never once answer a question except to play games.

By the way what is your favorite movie star. I was thinking the other day what if a movie had all the hunks in it that must girls like. I doubt they ever do it. Mel gibson, kevin kostner, some like tom cruise, sean connery, and who else. I trying to think younger but I think I have nto watch that many young people movies.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

who beleive in a nine part trininity i never heard of that one

Mr. Arron, your religion's Bible is based on a nine part trinity.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

aTAM all I ask is you read the Bible for yourself before making any decisions. see the Bible is true whether you beleive anything I said or not. God is a good God and can change the world at his finger tips or by just speaking the word. The problem is you fail to answer any of our questions and we been patient answer yours. You must know it is sad to think after three years of talking to you that you never once answer a question except to play games.

By the way what is your favorite movie star. I was thinking the other day what if a movie had all the hunks in it that must girls like. I doubt they ever do it. Mel gibson, kevin kostner, some like tom cruise, sean connery, and who else. I trying to think younger but I think I have nto watch that many young people movies.

Rev. Ms. Turtle, I know of no one in their right mind who accepts the oneness theory. As to movies, my dear sweet Rev. Ms. Turtle, I spend my time reading the Bible you so distain.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Arron, yes I assumed you already knew this, wasn't trying to imply that you didn't. The point is, the Word of God clearly tells us that Jesus was/is God. The NWT tells us that isn't true. So until Praetorian can prove otherwise, I'm sticking to what the Word of God clearly states in the first ch of John..and that is..Jesus is God, and that's with a capital 'G'.

Mr. Oneway:

Are you proposing the same oneness doctrine of Rev. Ms. Turtle?

[turtle]

Rev. Ms. Turtle, I know of no one in their right mind who accepts the oneness theory. As to movies, my dear sweet Rev. Ms. Turtle, I spend my time reading the Bible you so distain.

ATAM I believe in the Trinity and it is on my website that i do. So what is your problem you have a mental problem I see.

[oneway]

Mr. Oneway:

Are you proposing the same oneness doctrine of Rev. Ms. Turtle?



Why would you even ask that? I've never claimed that the Father and Jesus are one and the same.

Why don't you just come right out and say what you think? Either Jesus is God or either He isn't. That doesn't make Him the Father tho.

In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward the God, and the word was God.

This is what it basically states in the Greek. Notice...the Word was God..not the God. Perhaps you don't see the distinction here, but there appears to be one to me.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Why would you even ask that? I've never claimed that the Father and Jesus are one and the same.

Why don't you just come right out and say what you think? Either Jesus is God or either He isn't. That doesn't make Him the Father tho.

In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward the God, and the word was God.

This is what it basically states in the Greek. Notice...the Word was God..not the God. Perhaps you don't see the distinction here, but there appears to be one to me.

Mr. Oneway, in a previous post you stated Rev. Ms. Turtle's theories were the same as your's. I posted Rev. Ms. Turtle's waffle for you then. Now you appear to contradict her theory.

Praetorian you are just mad because you do not grasp this verse here

John 14:7 KJV
(7) If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

If you know Christ you should know the Father and if you know him you have seen him. Meaning He {Christ, from the previous sentence} is the Father, the everlasting Father, if you go further down you will Christ say he is in me and I in Him. Meaning God Father in Christ and Christ is in the Father. Both speaking through each other. Now that sounds confusing most will admit I think. But then you got to remember in the begin was the word and the word became flesh. So the word being the Father and also being the Son. That 1:1 and I think 14.

Verse about Jesus being in the Father and vise versa.


Fact is I could go on and on and on and perhaps you can to, but this is my last post for awhile so have fun trying to out do atam.

[oneway]

Mr. Oneway, in a previous post you stated Rev. Ms. Turtle's theories were the same as your's.

TATM, I don't recall putting it exactly that way. I seem to recall stating that I thought Turtle had a pretty good understanding of Scriptures. I based that conclusion mostly on some things she has posted in the SC threads, unrelated to this trinity discussion, etc. I wasn't trying to imply that I agree with her oneness theories. Of course even on those SC threads, I wouldn't say that I agreed with her 100% on everything, nor would I say that she agreed with my conclusions 100%. So, this doesn't mean that I would or even could agree with everything she believes, nor could I with anyone else for that matter, nor do I expect that anyone would always, if at all, agree with me. No one is that good, where they're never wrong.

[truth_child]

i am sorry but i dont find a nine part trinity at all in any bible (kjv)

[turtle]

TATM, I don't recall putting it exactly that way. I seem to recall stating that I thought Turtle had a pretty good understanding of Scriptures. I based that conclusion mostly on some things she has posted in the SC threads, unrelated to this trinity discussion, etc. I wasn't trying to imply that I agree with her oneness theories. Of course even on those SC threads, I wouldn't say that I agreed with her 100% on everything, nor would I say that she agreed with my conclusions 100%. So, this doesn't mean that I would or even could agree with everything she believes, nor could I with anyone else for that matter, nor do I expect that anyone would always, if at all, agree with me. No one is that good, where they're never wrong.

Tatam: Just because I post a theology does not mean I believe it.

Oneway: I hope you view my site and decide for yourself if you agree with me there. Here we talk alot of scripture theology. How something is traditionally taught. I do beleive in the Trinity. One God in three person's.

[truth_child]

turtle do you beleive in the trinity as three seperate ONES are just differnet workings of ONE

[oneway]

i am sorry but i dont find a nine part trinity at all in any bible (kjv)


The Trinity- 3 or 9? "Each one of them is a triune being
by Himself...there's nine of them"
(Benny Hinn, TBN, 3rd October
1990).
"God the Father is a person
separate from the Holy Ghost.
Totally separate. ...Do you know that
the Holy Spirit has a soul and a
body separate from that of Jesus
and the Father? ...God the Father
then is a triune being within Himself.
He's a person, He has His own
Spirit, He has a soul. …A soul is my
intellect. …God thinks. …separate
from the Son and separate from the
Holy Ghost. …God the Father is a
separate individual from the Son and
the Holy Ghost, who is a triune
being who walks in a spirit body and
He has hair…has eyes…has a
mouth…has hands" (Orlando
Christian Centre, Oct 13th 1990).

http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/unmasked_____benny_hinn.html

And no...I don't agree with Mr. Hinn. LOL

[turtle]

TC that is a good question. I think of the verse in Ephesians that goes one Lord, one faith, one baptism. There are verse that support the trinity in One God in three person's but then you look at the baptism and you see all three present. And yet we know that God lives in each believer in Chrsit. The Holy Spirit comes and seals and lives within the heart. It is like a pitcher of water being poured into different cups. Each cup representing each believer. God used a cloud and fire to lead teh people and was Him in the cloud and fire, but at the same time we know God more then that cloud and fire in exodus. We see him in Moses, and all the old prophets. We see God in His Son and in God the Father. And the Holy Spirit in each believer. God we know is Spirit, Christ is flesh, sitting at the right hand of the Father. John says God is love. Love is in Jesus, God is in the Father. God is in each believer. God has made the earth his footslool that how big God is and yet he small enough to live in our hearts. God can not be put in a box or a sphere. God is more then that.Part of God can be housed but not all of God can be housed by humans.

The question is not easy one to answer, but I do believe God is one existing in three persons.

[turtle]

The Trinity- 3 or 9? "Each one of them is a triune being
by Himself...there's nine of them"
(Benny Hinn, TBN, 3rd October
1990).
"God the Father is a person
separate from the Holy Ghost.
Totally separate. ...Do you know that
the Holy Spirit has a soul and a
body separate from that of Jesus
and the Father? ...God the Father
then is a triune being within Himself.
He's a person, He has His own
Spirit, He has a soul. …A soul is my
intellect. …God thinks. …separate
from the Son and separate from the
Holy Ghost. …God the Father is a
separate individual from the Son and
the Holy Ghost, who is a triune
being who walks in a spirit body and
He has hair…has eyes…has a
mouth…has hands" (Orlando
Christian Centre, Oct 13th 1990).

http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/unmasked_____benny_hinn.html

And no...I don't agree with Mr. Hinn. LOL

Does the Father have his own brain. Does the Son? second thought I am editing my last response because I am going to have to regroup on that thought, I do not think it can be proven as separat identies in that since. For they all speak the same.

[truth_child]

you have lost me on the nine trinity s

[oneway]

you have lost me on the nine trinity s



Don't ask me to explain it to you, I wasn't the one that came up with this theory. Where did this theory come from in the first place? Didn't this theory originate from within your religion? I honestly don't know if that's really true, but I seem to recall TATM making mention somewhere that your religion was responsible for this theory.

[praetorian]

Jesus, the Word, is God vs. Jesus, the Word, is "a" god

Tony,

Thank you for taking the time to reply to the Scriptures that I posted. I have read your reply post several times. I know that your convictions are very strong on this subject. I think that you can understand where I disagree with the ideas of The Watchtower Society based from these Scriptures and you seem well studied with a response from the alternative viewpoint.

For me I choose not to agree with the cardinal idea that separates the ideas of Arius, and The Watchtower Society, from orthodox Christianity, namely that Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh. I choose not to agree with The Word Translation's addition of the article "a" to God of John 1:1:

1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.

My concept of the ideas of these passages in John are very different than yours. You know where I am coming from.

Turtle,

I think that you need to rethink your post on the idea of the Father having a body like we do. It sounded a bit Mormon to me.

TATM,

You have been on my ignore list, but I cheated, and your posts are very good the subject of the Trinity...now if Truth, Turtle, and I could lay are hands on you and pray for you to receive The Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues your spirit would be lifted up...

Dear Easeltine:

I very much appreciate your reply. I too know and appreciate that “your convictions are very strong” however, I do not selectively ignore what has been stated about this particular passage in recent times!!! You will also note, that I have never quoted the WTBS as the basis for my beliefs here and do not do so here.

I note that you wrongly conclude that my personal beliefs are based solely on the WTBS, for you state, “For me I choose not to agree with the cardinal idea that separates the ideas of Arius, and The Watchtower Society, from orthodox Christianity, namely that Jesus Christ is God Almighty come in the flesh. I choose not to agree with The Word Translation's addition of the article "a" to God of John 1:1” and I reply, that there are many more references sources that take a position (Modern view) against the translating the verse as “the Word was God” and that you rely upon two other things; 1. Persons outside the Bible (like I do here below as scholars) and; orthodox Christianity which in and of itself, is saying that “majority rule” while true in many instances of life, is NOT true in the Bible as true believers of God (Jews and or Christians) have never been the in the majority or viewed as the “orthdox” way, so therefore, I respectfully submit to you, this is NOT fair method or standard, to determine if something is truly Bible taught or not!

So, please allow me the opportunity to respond in particular to the matter of John 1:1. You are aware of the fact that John 1:1 is NOT translated the same way by many other English Bibles, which at the very least tells you that there MUST be something in the Greek that causes this to be so! And your simply choosing which one works for you, is not reasonable as one must truly “know” why this is so. Second, you are also aware that the KJV was translated from the Latin that does not distinguish between Common (Common nouns identified by lower case letters) and Proper nouns (identified by Capital letters) thus between “writer” and say “John Updike” and or “car” and “Ford” or “God” and or ‘god” therefore in the Latin there is no distinguishing between them! Also, there is no capitalization in Greek and Hebrew!

Much of what has occurred with John 1:1 after people began figuring this out, was, that many English scholars starting looking for a way to support this in the Greek (realizing that this took place because of the Latin) and so a scholar by the name of E. C. Colwell who “invented” or is said to have discovered a rule in Greek, however the problem is, that there is NO SUCH Greek rule of Grammar and also, (meaning it does not exist in Greek to begin with) his English for Greek rule was made NOT on an examination of “ALL” verses where this occurs, but rather by an “admitted” sampling, to which he explained contained 15 exceptions!!!!! Thus, his rule has been both exposed for what it actually is, not to mention antiquated to what is Known today!!!!

Note, what the following scholar’s have to state about this passage below:

Bible scholar A.T. Robertson recognizes, that if both subject and predicate have articles, “both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, interchangeable.” And he also provides an example found at Mathew 18:38, where it speaks of “the field [Greek, ho agros’ is the world [Greek, ho kosmos].” Thus the grammar here enables us to understand that the world is also the field.

Now, what if the subject has a definite article but the predicate does not as in John 1:1? Cithing that verse as an example, scholar James Allen Hewett states, “In such a construction the subject and predicate are not the same, equal, identical, or anything of the sort.”

Hewett goes on to refer to John 1:5, that says, “God is Light.” In Freek, “God is ho theos, and therefore has a definite article, but phos, for “light”, is not preceded by any article, therefore he continues, “One can always…say of God He is characterized by light; one cannot always say of light that it is God!” Now, similar examples are found at 1 John 4:16, “God is love.” In both of these verses, the subjects have definite articles but the predicates, “Spirit” and “love” do not! So the subjects and predicates are not interchangeable!!!

Scholar William Barclay states “Because [the apostle John] has no definite article in from of the theos, it becomes description” and also, “John is not here identifying the Word with God. To put it very simply, he does not say that Jesus was God.” Scholar Jason David Beduhn (author of Truth in Translation) likewise says, “In Greek, if you leave off the article from theos in a sentence like the one in John 1:1c, then your readers will assume you mean ‘a different god.” Further adding, “Its absence makes theos quote different than the definite ho theos, as different as ‘a god’ is from ‘God’ in English!” Further Beduhn states, that “In John 1:1, the word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or different being.”

In the words of the scholar Joseph Henry Thayer, (the primary author of the Thayer’s Greek Lexicon) who also worked on the American Standard Version (ASV) “The Logos [or, Word] was divine, not the divine Being himself.”

NOTE: None of the folks above are JW’s and a few of them are Trinitarians!!!!!!

I hope this clarifies things and also provide you with reason enough to take the time to investigate this for yourself, in order to determine what the Bible plainly, simply, clearly and grammatically states about this subject matter by itself! And I am certain if you do, you will clearly see how Jesus is distinguished from his Heavenly Father, the Almighty God, Creator or Heaven and Earth and of Jesus himself!

Take care,


TP

P.S. Oneway, I do not need to prove anything or be considered, the Bible does all of the talking if you use ALL not some of the scriptures, with no outside influences, such as dogma, creeds, opinions or theology of humans!!!

[praetorian]

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


Praetorian, the first thing one needs to ask themselves, in the beginning of what? The only logical conclusion, and since God has no beginning, the beginning would be the beginning of creation. Nothing else works!!

So, the next question might be, who was there at the beginning of creation?
Verse one tells is that the Word was there, and that the Word was already with God. When? At the beginning of creation.

So, who was/is the Word? Verse 14 tells us the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. Well this can only be talking about Jesus. I'm sure you don't disagree with that, correct?

Getting back to verse 1 and since you're one to keep to what the text clearly states, then why are you denying what the text clearly states?

Verse 14 has already proven that the Word is indeed Jesus. Verse 1 tells us that the Word was God. So, how can you argue with what the text clearly states?

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

By whom? The Word...IOW God. And we already know from verse 14 that God was made flesh, and that He dwelt among us.

I realize that your NWT has done a diservice to this passage by altering it's meaning. And I also know that not one thing I've stated here is going to mean anything to you, because I know that you've heard this all before. But me, I'm going to stick to what the Scriptures are plainly saying here, and I'm going to believe exactly what it states here..that the Word AKA Jesus is God. It can't get any plainer than this. Any Bible believing Christian can plainly see the truth contained in this text, and any Bible believing Christian wouldn't dare try to change that truth into a lie for any reason.

Now, before I'm even going to consider other things that you have posted, you're going to have to show me how Jesus is not God according to the first ch of John, and how the beginning would not be the beginning of creation. What other beginning would there be? There is only one beginning, not several.

Oneway:
(And others)

The problem with you believe is that there you folks take for granted many things, and assume to choose a Bible that supports your position and I do not! I like to examine ALL there is on a subject matter BEFORE I open my mouth and or before I ASSUME that a persons Faith (Religion) is at fault!!!

I am going to show two things here in this post, one having to do with the problems relating to “worship” of Jesus and also other Englihs Bible’s and how they render John 1:1, that cannot be ignored, unless you wish to purposesly be IGNORANT!!!

At Matthew 8:1-3 the King James Version, (by this I mean the most common one, the original 1611) states, “When He [Jesus] was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed Him. And, behold, there came a leper and worshiped Him, saying, ‘Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.’ Now, note what the following English Bibles state (taken from www.biblegateway.com, so those of you can easily follow along):

The NIV states, “knelt before him”; New American Standard Bible, “bowed down before him”; The Message Bible, “went to his knees”; Amplified Bible, “prostrated himself before him”; New Living Translation, “knelt before him”; English Standard Version, “knelt before him.”; Contemporary English Version, “knelt before him”; New Century Version, “bowed down before him”; Young’s Literal Translation, “was bowing down to him”; New Life Version, “got down before him”; Holman Christian Standard Bible, “knelt before him”; New International Readers Version, “got down on his knees”; Worldwide English (New Testament), “came and kneeled in front of”; New International-UK Version, “knelt before him”; Today’s New International Version, “knelt before him”; Darby Translation uses “homage” which agrees with the majority!

The above totals 16 Bibles that state this verse differently than the King James Version. Also, to be fair, the Wycliffe New Testament, the 21st Century King James Version, and the New King James Version all use the word “Worshipped” in this same verse, thereby totaling four Bible’s using the word “worshipped” in this verse.

Interestingly this is the SAME EXACT used in Greek when Cornelius fell down at the feet of Peter in Acts!!!!

Now for John 1:1, and note not in the above nor in the below do I EVER refer to the JW’s NWT!!!!!! EVER!!!!! NOTE:

1. (MNT) Moffatt New Translation (1922) George H. Doran Company (1922)[Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God,
the Logos was divine.”

2. (NEB) New English Bible. (1970)
“When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was.”

3. (SGAT) An American Translation, Smith-Goodspeed (1931) University of Chicago Press (1931
“In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine. It was he that was with God in the beginning. Everything came into existence through him, and apart from him nothing came to be.”

4. (WET) Wuest Expanded Translation (1961) Eerdmans (1961)
“In the beginning the Word was existing. And the Word was in fellowship with God the Father. And the Word was as to His essence absolute deity. This Word was in the beginning in fellowship with God the Father. All things through His intermediate agency came into being, and without Him there came into being not even one thing which has come into existence.”

5. The Authentic New Testament (1958) New American Library (1958) [Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God. So the Word was divine.”

6. (BNT) Barclay New Testament (1969). "Collins (vol. 1 in 1968; vol. 2 in 1969)[Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“When the world began, the Word was already there. The Word was with God, and the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God.”

7. (CNT) Cassier New Testament (1989) William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company (1989) [Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“It was the Word that was at the very beginning; and the Word was by the side of God, and the Word was the very same as God.”

8. (ISV) International Standard (1998) Davidson Press (1998)[Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“In the beginning, the Word existed. The Word was with God. Through him all things were made, and apart from him nothing was made that has been made”

9. (ONT) The Original New Testament (1985) Harper and Row (1985)[Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“'In the Beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God. So the Word was divine.”

10. The Orthodox Jewish Brit Chadasha (1997) AFI International Publishers (1997) [Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“Bereshis (In the Beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [YESHAYAH 55: 11; BERE**** 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (along with) Hashem [MISHLE 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim!”

11. (PRNT) The Restored New Testament 1914 John M. Pryse / John M. Watkins (1925) [Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“The divine Thought inhered in the primordial Element, And proximate to the Unmanifested God was this divine Thought; And verily the divine Thought was the secondary God”

12. (REB) Revised English Bible (1989) Oxford and Cambridge Universities Presses (1989) [Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“In the beginning the Word already was. The Word was in God's presence, and what God was, the Word was.”

13. (SV) Scholars Version (The Five Gospels) (1993) Macmillan (1993)[Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“In the beginning there was the divine word and wisdom. The divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was.”

14. (TEV) Today’s English Version (1976) [The Good News Bible] (@) United Bible Societies (1976) [Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“Before the world was created, the Word already existed; he was with God, and he was the same as God.”

15. (UNT) The Unvarnished New Testament (1991) Phanes Press (1991) [Tyndale House, Cambridge, United Kingdom]
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward God, and God was what the Word was.”

End of English Bible references.

At the very least, this goes to establish that the matter of John 1:1 as referred to here by many is NOT AS CUT AND DRY AS YOU BELIEVE IT TO BE!!!!

This is what happens when you choose a Bible on feelings or opinions because it supports your beliefs and also your not knowing enough about the issues contained therein!!!!

TP

[truth_child]

you are right for that is the kind of bible you have chosen one based on feelings and not the acutal word OF GOD the erronious nwt

[praetorian]

you are right for that is the kind of bible you have chosen one based on feelings and not the acutal word OF GOD the erronious nwt

TC:

Your post ignores the facts mentioned above in my posts to Easeltine and Oneway!

By my using anyone BUT the NWT, other legitimate and to many, better translations than the KJV, NIV etc, I have demonstrated that matters of belief on John 1:1 and Jesus being worshipped is not as cut and dry as you and those like you, believe them to be!

THE FACT: Nowhere in the Bible do you ever find it explicitly, plainly, simply, clearly and grammatically stated that “Jesus is God” and that “God is Triune” as you do, in the Bible, where Jesus and his Father are clearly and simply distinguished! And, in order to believe this you must quote The Anathasian Creed and those others who have chosen to base their beliefs on these teachings of humans, over the plain and simple words of the Bible!!!!

Your will have to live with that!

Again, I did not use the NWT here to demonstrate these things!!!!

TP

[truth_child]

john 1:1 is the answer

[praetorian]

john 1:1 is the answer

John 1:1 is NOT the answer! If there was no dispute on translating this verse, which there is, then at best, you would ONLY have support for a duality, not a Trinity!!!!! As it is, even if all Bibles agreed, (and they do not) you do not have support for Jesus being Almighty God and that God is a Trinity!

Tell me, on what basis, can you choose which Bible in English translate John 1:1 correctly when scholars, many scholars TODAY (not a hundred or more years ago) state that John 1:1 is NOT translated correctly in most English Bibles, not to mention your ignoring the fact that the KJV translated this verse and others in the NT from Latin!!! And Latin does not distinguish between common nouns like, the "poster" or "writer" as common, and "Truth Child" as the Proper noun!

You are not dealing fairly nor reasonably with the FACTS!!!!

It is not about your not liking what you read, or disagreeing with the same, but FACTS and plain scriptures that are against you that you choose to ignore!!!!

TP

[praetorian]

Disagree all you like, as I am certain if the FACTS were on the other side, or foot, like completely supporting you, that you would have no problem understanding the English therein and throwing it in my face, but the facts show the opposite and nothing you do, feel, or say, will alter the fact that the Bible does not plainly, clearly, simply, explicitly or grammatically state that “Jesus is God” and that “God is Tiune” EVER!!! Instead you must use creeds of man, to then by implication find scriptures you feel, may, with interpretation and implication, support you pagan beliefs!!!!

I choose to believe the simple words of Jesus and the Apostles and you only the ones, that you find suit your needs and pagan teachings, that come with all sorts of plainly and simply stated contradictions!!!

TP

[truth_child]

john1:1 is what the BIBLE says

[oneway]

At Matthew 8:1-3 the King James Version, (by this I mean the most common one, the original 1611) states, “When He
[Jesus] was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed Him. And, behold, there came a leper and worshiped
Him, saying, ‘Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.’ Now, note what the following English Bibles state (taken from
www.biblegateway.com, so those of you can easily follow along):

The NIV states, “knelt before him”; New American Standard Bible, “bowed down before him”; The Message Bible, “went
to his knees”; Amplified Bible, “prostrated himself before him”; New Living Translation, “knelt before him”; English Standard
Version, “knelt before him.”; Contemporary English Version, “knelt before him”; New Century Version, “bowed down
before him”; Young’s Literal Translation, “was bowing down to him”; New Life Version, “got down before him”; Holman
Christian Standard Bible, “knelt before him”; New International Readers Version, “got down on his knees”; Worldwide
English (New Testament), “came and kneeled in front of”; New International-UK Version, “knelt before him”; Today’s New
International Version, “knelt before him”; Darby Translation uses “homage” which agrees with the majority!


Praetorian, believe it or not, one can even learn a lot of things from the devil himself. Take note of these verses:

Matthew 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Notice verse 9 in particular. What did the devil want Him to do? Worship him. How? By falling down(IOW a humble position). That's what the text states. This tells us, that to worship, this can mean to humble one's self and give homage to . And this is exactly what this leper in your example that you provided did. He fell down humbled, thus literally worshipping Jesus. Why? Because he must have discerned that Jesus was the Lord sent from heaven.

Verse 10 tells us Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Psalms 95:6 O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the LORD our maker.

Who is our maker? John ch 1 tells us that it's the Word AKA Jesus. What does this verse tell us to do? Worship and bow down, to kneel before the LORD our maker.



IMO, your above example does nothing to support your position, it only helps to reinforce the position, as in your above example, that Jesus was indeed worshipped in a same manner that only God is to be worshipped.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

you have lost me on the nine trinity s

Mr. Oneway read the theory to you from your religion's Bible.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Trinity Sunday.

[turtle]

The Bible Says every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess Jesus Christ is Lord.

Philippians 2:11 KJV
(11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Romans 14:9-12 KJV
(9) For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
(10) But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
(11) For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
(12) So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Now deal with it. Who do we bow to only God and who is Christ God because one day we will all bow to Him.

[truth_child]

and there is also THE FATHER AND THE SON AND THE HOLY GHOST these three are one BUT THEY ARE SEPERATE BEINGS

[truth_child]

there has never been a problem with me to beleive that THESE THREE ARE ONE

[praetorian]

john1:1 is what the BIBLE says

No one is denying that John 1:1 is what the Bible says, however, for some reason you cannot get this through your head, and that is;' NOT ALL ENGLISH BIBLES translate John 1:1 the same. Take a good look above at my posts to Oneway and to Easeltine and you will have PROOF of the same! Now, the issue is, do you have the qualifications to know which one is right, other than using your feelings to choose? If not, then it is ignorant to ignore this and or take a position just because of your feelings or beliefs, or how else can God correct your views if you do not listen to what he says!!!! And there is ample evidence that makes John 1:1 controversial and not admitting it is again ignorant!

"Here's Your Sign" via Bill Engvall, you should get this as it truly applies to you! You should never leave home without it!

TP

[praetorian]

Praetorian, believe it or not, one can even learn a lot of things from the devil himself. Take note of these verses:

Matthew 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Notice verse 9 in particular. What did the devil want Him to do? Worship him. How? By falling down(IOW a humble position). That's what the text states. This tells us, that to worship, this can mean to humble one's self and give homage to . And this is exactly what this leper in your example that you provided did. He fell down humbled, thus literally worshipping Jesus. Why? Because he must have discerned that Jesus was the Lord sent from heaven.

Verse 10 tells us Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Psalms 95:6 O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the LORD our maker.

Who is our maker? John ch 1 tells us that it's the Word AKA Jesus. What does this verse tell us to do? Worship and bow down, to kneel before the LORD our maker.



IMO, your above example does nothing to support your position, it only helps to reinforce the position, as in your above example, that Jesus was indeed worshipped in a same manner that only God is to be worshipped.





Oneway:

You like others here tend to completely ignore things that are factual that contradict your way of thinking therefore you are using feelings to make these determinations and that is the wrong way to make such a decision!

You ignored what I demonstrated to you about worship being used in some Bibles and then with most of them NOT, when referencing Jesus? Do you know why? You should!!!

As to Matthew 4:9, you make a good point, however there is MORE! If Jesus was God or part of God, then this offer would make no sense whatsoever as you cannot tempt God as he has everything! It can and does however apply to a Son of God, Jesus!!!! Now, again this has nothing to do with what I demonstrated above in this string, about the word worship as used in Matthew 8:1-3, again, with some Bibles showing worship and most NOT!!!! For you to make this determination and not know why, and fall back onto your dogma, or opinion is ignorant, “Here’s your Sign!” You don’t want the truth, or rather “cant handle the truth.!” Not I, as I do not ignore things like other Bibles (and not the NWT as I never refer to it here EVER) state in a verse causing me to investigate it, rather than just choose what I like (in fact that is what you and others have done to me, but I never use the NWT for support here) because it fits my beliefs, as though the other Bibles and their renderings do not exist! Again, that is ignorant!!!

As to verse 10, here Jesus’ quotes from the OT thereby distinguishing him from his God and Father, that contains God’s personal Name, as represented by the Tetra (undeniable FACT) telling Satan and all of us, that it is only YHWH, his God and Father that is to be worshipped, NOT HIM, as he never said., “I Jesus am to be worshipped!!!!

As to Psalms 95:6, note it is “LORD” in all capital letters, and in Hebrew (or read just about any preface to any English Bible) this word is substituted for God’s personal name, as represented by the Tetra FACT!!!!!!

Therefore for you to arrive at the conclusion of John 1:1, is to ignore what other English Bibles state and expert scholars whom I have referred you to above, and to also ignore the fact that in Latin, from where the KJV (that started this in the first place) does not distinguish between common nouns and proper nouns; is totally ignorant and allows you to arrive at conclusions, that are biased and inconclusive as you are ignoring several FACTS that are against this conclusion!!!! You are also picking and choosing Bible renderings that support your conclusion, via incomplete information, which does not make it right nor does it make the FACTS in opposition some how disappear as they don’t!

In the end, nothing you refer me to clearly, plainly, simply, explicitly and grammatically states that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” as these must be implied as opposed to the many scriptures where Jesus and his God and Father are distinguished as separate!!!!

Here’s your sign!!!

TP

[praetorian]

there has never been a problem with me to beleive that THESE THREE ARE ONE

I know, as you are a pagan Christian! As this is NOT a Bible taught teaching matter how much you believe or want to believe that it is!!!

TP

[praetorian]

The Bible Says every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess Jesus Christ is Lord.

Philippians 2:11 KJV
(11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Romans 14:9-12 KJV
(9) For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
(10) But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
(11) For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
(12) So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Now deal with it. Who do we bow to only God and who is Christ God because one day we will all bow to Him.






Turtle:

Again with your indecisions, I am posting, I am never posting, and you feel that you are of the right mind to make these determinations with your indecisive nature? Good for you! Here’s your Sign!!!!

Philippians 2:11, does not tell you that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” and serves to compliment the rest of the Bible, all of it, that God has appointed his special, only and only Son as King his (God’s) Kingdom, and that he Jesus is our (Humans) Lord to NOTE: “the glory of “God the Father” thereby distinguishing between the two of them!!!!

Romans 14: 9-12 again, does not tell us that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” and does explain again what is supported throughout the Bible about the Messiah, who we know is Jesus Christ, and in verse 11, quotes from Isaiah 45:23, applying it the God and Father of Jesus and NOT to Jesus, as the remainder of verse 11 states, “and every tongue shall confess to God” not that Jesus is God or that God is Triune!!!!

You then state, “Now deal with it. Who do we bow to only God and who is Christ God because one day we will all bow to Him” no, the Bible shows that others have been bowed to like Kings, like King David etc!!!!! And we MUST bow to the Son of God, but not that he is God!!!!

You must have totally missed the point of what I posted above so here, DEAL WITH THIS!!!

At Matthew 8:1-3 the King James Version, (by this I mean the most common one, the original 1611) states, “When He [Jesus] was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed Him. And, behold, there came a leper and worshiped Him, saying, ‘Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.’ Now, note what the following English Bibles state (taken from www.biblegateway.com, so those of you can easily follow along):

The NIV states, “knelt before him”; New American Standard Bible, “bowed down before him”; The Message Bible, “went to his knees”; Amplified Bible, “prostrated himself before him”; New Living Translation, “knelt before him”; English Standard Version, “knelt before him.”; Contemporary English Version, “knelt before him”; New Century Version, “bowed down before him”; Young’s Literal Translation, “was bowing down to him”; New Life Version, “got down before him”; Holman Christian Standard Bible, “knelt before him”; New International Readers Version, “got down on his knees”; Worldwide English (New Testament), “came and kneeled in front of”; New International-UK Version, “knelt before him”; Today’s New International Version, “knelt before him”; Darby Translation uses “homage” which agrees with the majority!

The above totals 16 Bibles that state this verse differently than the King James Version. Also, to be fair, the Wycliffe New Testament, the 21st Century King James Version, and the New King James Version all use the word “Worshipped” in this same verse, thereby totaling four Bible’s using the word “worshipped” in this verse.

THE ABOVE IS FACT NO MATTER HOW BAD YOU DON’T WANT TO HEAR IT! DEAL WITH IT, AS IT IS FACT AND DEMONSTRATES THAT NOT EVERYTHING IS AS CUT AND DRY AS YOU WANT IT TO BE NOR DOES PICKING AND CHOOSING A BIBLE THAT SUPPORTS YOUR BELIEF MEAN THAT THE OTHERS ARE WRONG ALLOWING YOU TO IGNORE IT!!

HERE’S YOUR SIGN!!!!

Interestingly and again, this is the SAME EXACT GREEK word used in the Bible text, when Cornelius fell down at the feet of Peter in Acts!!!!

So before you open your mouth how about dealing with this for a change and not ignore it, to see what this is so!!!!

TP

[turtle]

Turtle:

Again with your indecisions, I am posting, I am never posting, and you feel that you are of the right mind to make these determinations with your indecisive nature? Good for you! Here’s your Sign!!!!

Philippians 2:11, does not tell you that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” and serves to compliment the rest of the Bible, all of it, that God has appointed his special, only and only Son as King his (God’s) Kingdom, and that he Jesus is our (Humans) Lord to NOTE: “the glory of “God the Father” thereby distinguishing between the two of them!!!!

Romans 14: 9-12 again, does not tell us that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” and does explain again what is supported throughout the Bible about the Messiah, who we know is Jesus Christ, and in verse 11, quotes from Isaiah 45:23, applying it the God and Father of Jesus and NOT to Jesus, as the remainder of verse 11 states, “and every tongue shall confess to God” not that Jesus is God or that God is Triune!!!!

You then state, “Now deal with it. Who do we bow to only God and who is Christ God because one day we will all bow to Him” no, the Bible shows that others have been bowed to like Kings, like King David etc!!!!! And we MUST bow to the Son of God, but not that he is God!!!!

You must have totally missed the point of what I posted above so here, DEAL WITH THIS!!!

At Matthew 8:1-3 the King James Version, (by this I mean the most common one, the original 1611) states, “When He [Jesus] was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed Him. And, behold, there came a leper and worshiped Him, saying, ‘Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.’ Now, note what the following English Bibles state (taken from www.biblegateway.com, so those of you can easily follow along):

The NIV states, “knelt before him”; New American Standard Bible, “bowed down before him”; The Message Bible, “went to his knees”; Amplified Bible, “prostrated himself before him”; New Living Translation, “knelt before him”; English Standard Version, “knelt before him.”; Contemporary English Version, “knelt before him”; New Century Version, “bowed down before him”; Young’s Literal Translation, “was bowing down to him”; New Life Version, “got down before him”; Holman Christian Standard Bible, “knelt before him”; New International Readers Version, “got down on his knees”; Worldwide English (New Testament), “came and kneeled in front of”; New International-UK Version, “knelt before him”; Today’s New International Version, “knelt before him”; Darby Translation uses “homage” which agrees with the majority!

The above totals 16 Bibles that state this verse differently than the King James Version. Also, to be fair, the Wycliffe New Testament, the 21st Century King James Version, and the New King James Version all use the word “Worshipped” in this same verse, thereby totaling four Bible’s using the word “worshipped” in this verse.

THE ABOVE IS FACT NO MATTER HOW BAD YOU DON’T WANT TO HEAR IT! DEAL WITH IT, AS IT IS FACT AND DEMONSTRATES THAT NOT EVERYTHING IS AS CUT AND DRY AS YOU WANT IT TO BE NOR DOES PICKING AND CHOOSING A BIBLE THAT SUPPORTS YOUR BELIEF MEAN THAT THE OTHERS ARE WRONG ALLOWING YOU TO IGNORE IT!!

HERE’S YOUR SIGN!!!!

Interestingly and again, this is the SAME EXACT GREEK word used in the Bible text, when Cornelius fell down at the feet of Peter in Acts!!!!

So before you open your mouth how about dealing with this for a change and not ignore it, to see what this is so!!!!

TP

TP fact is you may have a need for a sign, but why is Christ on the white seat judgment and has the authority to judge as well as to intercede in our behalf. You can put a sign out there if you wish. Paint it pretty. BTW TP if you looked in your greek and Hebrew you will find the word theos there which is a reference to the triune God head.

[praetorian]

TP fact is you may have a need for a sign, but why is Christ on the white seat judgment and has the authority to judge as well as to intercede in our behalf. You can put a sign out there if you wish. Paint it pretty. BTW TP if you looked in your greek and Hebrew you will find the word theos there which is a reference to the triune God head.


Turtle:

As to signs, first I brought it up so get your own, idea and also it is TRUE, if you wore a “Sign” people would know you are limited in comprehension and reading and would speak to you more slowly and in smaller words!!!!

You know the many scriptures that show that God appointed his Son Jesus as King of the Kingdom and he rules (with others as the Bible also states, though NO ONE RULES WITH GOD) and does as you state, “intercede” for us, and NOTE, if Jesus was God, then who would he be interceding for and between? Jesus can do this because he is NOT God, not the same person the Bible clearly distinguishes between him and his Father when simply stating “the God and Father of Jesus Christ” which it does many times!!!!!

And no, PROVE TO ME, SHOW ME WHERE THEOS IS TRIUNE!!! That is a bold face lie that you are stating!!!! Theos is not the word used in Hebrew!!! In Hebrew, the word Elohim, is in the plural, however, all words in Hebrew are in plural when speaking about majesty etc!

Finally even in the “plural” with regards to Elohim, nothing refers to a specific number, plural means “more than one” so who is to say, that it means, 2, 3, 10, 100 or a 1,000!

You are very confused! Here’s Your Sign!

TP

[oneway]

You then state, “Now deal with it. Who do we bow to only God and who is Christ God because one day we will all bow to
Him” no, the Bible shows that others have been bowed to like Kings, like King David etc!!!!! And we MUST bow to the
Son of God, but not that he is God!!!!


Praetorian, I am so glad that you made mention of this, because this was something else I was planning on addressing. Think about it for a moment. David was a king, was he not? When the leper, from your prev example, bowed down and worshipped Jesus, was Jesus wearing a king's attire? Was He wearing a king's crown? Was He wearing all the jewels that a king might wear? Did He at the time live in a King's castle/mansion? No! Even so, Jesus was still a king, as a matter of fact the king of kings..the thing about it, no one was expecting a king to show up in the form of a servent or even as a peasant.

So why in the world would a leper pay a king's homage to a mere man who probably resembled more of a poor peasant, than that of a richly king? Well, you might suggest it was because the leper had heard of the miracles that this man Jesus was performing, so he was paying his homage for the miracles sake. If so, I don't buy that. He worshipped Jesus because He recognized Him for who He was... and that would be he recognized his Maker.

[praetorian]

Because unlike David, who could not cure anyone Jesus was doing this all over the then land of Isreal, and the leper wanted to be cured!!!!! So why would he not bow to him for doing so and because he was in fact his Lord and Savior as he is ours, but that does not mean that "Jesus is God" nor that "God is Triune!"

Again, just because you do not like what you read from me, does not mean it is NOT true or that you can IGNORE what is stated above like in Matthew 8:1-3, (as it will not go away) about the manner in which some Bible's use the Greek word that is translated "worship" in some Bibles, when in other Bibles it is NOT!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

I know, as you are a pagan Christian! As this is NOT a Bible taught teaching matter how much you believe or want to believe that it is!!!

TP

According to the earliest Christian writings it is. Your theory was not invented until the fourth century.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Mr. Oneway, here is your answer.

http://sites.onlinemac.com/trwmainst/dake.html

[praetorian]

According to the earliest Christian writings it is. Your theory was not invented until the fourth century.

You are indeed correct, that "according to the earliest Christian writings it is" however, these writings are from those OUTSIDE the Bible and NOT IN THE BIBLE, therefore it is, as early as you wish, not found directly in the Bible! Fellow, there is just overwhelming evidence not to mention the innumerable admissions of Trinitarian scholars that admit this, for you to take the position that they are all wrong and you are right!

In the end, you do refer to "Christian Writings" but this is NOT Bible nor is it to say, that these authors, promoters of these “Christian Writings” were and are correct; it is that you and others like you that have chosen to believe they are correct, and others, like myself do not choose to go beyond the things written by the Apostles and others, that were clearly inspired by God!

There is no shame in believing what you believe, the shame is in trying to lie and or slant the truth about this or in not acknowledging that it is these NON BIBLE "Christian Writings" that express this and not the Bible!!!!

TP

[oneway]

Again, just because you do not like what you read from me, does not mean it is NOT true or that you can IGNORE what is
stated above like in Matthew 8:1-3, (as it will not go away) about the manner in which some Bible's use the Greek word that
is translated "worship" in some Bibles, when in other Bibles it is NOT!


Praetorian, please, let's get one thing straight here..it is not true that I don't like anything that you write. There is a reason why I don't debate much of it, it's because I can't. What you write is definitely contained in the Scriptures. It's your overall conclusions that I question. It appears to me that you're failing to use deductive reasoning based upon Biblical evidence, or who knows, perhaps it is even I who is failing to use deductive reasoning based upon Biblical evidence.

I indeed recognize that you make excellent points. I also do not ignore them...I simply can't argue with them..since I would be argueing with Scriptures themselves. Believe it not, in my own sorta way I'm paying you a compliment. This doesn't mean that I can fully agree with you nor do I have to fully agree with you. Keep this in mind, this works both ways, when I don't agree with you, you obviously don't agree with me. So please, let's not make this one sided.

[praetorian]

Praetorian, please, let's get one thing straight here..it is not true that I don't like anything that you write. There is a reason why I don't debate much of it, it's because I can't. What you write is definitely contained in the Scriptures. It's your overall conclusions that I question. It appears to me that you're failing to use deductive reasoning based upon Biblical evidence, or who knows, perhaps it is even I who is failing to use deductive reasoning based upon Biblical evidence.

I indeed recognize that you make excellent points. I also do not ignore them...I simply can't argue with them..since I would be argueing with Scriptures themselves. Believe it not, in my own sorta way I'm paying you a compliment. This doesn't mean that I can fully agree with you nor do I have to fully agree with you. Keep this in mind, this works both ways, when I don't agree with you, you obviously don't agree with me. So please, let's not make this one sided.

Dear Oneness:

Fair enough, and please accept my comments to you as a compliment as well, as you are one of the few here that actually do not fight the simple and plain reasoning from the scriptures.

Therefore may I suggest please, that we bear in mind our Lord and Master’s own words, where he stated; that he was born and or came into the world to bear witness to the “truth” (John 18:37) and that he was the “way, and the truth and the life” as stated at John 14:6, also, as stated at John 4:23, 24, that we must worship God with “spirit” and “truth” and finally (for this discussion) he tells us plainly that if we remain or stay in his “word” then we would be his, and that we would know the “truth” and that this “truth” would set us free as found at John 8:31, 32.

I believe this words as you do, and if so, then we as people should, no must be able to find this “truth” about God and Jesus or Jesus words would be a lie, which we know they cannot be!

If we stick to the Bible and only the Bible we can and must come to this “truth” as told to us plainly in the Bible, and note it is not our “truth” or the “truth” of those outside the Bible, but God’s Truth, and that of his Son, that tells us what the “Truth” is, whether we like it or not!

You have heard the expression; ‘the truth hurts’ it does, and even more so when it comes to matters so personal as to do with our very lives, especially when confronted with things that require that we “Change” our positions on something, regardless of how long it is held, in light of what the Bible teaches us!

Take Care,

TP

[oneway]

Dear Oneness:

Fair enough, and please accept my comments to you as a compliment as well, as you are one of the few here that actually do not fight the simple and plain reasoning from the scriptures.

Therefore may I suggest please, that we bear in mind our Lord and Master’s own words, where he stated; that he was born and or came into the world to bear witness to the “truth” (John 18:37) and that he was the “way, and the truth and the life” as stated at John 14:6, also, as stated at John 4:23, 24, that we must worship God with “spirit” and “truth” and finally (for this discussion) he tells us plainly that if we remain or stay in his “word” then we would be his, and that we would know the “truth” and that this “truth” would set us free as found at John 8:31, 32.

I believe this words as you do, and if so, then we as people should, no must be able to find this “truth” about God and Jesus or Jesus words would be a lie, which we know they cannot be!

If we stick to the Bible and only the Bible we can and must come to this “truth” as told to us plainly in the Bible, and note it is not our “truth” or the “truth” of those outside the Bible, but God’s Truth, and that of his Son, that tells us what the “Truth” is, whether we like it or not!

You have heard the expression; ‘the truth hurts’ it does, and even more so when it comes to matters so personal as to do with our very lives, especially when confronted with things that require that we “Change” our positions on something, regardless of how long it is held, in light of what the Bible teaches us!

Take Care,

TP



Praetorian, You have given ample proof why you believe that Jesus is not God. All I can do is to try and counter that with why I believe He is God, even tho the Scriptures according to you state otherwise

Here's a little something to digest for a bit. Even tho I did get some of this idea elewhere, this is my own thoughts put into my own words.


In the beginning was Eve, and Eve was with Adam, and Eve was Adam.

The question is, how do we interpret this so that all of it is true?

We would render the Adam in clause b as a proper name. In clause c, we would render that Adam as a class, such as in mankind. That would make Eve of the same class as Adam, since we know she came forth from that Adam in clause b, but she would not be the Adam in clause b. Also Adam would be the higher of the hierechy since we know that the male is the head of the female.


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The question is, how do we interpret this so that all of it is true?
The same way we did in the above example.

We would render the God in clause b as a proper name. In clause c, we would render that God as a class of being, such as how mankind is a class of being describing humankind. That would make the Word as the same class as the God in clause b, since we know the Word came forth from the God in clause b, but the Word would not be the God in clause b. Also the God in clause b would be higher in the hierechy since we know that the Father is the most high God.

If you're honest with yourself, you can see from my first example, Eve was no less human than Adam was, even tho they weren't the same person, and that both Adam and Eve could be classified as Adam and still be true. We see that fact in Genesis 5:2.

The same in the second example. Jesus is no less God than the Father Himself is. They're simply not the same person, yet they're both fully God, and one God at that, not 2. Just like Adam and Eve were both of one mankind, not of 2 or more seperate mankinds, yet 2 different people, and both fully human.

How can Jesus be God, and the Father be God, yet not have more than one God? Just like I prev explained, plus, if you recall, who's will did Jesus always do? The Father's. That alone would make them one God in unison, since it is actually the Father's will that trumps and get's acted upon.

[turtle]

Turtle:

As to signs, first I brought it up so get your own, idea and also it is TRUE, if you wore a “Sign” people would know you are limited in comprehension and reading and would speak to you more slowly and in smaller words!!!!

You know the many scriptures that show that God appointed his Son Jesus as King of the Kingdom and he rules (with others as the Bible also states, though NO ONE RULES WITH GOD) and does as you state, “intercede” for us, and NOTE, if Jesus was God, then who would he be interceding for and between? Jesus can do this because he is NOT God, not the same person the Bible clearly distinguishes between him and his Father when simply stating “the God and Father of Jesus Christ” which it does many times!!!!!

And no, PROVE TO ME, SHOW ME WHERE THEOS IS TRIUNE!!! That is a bold face lie that you are stating!!!! Theos is not the word used in Hebrew!!! In Hebrew, the word Elohim, is in the plural, however, all words in Hebrew are in plural when speaking about majesty etc!

Finally even in the “plural” with regards to Elohim, nothing refers to a specific number, plural means “more than one” so who is to say, that it means, 2, 3, 10, 100 or a 1,000!

You are very confused! Here’s Your Sign!

TP

TP I will show you with scripture. Moses is filled with the Holy Spirit. Moses is in the tent, God is in the cloud, God is in the ark insdie the tent.

Exodus 33:7-10 KJV
(7) And Moses took the tabernacle, and pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the Tabernacle of the congregation. And it came to pass, that every one which sought the LORD went out unto the tabernacle of the congregation, which was without the camp.
(8) And it came to pass, when Moses went out unto the tabernacle, that all the people rose up, and stood every man at his tent door, and looked after Moses, until he was gone into the tabernacle.
(9) And it came to pass, as Moses entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar descended, and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the LORD talked with Moses.
(10) And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door.

Now PT before you get your dander up, how do I know that God was in the cloud.

Exodus 13:21-22 KJV
(21) And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:
(22) He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people.

Moses is a type of Christ, He is not Christ because he is only man and not God son in the physical since. Christ was God physically and spiritually, for He was the only begotten of the Father. Now Moses is filled with the Holy Spirit, Moses is inside the tent, making intercession for Israel, God covers the tent and is before the people. Covered by a cloud. God is also covered in the ark before Moses in the tabernacle. The veil separating Moses from God. Yet God Holy Spirit is on Moses inside Moses and the people see Moses. Christ body is like a veil, Though He be fully human, He is fully God. Just like the Cloud is fully covering God but God is in the Cloud. The difference between the cloud and Christ is the cloud is a creation of God. Jesus is the Only Begotten of the Father. Meaning God created Christ in Mary's womb the way man is created without sex. For Mary was a virgin.

Now that you are totally confused or totally enlighten I do not know. But the Holy Spirit in the Cloud and Ark and Moses is the same in each believe of Christ being the Son of God and God. Moses could never be God but he housed a part of God. Moses was human and could go before the people. Christ is human and could go before the people.

[truth_child]

Jesus is still god no matter waht the nwt says and trys to change it is jesus is god and will always be god almighty

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

You are indeed correct, that "according to the earliest Christian writings it is" however, these writings are from those OUTSIDE the Bible and NOT IN THE BIBLE, therefore it is, as early as you wish, not found directly in the Bible! Fellow, there is just overwhelming evidence not to mention the innumerable admissions of Trinitarian scholars that admit this, for you to take the position that they are all wrong and you are right!

In the end, you do refer to "Christian Writings" but this is NOT Bible nor is it to say, that these authors, promoters of these “Christian Writings” were and are correct; it is that you and others like you that have chosen to believe they are correct, and others, like myself do not choose to go beyond the things written by the Apostles and others, that were clearly inspired by God!

There is no shame in believing what you believe, the shame is in trying to lie and or slant the truth about this or in not acknowledging that it is these NON BIBLE "Christian Writings" that express this and not the Bible!!!!

TP

That, my friend, is your religion's dogma.

[turtle]

Jesus is still god no matter waht the nwt says and trys to change it is jesus is god and will always be god almighty


TC you believe Jesus is Little g and not big G??

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Jesus is still god no matter waht the nwt says and trys to change it is jesus is god and will always be god almighty

Hold to your guns, Mr. Arron. There are those who would like to deceive you, including your own religion.

[praetorian]

Praetorian, You have given ample proof why you believe that Jesus is not God. All I can do is to try and counter that with why I believe He is God, even tho the Scriptures according to you state otherwise

Here's a little something to digest for a bit. Even tho I did get some of this idea elewhere, this is my own thoughts put into my own words.


In the beginning was Eve, and Eve was with Adam, and Eve was Adam.

The question is, how do we interpret this so that all of it is true?

We would render the Adam in clause b as a proper name. In clause c, we would render that Adam as a class, such as in mankind. That would make Eve of the same class as Adam, since we know she came forth from that Adam in clause b, but she would not be the Adam in clause b. Also Adam would be the higher of the hierechy since we know that the male is the head of the female.


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The question is, how do we interpret this so that all of it is true?
The same way we did in the above example.

We would render the God in clause b as a proper name. In clause c, we would render that God as a class of being, such as how mankind is a class of being describing humankind. That would make the Word as the same class as the God in clause b, since we know the Word came forth from the God in clause b, but the Word would not be the God in clause b. Also the God in clause b would be higher in the hierechy since we know that the Father is the most high God.

If you're honest with yourself, you can see from my first example, Eve was no less human than Adam was, even tho they weren't the same person, and that both Adam and Eve could be classified as Adam and still be true. We see that fact in Genesis 5:2.

The same in the second example. Jesus is no less God than the Father Himself is. They're simply not the same person, yet they're both fully God, and one God at that, not 2. Just like Adam and Eve were both of one mankind, not of 2 or more seperate mankinds, yet 2 different people, and both fully human.

How can Jesus be God, and the Father be God, yet not have more than one God? Just like I prev explained, plus, if you recall, who's will did Jesus always do? The Father's. That alone would make them one God in unison, since it is actually the Father's will that trumps and get's acted upon.

Dear Oneway:

Nicely done, but NOT BIBLE!

You state, QUOTE: “You have given ample proof why you believe that Jesus is not God. All I can do is to try and counter that with why I believe He is God, even tho the Scriptures according to you state otherwise” END QUOTE: and reply, no, not that I “state” anything, like this or that, but that the scriptures I referred you to plainly state that Jesus has a God and Father and that he is NOT Almighty God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth and the things in them; again not that I state anything but the Bible states this, in fact all of them use the phrase “God and Father of Jesus Christ.” I feel it is important to note this distinction of Bible verses me and or any human!

You then go on to state, and I will put this all together in one paragraph, QUOTE: “Here's a little something to digest for a bit. Even tho I did get some of this idea elewhere, this is my own thoughts put into my own words. In the beginning was Eve, and Eve was with Adam, and Eve was Adam. The question is, how do we interpret this so that all of it is true?” we don’t, we do not attempt to interpret what is plainly stated in the Bible as if and when we do, we go beyond the Bible rule of what is written and risk being accursed with those who do! (See 1 Corinthians 4:6 and Galatians 1: 6-9).

Also, note, when one does this, go beyong what is written now we enter the realm of human teachings and thinking, where we then must decide what would should do as you state, in effect “interpret this is that all of it is true” and this will take you into what Satan wants, a world of total confusion, where ‘my opinion is better than your opinion’ or these writings and or early Church Fathers said this and or that, and you remain, in human confusion. Instead, one should take what the Bible states and accept it, and where it is literal, literal, where figurative, then figurative! And, the Bible interprets itself, without the help of human aid or thinking and does this all by itself!

Therefore according to the account in Genesis account Adam and Eve were real persons as corroborated by Jesus himself at scriptures found at Mark 10:6 or in the lineage account of Luke or by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:9; were all of these people, including Jesus, quoting and or referring to people that simply did not exist? This would also disregard, the many other genealogical accounts throughout the Bible referring to them!

As to class A, B, C etc. or other Adam class, the Bible does not do this, man and his teachings do this! Could one however, to teach a Bible lesson and refer to a class of people, like “Adam” ABC, by way of an analogy, say to teach some point or lesson, sure, however, it is one thing to do so, and quite another to use this for and or then call into question what God’s inspired word the Bible states about them being real people, would not be accurate and also would be going beyond what is written!

So as to your paragraph, QUOTE: “We would render the Adam in clause b as a proper name. In clause c, we would render that Adam as a class, such as in mankind. That would make Eve of the same class as Adam, since we know she came forth from that Adam in clause b, but she would not be the Adam in clause b. Also Adam would be the higher of the hierechy since we know that the male is the head of the female” END QUOTE: and reply, that since the Bible does not address these issues, I have nothing to express on my own, by way of opinion!


You then quote the most popular rendering of John 1:1, here as “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” and reply; that if that was the only way this verse was rendered in ALL English Bibles, which we know that it is NOT, excluding what many modern scholars have to say about this rendering being incorrect; state that at best one would have a duoity, or duality, meaning nothing in this verse shows that God is Triune! Finally, the verses surrounding this text refer distinguish both Jesus from his Father and God which also stands in contradiction to this particular rendering!

Therefore, if you question is to refer to this particular verse, then I have posted some things to consider, as there are so many other scriptures.

You then ask, “The question is, how do we interpret this so that all of it is true?
The same way we did in the above example” and first, you need to take into consideration what has already been mentioned in the previous paragraph that has been amply demonstrated, ad nauseam here on this string, and if one is being fair, then all of the scriptures, no just one or a few, need to be considered, knowing that the overwhelming greater of them contradicts this type of thinking as expressed in majority renderings of the latter part of John 1:1!

Your state, QUOTE; “We would render the God in clause b as a proper name. In clause c, we would render that God as a class of being, such as how mankind is a class of being describing humankind. That would make the Word as the same class as the God in clause b, since we know the Word came forth from the God in clause b, but the Word would not be the God in clause b. Also the God in clause b would be higher in the hierechy since we know that the Father is the most high God” END QUOTE: and reply; again this type of reasoning is based upon a foundation you attempt to build on above that is not Biblical, nor expressed in the Bible but is obviously used and contemplated to further the aim of what is taught in The Anathanasian Creed (and not the Bible) therefore you reasoning is not fair nor appropriate! In fact, but for The Anathanasian Creed; in other words if you were to take this event in history that originated this Creed, you would not believe it today!

You state, QUOTE: “If you're honest with yourself, you can see from my first example, Eve was no less human than Adam was, even though they weren't the same person, and that both Adam and Eve could be classified as Adam and still be true. We see that fact in Genesis 5:2” End QUOTE: and reply, NO, that is NOT correct as your first example is NOT Biblical, and second, I did not address the matter of Eve being “less human than Adam was” as the Bible does not teach this, it teaches they were equal in creation, however with different responsibilities! Oneness, a person can be awe struck by the creation of the famous California Sequoia trees, especially when driving through one, as well as be awe struck by a lovely flower on the side of the road, so lovely, that it causes one to stop; both the tree and the flower are equal in creation, however, you would not build a house from the flower any more than you would use the Sequoia tree as an ornamental piece on your dining room table! Equally created, but not equal in respective duties!

Therefore you continue to building on a faulty foundation that is NOT Biblical in order to make this next statement and add, that you have unfairly matched, unequal analogies to form and building on your suppositions; QUOTE: “The same in the second example. Jesus is no less God than the Father Himself is. They're simply not the same person, yet they're both fully God, and one God at that, not 2. Just like Adam and Eve were both of one mankind, not of 2 or more seperate mankinds, yet 2 different people, and both fully human” END QUOTE: and reply; No, that is NOT when it comes to Jesus and his God and Father, as the Bible clearly refers to them in different roles, as the term Father and Son do by way of distinguishing them, also, the Bible speaks of Jesus being obedient to his God and Father, and that Jesus prayed to his God and Father and that the God and Father of Jesus is the Head of Jesus, and that Jesus is his Servant, that Jesus is submissive to his Father, that God gave Jesus power etc etc. etc! One is unable to ignore the many scriptures that show them totally separate and distinct the one to the other, and yes, they are both spirit creatures, though there are many other spirit creatures, that the Bible tells us that God created, for and through his Son Jesus, which again, demonstrates they are totally separate and different, distinct spirit persons-creatures!!!! Your words that they are “both fully God” etc. are found outside the Bible in dogma, creeds and theologies of humans and NOT BIBLE! If it were in the Bible we would not be having this discussion, but as it is, it is CLEARLY NOT!!!!!

You then state, QUOTE; “How can Jesus be God, and the Father be God, yet not have more than one God? Just like I prev explained, plus, if you recall, who's will did Jesus always do? The Father's. That alone would make them one God in unison, since it is actually the Father's will that trumps and get's acted upon” END QUOTE; and reply, you keep building on non Biblical foundations in order to draw upon your suppositions that are clearly from outside the Bible, and also; just because a Son does everything that pleases his Father, both in human terms and or spirit terms, does not mean they are the same person any more than when people get married they “become ONE FLESH” and yet, they are NOT physically the same person, but the same in purpose and in life, so too the Bible speaks of Jesus having a “God and Father” as it does not get any clearer than not! So long as one does not use sources outside the Bible as the source for their information as you have done so here!!!

Again, nicely written, however, it is NOT BIBLE!

TP

[praetorian]

TP I will show you with scripture. Moses is filled with the Holy Spirit. Moses is in the tent, God is in the cloud, God is in the ark insdie the tent.

Exodus 33:7-10 KJV
(7) And Moses took the tabernacle, and pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the Tabernacle of the congregation. And it came to pass, that every one which sought the LORD went out unto the tabernacle of the congregation, which was without the camp.
(8) And it came to pass, when Moses went out unto the tabernacle, that all the people rose up, and stood every man at his tent door, and looked after Moses, until he was gone into the tabernacle.
(9) And it came to pass, as Moses entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar descended, and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the LORD talked with Moses.
(10) And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door.

Now PT before you get your dander up, how do I know that God was in the cloud.

Exodus 13:21-22 KJV
(21) And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:
(22) He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people.

Moses is a type of Christ, He is not Christ because he is only man and not God son in the physical since. Christ was God physically and spiritually, for He was the only begotten of the Father. Now Moses is filled with the Holy Spirit, Moses is inside the tent, making intercession for Israel, God covers the tent and is before the people. Covered by a cloud. God is also covered in the ark before Moses in the tabernacle. The veil separating Moses from God. Yet God Holy Spirit is on Moses inside Moses and the people see Moses. Christ body is like a veil, Though He be fully human, He is fully God. Just like the Cloud is fully covering God but God is in the Cloud. The difference between the cloud and Christ is the cloud is a creation of God. Jesus is the Only Begotten of the Father. Meaning God created Christ in Mary's womb the way man is created without sex. For Mary was a virgin.

Now that you are totally confused or totally enlighten I do not know. But the Holy Spirit in the Cloud and Ark and Moses is the same in each believe of Christ being the Son of God and God. Moses could never be God but he housed a part of God. Moses was human and could go before the people. Christ is human and could go before the people.

Turtle:

I will not respond on point to you any further, as all you do is, when I address something you wait or forget the reply, and post it again, and discuss the same thing over and over again, to no avail,

In the End, you will never find a scripture in the Bible that plainly tells you that "Jesus is God" and or that "God is Triune."

If someone else wants me to do so, because they have fallen for your cow poop, then I will, but I am done with you as no scripture or quote from "Jesus himself" will you respect, UNLESS and OF COURSE you agree with it FIRST!

You think to much of yourself, to go beyond Jesus words, and know that I have never done so, as though Jesus did not say what he meant, or the Bible writers did not do so either!

This is your issue to believe the lie, which I choose not to!!!

That is your right!!!

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12, especially 11!

TP

[praetorian]

That, my friend, is your religion's dogma.

No it is history, that clearly tells you this, or you would be showing me the many scriptures that clearly, plainly, simply and grammticaly state that "Jesus is God" and or "God is Triune!"

TP

[praetorian]

Jesus is still god no matter waht the nwt says and trys to change it is jesus is god and will always be god almighty

Get it! SIMPLE WORDS HERE REALLY!!!

Disagree with me all you want, however your using the NWT as a point of reply is silly, as I HAVE NOT ONCE, AGAIN, NOT ONCE USED IT AS A RERERENCE FOR JOHN 1:1 or OTHER SCRIPTURE!!!!! So, what about those other Bible's?????

Get bent!

TP

[truth_child]

turtle now you know me better than that i mistyped it i menat GOD in BIG LETTERS

[turtle]

Turtle:

I will not respond on point to you any further, as all you do is, when I address something you wait or forget the reply, and post it again, and discuss the same thing over and over again, to no avail,

In the End, you will never find a scripture in the Bible that plainly tells you that "Jesus is God" and or that "God is Triune."

If someone else wants me to do so, because they have fallen for your cow poop, then I will, but I am done with you as no scripture or quote from "Jesus himself" will you respect, UNLESS and OF COURSE you agree with it FIRST!

You think to much of yourself, to go beyond Jesus words, and know that I have never done so, as though Jesus did not say what he meant, or the Bible writers did not do so either!

This is your issue to believe the lie, which I choose not to!!!

That is your right!!!

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12, especially 11!

TP

TP don't talk to me.

Matthew 1:23 KJV
(23) Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

[turtle]

turtle now you know me better than that i mistyped it i menat GOD in BIG LETTERS

I know what you mean but thousand upon thousand of readers do not. You need to clarify when you type that one thing. It is important. Saying little g makes Christ equal to us and He is big G.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

No it is history, that clearly tells you this, or you would be showing me the many scriptures that clearly, plainly, simply and grammticaly state that "Jesus is God" and or "God is Triune!"

TP

I will glad show you those scriptures when you show me scripture that clearly states God is omnipresent. Or better yet, show me scripture that clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states that the great China Wall can be seen from the moon.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

I know what you mean but thousand upon thousand of readers do not. You need to clarify when you type that one thing. It is important. Saying little g makes Christ equal to us and He is big G.

hahahahhahahahahhahahahahaehehhehehehehe!!!!!!!!!! ! Now we know Rev. Ms. Turtle is a little god. How udderly hilarious!!!!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

turtle now you know me better than that i mistyped it i menat GOD in BIG LETTERS

Careful, Mr. Arron, Rev. Ms. Turtle is trying to sucker you.

[turtle]

Praetorian here are some verses to help you out. These are all a reference to Jesus as Jehovah.

From Nave's Topical Bible

Divinity of:
As Jehovah:
General references
Isa_40:3; Mat_3:3
Jehovah of glory
Psa_24:7; Psa_24:10; 1Co_2:8; Jam_2:1
Jehovah our righteousness
Jer_23:5-6; 1Co_1:30
Jehovah above all
Psa_97:9; Joh_3:31
Jehovah the first and the last
Isa_44:6; Rev_1:17; Isa_48:12-16; Rev_22:13
Jehovah's fellow and equal
Zec_13:7; Phi_2:6
Jehovah of hosts
Isa_6:1-3; Joh_12:41; Isa_8:13-14; 1Pe_2:8
Jehovah
Psa_110:1; Mat_22:42-45
Jehovah the shepherd
Isa_40:10-11; Heb_13:20
Jehovah, for whose glory all things were created
Pro_16:4; Col_1:16
Jehovah the messenger of the covenant
Mal_3:1; Luk_2:27

[truth_child]

turtle since i am the only one on here who makes mistaks in typing i best not type any more may GOD BLESS you

[praetorian]

I will glad show you those scriptures when you show me scripture that clearly states God is omnipresent. Or better yet, show me scripture that clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states that the great China Wall can be seen from the moon.

TATM:

First, that is NOT what I asked of you and you know it!!!!

I stated in reply to you, NOTE AND QUOTE: “No it is history, that clearly tells you this, or you would be showing me the many scriptures that clearly, plainly, simply and grammticaly [sic] state that "Jesus is God" and or "God is Triune!" End Quote.

And you replied NOTE AND QUOTE: “I will glad show you those scriptures when you show me scripture that clearly states God is omnipresent. Or better yet, show me scripture that clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states that the great China Wall can be seen from the moon.” End Quote.

So, how do you feel your reply addresses my post which you yourself QUOTE? It doesn’t!!! Further my reply was in DIRECT response to your previous post above it!!!

Thus, your reply, as usual does not address the issues, but it also, purposely switches the subject matter. You are truly adept at this!!!! However, if you wish to get into what the Bible states, as you put it, that “God is omnipresent”; (and you may want to start a new string for this) and reply, that the Bible clearly expresses that God is omnipotent, and omniscient, (some people get these all confused) though NOT that he is “Omnipresent” (another pagan teaching, note how the Hindu God’s are both a Trinity and omnipresent-interesting).

As to your statement, “Or better yet, show me scripture that clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states that the great China Wall can be seen from the moon” and reply; from whose standpoint do you ask this silly question, human or spirit creatures? Also, in the end, other than what humans who have been in outer space have said about this specifically, which I trust you know about it; you have left the Bible (as usual) as one is unable to speak about this matter from the standpoint of the Bible, as the Bible does not speak to this on point!

Sadly your conduct and words, demonstrate that you do not want the Truth about God, his Son etc, FROM THE BIBLE, but instead, you desire to choose to believe what you want to believe, and that is OK, but it does not mean it is BIBLE BASED!!!!

TP

[praetorian]

Praetorian here are some verses to help you out. These are all a reference to Jesus as Jehovah.

From Nave's Topical Bible

Divinity of:
As Jehovah:
General references
Isa_40:3; Mat_3:3
Jehovah of glory
Psa_24:7; Psa_24:10; 1Co_2:8; Jam_2:1
Jehovah our righteousness
Jer_23:5-6; 1Co_1:30
Jehovah above all
Psa_97:9; Joh_3:31
Jehovah the first and the last
Isa_44:6; Rev_1:17; Isa_48:12-16; Rev_22:13
Jehovah's fellow and equal
Zec_13:7; Phi_2:6
Jehovah of hosts
Isa_6:1-3; Joh_12:41; Isa_8:13-14; 1Pe_2:8
Jehovah
Psa_110:1; Mat_22:42-45
Jehovah the shepherd
Isa_40:10-11; Heb_13:20
Jehovah, for whose glory all things were created
Pro_16:4; Col_1:16
Jehovah the messenger of the covenant
Mal_3:1; Luk_2:27


Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

TP

[praetorian]

TP

For anyone to state, QUOTE; “I know what you mean but thousand upon thousand of readers do not. You need to clarify when you type that one thing. It is important. Saying little g makes Christ equal to us and He is big G.” and reply, especially that “Saying little g makes Christ equal to us” is OUTRAGEOUS, as that would mean that first a person would have to think that they are a “god” in the first place, which they are not!!!! How dare anything think that, as there is PART of the problem! Someone thinks to much of themselves!!! And, in GREEK or HEBREW there are no capital letters, it is DONE in English to distinguish between common and proper nouns!!!!!

There are some spiritual sick and perverted thinkers on this board who are completely unaware what they themselves express!!!!

TP

[turtle]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

TP

Tp I will put this in a mathmatic equestion

A= Jehovah ( called the mighty God, Everlasting Father, bread of life, judge, righteousness, salvation and so forth)

B+Jesus and He is called all the things Jehovah is called. Mighty God, everlasting Father, Bread of Life and judge, rigteousness,salvation and so forth)

Do you not believe

A=B

[praetorian]

The Bible does not teach any sort of convoluted mathematics about God nor his Son, people do! You are making this up and copying (as you are not that bright) from others and parroting, (Polly wants a cracker) while all the time you are only supporting this pagan theory creed that is known as The Anathasian Creed!

YHWH is the Almighty God, who has never had a beginning and his Son, is Godlike, a God, (and in the Bible, God calls others “gods” LITTLE G) and God created him first before all other things (See Colossians 1:15, in the NASB, “…first born of all creation”) and the God and Father of Jesus Christ has never been the first born of anything-creation or otherwise!!!!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

[turtle]

The Bible does not teach any sort of convoluted mathematics about God nor his Son, people do! You are making this up and copying (as you are not that bright) from others and parroting, (Polly wants a cracker) while all the time you are only supporting this pagan theory creed that is known as The Anathasian Creed!

YHWH is the Almighty God, who has never had a beginning and his Son, is Godlike, a God, (and in the Bible, God calls others “gods” LITTLE G) and God created him first before all other things (See Colossians 1:15, in the NASB, “…first born of all creation”) and the God and Father of Jesus Christ has never been the first born of anything-creation or otherwise!!!!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

praetorian your insults to me prove not only who you are, but what you are.

[turtle]

Jesus is the Light of the world. Who also is the light of the world God. Jesus is God.

[turtle]

Luke 20:1-21 KJV
(1) And it came to pass, that on one of those days, as he taught the people in the temple, and preached the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes came upon him with the elders,
(2) And spake unto him, saying, Tell us, by what authority doest thou these things? or who is he that gave thee this authority?
(3) And he answered and said unto them, I will also ask you one thing; and answer me:
(4) The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men?
(5) And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then believed ye him not?
(6) But and if we say, Of men; all the people will stone us: for they be persuaded that John was a prophet.
(7) And they answered, that they could not tell whence it was.
(8) And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.
(9) Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
(10) And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
(11) And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
(12) And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
(13) Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
(14) But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
(15) So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
(16) He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
(17) And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
(18) Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
(19) And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
(20) And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.
(21) And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly:


Praetorian, Christ did not tell you the authority in which He taught. why because they did not believe Him. The authority I have to teach does not come from man. Does nto come from organization, does not come from heritage. It comes from the call of God on my life. I am and never will be God, I am not God, i am not Jesus. However I do teach what God lays on my heart to teach from His word the Holy Bible. God instructed Paul, and all those that came after the time of Christ to teach education is only a plus when it comes to college degrees.It helps people know your dedication.

[praetorian]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

[turtle]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

I did not post to you or you me, for see you and I did not post each other's name so who are you talking to praetorian?

[praetorian]

Above someone wrote me stating in the last paragraph of post number 625, "Praetorian, Christ did not tell you..."

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

Matthew 4:10, "Go away Satan" as Jesus quotes the OT and states we need to worship NOTE, HIS GOD AND FATHER, NOT HIMSELF WHEN HE GOES BACK TO HEAVEN.

And for you, John 8:43, 44!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

TATM:

First, that is NOT what I asked of you and you know it!!!!

I stated in reply to you, NOTE AND QUOTE: “No it is history, that clearly tells you this, or you would be showing me the many scriptures that clearly, plainly, simply and grammticaly [sic] state that "Jesus is God" and or "God is Triune!" End Quote.

And you replied NOTE AND QUOTE: “I will glad show you those scriptures when you show me scripture that clearly states God is omnipresent. Or better yet, show me scripture that clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states that the great China Wall can be seen from the moon.” End Quote.

So, how do you feel your reply addresses my post which you yourself QUOTE? It doesn’t!!! Further my reply was in DIRECT response to your previous post above it!!!

Thus, your reply, as usual does not address the issues, but it also, purposely switches the subject matter. You are truly adept at this!!!! However, if you wish to get into what the Bible states, as you put it, that “God is omnipresent”; (and you may want to start a new string for this) and reply, that the Bible clearly expresses that God is omnipotent, and omniscient, (some people get these all confused) though NOT that he is “Omnipresent” (another pagan teaching, note how the Hindu God’s are both a Trinity and omnipresent-interesting).

As to your statement, “Or better yet, show me scripture that clearly, plainly, simply and grammatically states that the great China Wall can be seen from the moon” and reply; from whose standpoint do you ask this silly question, human or spirit creatures? Also, in the end, other than what humans who have been in outer space have said about this specifically, which I trust you know about it; you have left the Bible (as usual) as one is unable to speak about this matter from the standpoint of the Bible, as the Bible does not speak to this on point!

Sadly your conduct and words, demonstrate that you do not want the Truth about God, his Son etc, FROM THE BIBLE, but instead, you desire to choose to believe what you want to believe, and that is OK, but it does not mean it is BIBLE BASED!!!!

TP

Come, my friend, your religion has created the dogma you are searching for. I answered your dogma with the same logic you used. You can not answer my question because your logic is illogical to begin with.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

Come, my friend, I quoted many early Christian writers who all believed in the Holy Trinity from the first century. Arian created the dogma your religion is selling in the fourth century. Try telling the truth for once.

[praetorian]

Come, my friend, your religion has created the dogma you are searching for. I answered your dogma with the same logic you used. You can not answer my question because your logic is illogical to begin with.

TATM:

You disappoint me! My “religion has” nothing to do with what you refer to as “created the dogma you are searching for” as I am not searching for anything, as the facts of this apostasy of The Anathasian Creed is to well known for that and has nothing to do with Witnesses of God or ME!!!!! Second, this is YOU, that you speak of as you buy this NON Bible BABEL!!!! Therefore you replied to something with a logic that makes no sense, (not me) and while you may not agree with me, I do make cohesive sense, so much so, that a 8th grader can understand it, so why not you?

Therefore I reply in kind, “You can not answer my question because your logic is illogical to begin with” and add, what I ask is very simple, in the style of “Dick and Jane” and “Dr. Seuss” and that is: Where in the Bible does it explicitly state, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” as the Bible explicitly states, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that Jesus has a “God and Father” thereby distinguishing between the two!

Now go have fund with Dick and Jane and or Dr. Seuss and learn to read and write and don’t forget that big one, comprehend, note not “selectively comprehend” but comprehend as understand!

TP

[praetorian]

Come, my friend, I quoted many early Christian writers who all believed in the Holy Trinity from the first century. Arian created the dogma your religion is selling in the fourth century. Try telling the truth for once.

TATM

We are not friends, and, you have in fact told the truth here, when you state, “I quoted many early Christian writers who all believed in the Holy Trinity from the first century” and reply, THAT IS THE POINT!!!! YOU ADMIT YOU HAVE TAKEN THIS NOT FROM THE BIBLE BUT FROM WHAT SOME MEN HAVE DONE TO INTERPRET WHAT IT MEANS THEREGO THE ANATHASIAN CREED, IF IT WERE NOT IN THE CREED BUT BIBLE, YOU WE WOULD NOT BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION!

As to Arian and or others, not believing in this creed, only goes to establish that there were others, opposed to this, but he and those in the minority lost out on this pagan presided over meeting!

Unlike The Anathasian Creed being presided over by a Roman Pagan, the Bible has no such pagans inspired writers, and you find fault with me, for wanting to take the Bible over what these men at that counsel did with a Pagan presiding over the meetings! GET REAL!

It does not get more truthful than this: Where in the Bible does it explicitly state, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” as the Bible explicitly states, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that Jesus has a “God and Father” thereby distinguishing between the two! Where do we find the words in the Bible of The Anathasian Creed, we don’t!!!!!

Now go have fun with Dick and Jane and or Dr. Seuss and learn to read and write and don’t forget that big one, comprehend, note not “selectively comprehend” but comprehend as understand!

TP

[praetorian]

TATM:

Tell me, when do you think things as expressed here in Acts 20:29, 30; 1 Timothy 4:1-3, and Galatians 1:6-9, 11, and especially 12, BEGIN TO APPLY? Note: Galatians, (NASB) “For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” Therefore we only have God’s word to use in order to compare it with others, humans state! I choose Bible ONLY, and you have chosen the “Early Church Father’s” none of who are inspired Bible writers to put your faith in! Good for you! However you have chosen poorly!!!!

It does not get more truthful than this: Where in the Bible does it explicitly state, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” as the Bible explicitly states, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that Jesus has a “God and Father” thereby distinguishing between the two! Where do we find the words in the Bible of The Anathasian Creed, we don’t!!!!!

Now go have fund with Dick and Jane and or Dr. Seuss and learn to read and write and don’t forget that big one, comprehend, note not “selectively comprehend” but comprehend as understand!

TP

[turtle]

Trinity mentioned in the Bible and explained Now take a look at these verse and read closely allowing the word to speak and not me. And take a look closely at the last two verses and the definiation below it.



Colossians 1:12-20 KJV
(12) Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
(13) Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
(14) In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
(15) Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
(16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
(17) And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
(18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
(19) For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
(20) And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Ephesians 1:21-23 KJV
(21) Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
(22) And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
(23) Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Colossians 2:9-10 KJV
(9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
(10) And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

Romans 1:20 KJV
(20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Praetorian,

Once you like to say you use Bible and do not look at the word in the last two verse, the Godhead. Stronge's Hebrew and Greek dictionary

G2320
θεότης
theotēs
theh-ot'-ace
From G2316; divinity (abstractly): - godhead.

Theos means more then one, the word for trinity in the Bible is Godhead,

[turtle]

Praetorian and ATAM I got you both an ignore ain't God good. I just added scripture without knowing a thing of what you wrote. lol. God is good, God is good Praise the Lord.

[praetorian]

An insane person on this board actually states, “Trinity mentioned in the Bible” and I ASK, where? YOU LIE as it is NOT!!!! EVER, you are LIE!!!!

YHWH is the Almighty God, who has never had a beginning and his Son, is Godlike, a God, (and in the Bible, God calls others “gods” LITTLE G) and God created him first before all other things (See Colossians 1:15, in the NASB, “…first born of all creation”) and the God and Father of Jesus Christ has never been the first born or anything creation or otherwise!!!!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

[turtle]

Trinity mentioned in the Bible and explained Now take a look at these verse and read closely allowing the word to speak and not me. And take a look closely at the last two verses and the definiation below it.



Colossians 1:12-20 KJV
(12) Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
(13) Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
(14) In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
(15) Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
(16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
(17) And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
(18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
(19) For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
(20) And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Ephesians 1:21-23 KJV
(21) Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
(22) And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
(23) Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Colossians 2:9-10 KJV
(9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
(10) And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

Romans 1:20 KJV
(20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Praetorian,

Once you like to say you use Bible and do not look at the word in the last two verse, the Godhead. Stronge's Hebrew and Greek dictionary

G2320
θεότης
theotēs
theh-ot'-ace
From G2316; divinity (abstractly): - godhead.

Theos means more then one, the word for trinity in the Bible is Godhead,

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

TATM:

You disappoint me! My “religion has” nothing to do with what you refer to as “created the dogma you are searching for” as I am not searching for anything, as the facts of this apostasy of The Anathasian Creed is to well known for that and has nothing to do with Witnesses of God or ME!!!!! Second, this is YOU, that you speak of as you buy this NON Bible BABEL!!!! Therefore you replied to something with a logic that makes no sense, (not me) and while you may not agree with me, I do make cohesive sense, so much so, that a 8th grader can understand it, so why not you?

Therefore I reply in kind, “You can not answer my question because your logic is illogical to begin with” and add, what I ask is very simple, in the style of “Dick and Jane” and “Dr. Seuss” and that is: Where in the Bible does it explicitly state, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that “Jesus is God” and or that “God is Triune” as the Bible explicitly states, simply, clearly, plainly and grammatically that Jesus has a “God and Father” thereby distinguishing between the two!

Now go have fund with Dick and Jane and or Dr. Seuss and learn to read and write and don’t forget that big one, comprehend, note not “selectively comprehend” but comprehend as understand!

TP

Come, my friend, all the earliest Christian writings include the Holy Trinity. Get over it.

[turtle]

Come, my friend, all the earliest Christian writings include the Holy Trinity. Get over it.


TATM you are scaring me now. lol Yo are actually taking the side I am on. lol

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

TATM you are scaring me now. lol Yo are actually taking the side I am on. lol

Praetorian and ATAM I got you both an ignore ain't God good. I just added scripture without knowing a thing of what you wrote. lol. God is good, God is good Praise the Lord.

You are the Queen of Waffles!!

[turtle]

Is on your ignore list

Signed in and signed out just to be able to see what you said just now.

[praetorian]

Come, my friend, your religion has created the dogma you are searching for. I answered your dogma with the same logic you used. You can not answer my question because your logic is illogical to begin with.


TATM:

You state-QUOTE: “Come, my friend, your religion has created the dogma you are searching for. I answered your dogma with the same logic you used. You can not answer my question because your logic is illogical to begin with” END QUOTE and reply; Your first sentence is lacking in syntax, as it makes on sense, further, I am not “searching for” anything, but replying to posts of people that believe in paganism masquerading as though it is actually taught explicitly in the Bible, when it is NOT! I have indeed addressed ALL of your posts, and questions, so therefore, one needs to distinguish between someone addressing something (something you NEVER DO, as the posts here in this thread clearly demonstrate) and one not agreeing with the reply! In other words, just because you do not agree with what I have plainly shown you in the Bible does not mean that I am some how “automatically” wrong, and or that you are this ALL powerful pseudo almighty person to decide for others! The only power you have my dear man is equal to me, and I have clearly chosen to Bible in what the Bible says and ONLY the Bible without any outside sources, of other non Bible “Christian writings.” Therefore in complete reply to your second, last sentence, I reply; “What a coincidence!”

In the end, nothing you state here or anywhere else on this board, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

Tata-TATM

[turtle]

Praetorian, do you not know our words change. Look up some of the cuss words in the dictionary, what they meant at one time is not what they mean today. Trinity the word is a word used in what century, oh I cant' remember, but the word in the Bible for Trinity is Godhead, God - Theos, or Elohim. And once you do not speak hebrew or greek, I think if you want to know more you best learn, because going by only the writen text of your group and not researching to see if there is older manuscripts which would be more accurate you fail as a witness for God as far as knowledge.

And truth is God is a good God. Christ is Lord and King and ruler of the universe.

Philippians 2:5-13 KJV
(5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
(6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
(7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
(8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
(9) Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
(10) That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
(11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
(12) Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
(13) For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

[praetorian]

Someone posted in total ignorance as usual above, something to do with the made up word, “Godhead” so why not take the side of the King James Version writers who gave the name “Lucifer” to Satan, which is NOT found in any Bible or Bible manuscript but is clearly, admittedly a made up, INVENTED Latin word-term translated into English!!! Go away Satan as you ON PURPOSE post partial information from one or some Bibles, and make it seem as though it is correct and found in ALL Bibles when it is NOT!!!!! Some crazy people here, also “ASSUME” things that are NOT SO AND state them, twist them as though there were FACT, like the fact that words do change over time, however, this does not apply to the words in question in the Hebrew and or Greek, as NOT THESE WORDS as found in Biblical manuscripts exist TODAY, that say otherwise, therefore they are clearly IGNORANT and need to back to the place their Father Satan is from!!!!

While, it will not make a difference to the illuminati (and those seriously lacking-Here’s Your Sign) on this board here are the facts: This made up word, “godhead” (I am using www.biblegateway.com in case you want to follow along) appears three times in the King James Versions (1611), and the 21st Century King James Version (both are VERSIONS and not TRANSLATIONS) in three places; at Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9, and in The New King James Version, in two places, at Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9, BUT NOT AT Acts, 17:29. It also appears in the paraphrased Bible known as the Message (which is BASED on the KJV) in two other places, such as Colossians 2:10, and Hebrews 1:9! It appears twice in the American Standard Version (NOTE: Not a translation but a Version that relied heavily on the KJV) Acts 17:29, and Colossians 2:9. In the Young’s Literal Translation it appears in four places, Psalms 8:5, Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9. In the Darby Translation two times, Colossians 1:19 and 2:9. It appears in the Wycliffe New Testament, three times, at Romans 1:20, and Colossians 2:9 and Revelation 5:12.

It is interesting to note that the following Bibles do not use the word at all and are more faithful to the Bible texts (meaning Hebrew and Greek) with regard to this specific matter note: New International Version (NIV); New American Standard Bible (NASB); The Message Bible; The New Living Translation; English Standard Version; Contemporary English Version; New Century Version; Homan Christian Standard Bible; New International Reader’s Version; The Worldwide English Bible; NIVUK-New International Version United Kingdom and Today’s New International Version!

The reason this is done; DOGMA, CREEDS AND THEOLOGY!!! Some Bible translators have taken it upon themselves, to “clarify” things for those who believe like them, in other words, they are NOT BEING FAITHFUL TO THE TASK OF TRANSLATION OVER THEIR OWN PERSONAL BIAS!!!!! How do we know? In Hebrew there is NO WORD that is an equivalent to “godhead” or that translates from Hebrew into English, as “godhead” AT ALL, EVER and is actually and has always been, something literally as “little from Elohim” though translated in nearly most all other English Bibles as (speaking to Psalms 8:5) as a “little lower than God”, “lower than heavenly beings”
“lower than angels”, “missed being gods”, etc. again IN MOST ALL BIBLES!!!! In Greek it is the SAME, as there is NO WORD equivalent in Greek that is “godhead” or that translates into “godhead” in English, and the Greek word actually used here from where these other Bibles, KJV etc. translate this from actually is a word in English which is “Divine”!!!!!! LOOK THIS UP AND VERIFY THIS FOR YOURSELF AND DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, BUT DO NOT OPEN YOUR MOUTH WITHOUT YOUR DOING SO AS IT MAKES YOU IGNORANT!!!! You cannot get away with lies here, at least by me!!!

Some people exemplify and personify, IGNORANCE so much, one must wonder if their picture is next the word in some dictionaries! And no, I am not NICE to bold face liars, like Satan and or his people, as I cannot distinguish between human liars and him, as they make up a “Godhead” of their own, though with more than THREE!!!!

Ignorant people ONLY use ONE or FEW Bibles that support their own Christian-Pseudo-Pagan beliefs, while IGNORING the ones (and the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts) that contradict the same in as in Philippians 2:5-13, as if you read this from the KJV, you learn that it is OK to take or think one to be equal with someone, (like Jesus with God) while the entire text is actually teaching against this, by explaining humility, thereby contradicting itself in this KJV Bible, however and as demonstrated above, this scripture is better translated by most other English Bibles, in line with the lesson that we are to learn about humility!

And now for the finale: Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!


TP

[turtle]

Praetorian what happened to you that makes you think it is a lie. I mean why do not think God loves you. Why do you think you are God?

[turtle]

Heavenly Father is not like earthly parents. God love is unconditional. Like a big soft Comforter.

[praetorian]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

[turtle]

Jesus Loves you and I do to.

[praetorian]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!


I do not love Satan and or his earthly representatives, nor does God and or his Son!!! That is why they will execute, KILL humans-people that are like Satan and the demons at Armageddon!!!! Nor do I want their love either!

[turtle]

Jesus Loves you and I love you.

[praetorian]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

I do not love Satan and or his earthly representatives, nor does God and or his Son!!! That is why they will execute, KILL humans-people that are like Satan and the demons at Armageddon!!!! Nor do I want their love either!

[turtle]

Matthew 4:5-7 KJV
(5) Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
(6) And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
(7) Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.


Jesus rebuke's Satan with the fact that it not right to tempt God. Who is satan talking to the Son of God and if the Son of God is not God then those words are futile to say to satan for they would be little. That is why Christ is God, It is a sin to tempt him.

[praetorian]

You can't even stick to your own words!!! Therefore Rinse, Lather and Repeat!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

I do not love Satan and or his earthly representatives, nor does God and or his Son!!! That is why they will execute, KILL humans-people that are like Satan and the demons at Armageddon!!!! Nor do I want their love either!

[turtle]

1 Corinthians 12:3 KJV
(3) Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

[praetorian]

Ms. Would you like me to call you in the phone and tell you!!! Leave me alone and RESPECT THE REQUEST! IT IS NOT MY REQUEST SO IF YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN, CHRISTINA, THEN LEAVE ME ALONE!!! and:
You can't even stick to your own words!!! Therefore Rinse, Lather and Repeat!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

I do not love Satan and or his earthly representatives, nor does God and or his Son!!! That is why they will execute, KILL humans-people that are like Satan and the demons at Armageddon!!!! Nor do I want their love either!

TP

[turtle]

Praetorian you are ATAM a false prophet.

[praetorian]

Ms. Christina Ferris: Would you like me to call you in the phone and tell you!!! Leave me alone and RESPECT THE REQUEST! IT IS NOT MY REQUEST SO IF YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN, CHRISTINA, THEN LEAVE ME ALONE!!! and: You can't even stick to your own words!!! Therefore Rinse, Lather and Repeat!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

I do not love Satan and or his earthly representatives, nor does God and or his Son!!! That is why they will execute, KILL humans-people that are like Satan and the demons at Armageddon!!!! Nor do I want their love either!

TP

[praetorian]

Praetorian you are ATAM a false prophet.

I will say one thing about TATM, while I disagree vehemently with him he is NOT STUPID OR CRAZY!!!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

Come, my friend, all the earliest Christian writers believed in the Holy Trinity. Get over it.

[turtle]

Realzie I believe Jesus is the Son of God and is God, I have the freedom in the USA to say that. Where are you that you would be afraid to say it.

[praetorian]

Ms. Christian Ferris: Would you like me to call you in the phone and tell you!!! Leave me alone and RESPECT THE REQUEST! IT IS NOT MY REQUEST SO IF YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN, CHRISTINA, THEN LEAVE ME ALONE!!! and:
You can't even stick to your own words!!! Therefore Rinse, Lather and Repeat!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

I do not love Satan and or his earthly representatives, nor does God and or his Son!!! That is why they will execute, KILL humans-people that are like Satan and the demons at Armageddon!!!! Nor do I want their love either!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Mr. Tonyp:

Do you believe telling the truth is important?

[praetorian]

Ms. Christian Ferris: Would you like me to call you in the phone and tell you!!! Leave me alone and RESPECT THE REQUEST! IT IS NOT MY REQUEST SO IF YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN, CHRISTINA, THEN LEAVE ME ALONE!!! and:
You can't even stick to your own words!!! Therefore Rinse, Lather and Repeat!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

I do not love Satan and or his earthly representatives, nor does God and or his Son!!! That is why they will execute, KILL humans-people that are like Satan and the demons at Armageddon!!!! Nor do I want their love either!

TP

[turtle]

Who is that?

[praetorian]

Come, my friend, all the earliest Christian writers believed in the Holy Trinity. Get over it.

I totally AGREE with you, though qualify, your statement, “all the earliest Christian writers” by reply, in that “first”, NO NOT ALL and also with specific regards to the First Century Christian Congregations, that were initiated and managed by The Apostles, and other the First Century Christian’s like Paul, etc, who served as the inspired writers, of the Bible, they clearly DID NOT believe this nonsense, and for this NOT only do you have the Bible, but you have many secular historical writings and encyclopedias that state so as well! Try looking up the Trinity in the Encyclopedia Britannica etc and see for yourself, which is something you will not be able to get around!!!!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!


TP

[praetorian]

Mr. Tonyp:

Do you believe telling the truth is important?

You have your answer here!

Now give me some more Dogma!

However, bear in mind, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!


TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

I totally AGREE with you, though qualify, your statement, “all the earliest Christian writers” by reply, in that “first”, NO NOT ALL and also with specific regards to the First Century Christian Congregations, that were initiated and managed by The Apostles, and other the First Century Christian’s like Paul, etc, who served as the inspired writers, of the Bible, they clearly DID NOT believe this nonsense, and for this NOT only do you have the Bible, but you have many secular historical writings and encyclopedias that state so as well! Try looking up the Trinity in the Encyclopedia Britannica etc and see for yourself, which is something you will not be able to get around!!!!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!


TP

Come, Mr. Tonyp, did you know the Britannica was written by the Roman church?

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

You have your answer here!

Now give me some more Dogma!

However, bear in mind, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!


TP

Come, Mr. Tonyp, why are you ashame to answer a direct question?

[praetorian]

Come, Mr. Tonyp, why are you ashame to answer a direct question?

I am truly, SORRY (add a little valley girl inflection to this for zip) and let me say, YES, I am! I am truly, SORRY if my reply was not more direct and gave you the wrong impression and so, you have your answer here!

Now give me some more Dogma!

However, bear in mind, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD

Yes, TATM YES I am!!!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

I am truly, SORRY (add a little valley girl inflection to this for zip) and let me say, YES, I am! I am truly, SORRY if my reply was not more direct and gave you the wrong impression and so, you have your answer here!

Now give me some more Dogma!

However, bear in mind, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD

Yes, TATM YES I am!!!

TP

Do you know the meaning of plausible?

[ravighy]

hi,
I am interested in psychology and I want to learn indept about the
topic. I am sure, I will learn a lot from this forum. I hope i am
welcome here.

[praetorian]

Do you know the meaning of plausible?

TATM:

You asked me; “Do you know the meaning of plausible?” and since I was not really sure what it meant or what you believed it meant, I to a moment, and looked it up on dictionary.com and it provided several meanings, though I thought I would choose the following below:

QUOTE:

Seemingly or apparently valid, likely, or acceptable; credible: a plausible excuse.
Giving a deceptive impression of truth or reliability.
Disingenuously smooth; fast-talking: "Ambitious, unscrupulous, energetic, ... and plausible,—a political gladiator, ready for a 'set-to' in any crowd" (Frederick Douglass).
1. Worthy of being applauded; praiseworthy; commendable; ready. [Obs.] --Bp. Hacket.
2. Obtaining approbation; specifically pleasing; apparently right; specious; as, a plausible pretext; plausible manners; a plausible delusion. "Plausible and popular arguments." --Clarendon. 3. Using specious arguments or discourse; as, a plausible speaker.

END QUOTE:

While I appreciate this, I ask, do you know the words that serve as an antonym to “plausible” and their meanings such as: implausible, improbable, unbelievable, unlikely, unreasonable.”

So long as we are on the same page with definitions that apply, I mention the following to you below:

Nothing you have shown here or anywhere else on this site, states in a “plausible” explicit, plain, clear and simple, grammatically speaking manner, that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” in and from the BIBLE (NOTE: I am not speaking with reference to outside sources, from non inspired Bible writers, referred to by you as early Christian Writings, as those you have refereed to in this thread, clearly do); as opposed, to the many statements-scriptures in the Bible, that goes well beyond being “plausible”, because they are explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply and grammatically stated many many times, like Jesus has a “God and Father” (thereby distinguishing them between them) and that Jesus is obedient to his Father, that Jesus does, and did the will of his Father, over his own will, also where Jesus is the Servant of God, that God is the Head of Jesus, where Jesus sits on the or at the right hand of his God and Father and not to mention the distinction that comes when one states "Son of God" etc, etc. etc.

However, I am very open to always learning new things, from the Bible and NOT from sources outside it, telling you what you must believe is in the Bible, which is commonly referred to as dogma, creeds, theology, in other words, opinions of humans OUTSIDE the Bible!

In the end, if by “plausible” you mean, that you can or must, instead, infer and imply your beliefs because of you’re choosing to believe in man made teachings, and opinions stemming from The Anathasian Creed, then know this falls far short of what it actually stated in the Bible that does not need to be considered “plausible” because it is clearly stated!

TATM your reasoning and efforts to go out of your way to prove something that cannot be established in the Bible plainly and without inference, can be shown to be faulty reasoning here: I would respectfully submit, that you would have no issues of understanding and comprehension, if you bought a home knowing that the Title Deed it explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically stated that you and or your neighbors were unable to have large and or wild animals on your property, and that the Title Deed defined wild and or large animals as “horses, cows, pigs, lions, tigers and bears etc.” However, your next door neighbor who also bought his home, decides that the Title Deed does not actually, specifically exclude (this has happened because people are indeed stupid or selfish or simply want what they want etc) elephants, rhinoceros’ and leopards, and that since he or she works for Barnum and Bailey Circus, wants to keep them in their back yard in order to take care of them despite knowing when they bought this home, that the Title Deed contained specific restrictions on large and wild animals, that are causing you and your other neighbors several problems with massive poop etc!

Now, one could “reason” and “argue” that in fact, since elephants, leopards, and rhinoceros are NOT specifically mentioned in the Title Deed, nor stated or defined, that it is indeed “plausible” that these particular animals (elephants, leopards and rhinos) are indeed excluded from the Title Deed, and are therefore not restricted and are in fact allowed to be kept in the back yard since we do after all live in a free country etc. etc. etc.

Bottom Line: You are arguing that you sincerely believe in something, and that because or despite it being outside the Title Deed, (Bible) and that the Title Deed (Bible) does not specifically restrict these animals, that it is therefore indeed plausible and reasonable to assume otherwise, because in the Title Deed, it is implied and or inferred, that the specific animals mentioned would are truly not excluded! This is what you are doing!!!!

Therefore, since it is your right to believe what you want to believe, and do what you want to do, since you free and in a free country, (US) just like your neighbor; it does not mean that it reasonable, for your neighbor to keep his elephants, leopards and rhinos on his property, as it is clearly and explicitly stated, that they are not permitted as to do so, especially because the folks like you, who bought property in your neck of the woods, did so, with this clearly written restrictions, in order to avoid such a thing from taking place! And yet despite this, this is exactly what you are doing!!!!

Sir, with all due respect, you need to get over this! You may recall, that I previously referred you to a webpage at http://www.trumpetcallbooks.com/trinity_truth.html, that contains the phrase, “Shocking Admissions” from many Trinitarians and Scholars from (not the JW’s) mainstream Christian faiths (Baptists, Pentecostals, Catholics, Methodists, Lutherans, Protestants, Born Again, etc) that clearly admit that this teaching of “Jesus being God” or “God being Triune” is NOT explicitly taught in the Bible however, and this is a big however, that despite this, and knowing it’s history; they like you, choose to believe and take their theology, which comes from non Bible sources, which you refer to as “Christian Writings” in order to believe teach it those in their church meetings! And this is OK, as we all have the right to choose in what we will believe in! However, they are not stupid enough, or should I say, educated enough (not motivated by blind credulity-emotions) to NOT go out of their way MAKE false claims and or points, that is simply not true and or MOOT and that is:

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking, in the Bible, or from the Bible; states, that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” instead you must infer and imply it, because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings (theology) clearly stemming and originating from and with The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

This is OK for you, and NOT FOR ME!!!! But I have never lied or tried to express my views as coming from the Bible, when they clearly do not-like you do!!!

Therego the difference between us, and the further element of your great disdain for my chosen belief system as a Jehovah’s Witness!

TP

[praetorian]

hi,
I am interested in psychology and I want to learn indept about the
topic. I am sure, I will learn a lot from this forum. I hope i am
welcome here.


As to whether or not those here will exchange posts with you on psychology, when it is a Trinity theme thread is purely up to them.

May I suggest that you open a sub post on here, and then send messages via the system inviting folks to participate in your experiment.

I am not sure I can and or will do so, though will be more than happy to address any issues and or concerns you have regarding the theme of this thread of the Trinity!

Take care,

TP

[praetorian]

hi,
I am interested in psychology and I want to learn indept about the
topic. I am sure, I will learn a lot from this forum. I hope i am
welcome here.


As to whether or not those here will exchange posts with you on psychology, when it is a Trinity theme thread is purely up to them.

May I suggest that you open a sub post on here, and then send messages via the system inviting folks to participate in your experiment.

I am not sure I can and or will do so, though will be more than happy to address any issues and or concerns you have regarding the theme of this thread of the Trinity!

Take care,

TP

[praetorian]

Sorry for the double post!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

hi,
I am interested in psychology and I want to learn indept about the
topic. I am sure, I will learn a lot from this forum. I hope i am
welcome here.

Welcome, my first exposure to psychology came from a discount Bible catalog. At first, it metagrobolized my weak mind. Why would a discount Bible catalog contain a section on "Psychology?" While scanning the titles, it became aparent the section was for those caught up in the pseudo-christian cult of pentecostalism. This particle thread is not for the subject, but you can learn a great deal about "True-believerism-Syndrome" observing people like Mr. Tonyp.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Plausible: Adjective
1 : superficially fair, reasonable, or valuable but often specious *a plausible pretext*
2 : superficially pleasing or persuasive *a swindlerT , then a quack, then a smooth, plausible gentleman — R. W. Emerson*
3 : appearing worthy of belief *the argument was both powerful and plausible*

Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary.

Plausibility is largely a legal term. When a judge or jury is faced with two equally creditable litigants giving opposing scenarios, a judgement must be reached based on plausibility. Based upon a few uncontested facts, the juror must decide what is the most plausible theory.

I noticed immediately you began searching for loopholes in the definition. Unfortunately, I did not posted the question for your benefit. Those who come along and examine the discussion will be the ones who adjudicate the case. You are not man-enough to admit your religion is wrong. Nor can you ever post the truth for the same reason. To tell the truth questions your gullibility. Like I said, you are not the type of person to confess to buying snake oil. You have already admitted to reading the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society’s dogma. I read the Bible. Already, you can see plausibility at work.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come, Mr. Tonyp, help me with plausibility. Name a Christian organization, association or congregation that agrees with your religion's dogma.

[praetorian]

TATM:

This will serve to reply to both of your posts above, 677 and 678.

You state, QUOTE: “Plausibility is largely a legal term. When a judge or jury is faced with two equally creditable litigants giving opposing scenarios, a judgement must be reached based on plausibility. Based upon a few uncontested facts, the juror must decide what is the most plausible theory” END QUOTE, and reply, that I totally agree with what you represent here, though add, with the Bible, one is dealing with spiritual elements, as there are those that know the actual facts, from those humans who perceive as facts, though judge them from their standpoint (human) when it is from God, and his Appointed King, his Son Jesus Christ, which adds a spiritual element to this, along with his Son’s words, and assurance, that his followers would be able to know the “truth” (John 8:31, 32) about his God and Father, which is NOT available in human terms, as like in a court room!

You then state, QUOTE “I noticed immediately you began searching for loopholes in the definition” END QUOTE, and reply, that what you understood as “searching for loopholes” is actually my attempt at looking at the big picture as a narrow view, like yours, will only serve to “control” the outcome that one wants, (selectively speaking) rather then get at the “truth” of something, that requires “all” and not some of the information be presented and examined!

You then state, QUOTE “Unfortunately, I did not posted the question for your benefit” and reply, by pointing out, that in your post 670 above, after quoting me, you then state, “Do you know the meaning of plausible?” END QUOTE, so therefore your first statement quoted here, seems to be lacking and misleading as you did post it in reply to a direct quote I made to you! Further, you clearly think to much of yourself as your brief comment-reply in post number 670 is NOT a “benefit” to me or anyone else as again, you made a brief reply to me, after directly quoting me above in 669!

You then state QUOTE, “Those who come along and examine the discussion will be the ones who adjudicate the case” and you are indeed absolutely correct about this, however I add, that those who want this matter resolved from the BIBLE and ONLY BIBLE, will have much to consider, and those who do not, and want it resolved in favor of Dogma, Creeds and Theologies, will totally agree with you, as I would if speaking from that vantage point; which I do not!

You then state, QUOTE “You are not man-enough to admit your religion is wrong. Nor can you ever post the truth for the same reason” END QUOTE and I reply; first, whether I am “man enough” is really not for you to decide, as the very fact that you take this upon yourself, to make such a personal statement, shows your lack of the same on top of an apparent super imposed extreme hubris, which probably stems from low self esteem issues! I will say, that my replies to you and those on this board demonstrate that I am man enough to point out the facts of you and those like you, advocating Dogma, Creeds and Theologies masquerading as Bible, when they are simply NOT!!! Now as to the second part of your first sentence, “…admit your religion is wrong” I reply simply; I don’t for good reason--because I do not believe it is wrong in the first place, and note that this statement is also extreme arrogance as it presupposes that I believe that my “religion is wrong” in the first place, when I clearly do not feel that way and add; If I felt my religion was wrong, I would not only state so, I would do something about it, as that is what part of being a Christian means, to be humble enough to take corrections and adjustments, take counsel, as opposed to stubbornly holding onto something, especially because of being emotionally challenged, as you truly appear to be!!!! Finally, know this, I have discussed the issue of the Trinity from the Bible’s standpoint and NOT my religion, as it is you and others, who attempt to dodge the subject matter and change it to something else, as there is no where to go on this subject matter of the Trinity but to your Dogma as the Bible all of it, is against your and this type of thinking! As to the second sentence, this too fails, as it falls on its face as you never point out where I am wrong, Biblically speaking, but only tell me that I am wrong, and support the same emotional ignorant stance, by using sources outside the Bible that infer it’s beliefs in the Bible, as that is the only way you can believe this nonsense! Nonsense from a Bible standpoint, but factual from a Dogma standpoint of non Biblical early Christian writings!!!!

You then state, QUOTE “To tell the truth questions your gullibility”, and reply, that you are indeed entitled to your opinion, as I feel the same way about you, ‘what a coincidence!’ And apparently, you feel that I am “gullible” because you choose to “believe” what many early Christian writings (NON Biblical inspired writings) many of which were mired in controversy, state about this Trinity belief, whereas by contrast, I choose to believe the opposite, that if it is NOT found in the Bible, then the “gullible” one is you and those like you; again from Biblical standpoint!

You then state, QUOTE, “Like I said, you are not the type of person to confess to buying snake oil” END QUOTE, and reply, no, I have indeed admitted to buying “snake oil” in my life in the past, though perhaps not on this board as it never came specifically, and further add, that I have come from where you and others are at present, is simply one of the many admissions, that I have made here! You are just stuck in the “snake oil” that most (Matthew 7:13, 14) people buy into! And since you do not know me, I trust you are using uncanny power from some source to make this statement correct, like via a medium, yes?

You then state QUOTE” You have already admitted to reading the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society’s dogma. I read the Bible. Already, you can see plausibility at work” END QUOTE, and reply, that the first part of this is old news, as I am a JW and have admitted it several times on this board, but this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is: the Bible does not state explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” instead, you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD! Also, I too read the Bible and have used the Bible to prove all of my matters in relation to this particular subject matter, and what is ironic is, that you state, “I read the Bible” and yet to prove your beliefs you have provided support for the same, not from the Bible, but from those outside the Bible, though again, not in the Bible! You may recall your post found on page 21 of this string, dated 2-14-09, post number 401 that quoted from Polycarp, Ignatius etc. but nothing, again NOTHING FROM THE BIBLE!!!!!!! So, you read the Bible, but ignore it for your beliefs, choosing Polycarp etc in order to mold your beliefs! Well, Good For You, as I don’t!!!

Now that is really funny, LOL, to say to least!!!! Do you ever read what you post, BEFORE you write it? Wow!!! OK!!!! You are therefore correct when you state, that one can indeed “see plausibility at work” like your delusional written behavior with bizarre thinking as well, as coming from your camp, as you quote outside sources for your beliefs and then take the position, by morphing something in your mind, to state, that it is actually from the Bible, when it is clearly NOT!!!! That sounds like a mental problem or a lying problem and either way, it is unacceptable for lovers of Truth!!!

Onto your post 678, you state, QUOTE; “Come, Mr. Tonyp, help me with plausibility. Name a Christian organization, association or congregation that agrees with your religion's dogma” and reply, first, you are truly consistent about one thing and that is, clearly evading issues, and changing the subject matter! As to naming a “Christian organization, association or congregation that agrees” with JW’s I reply; I don’t care, the only thing I or “we” care about is that we “AGREE” totally with what the Bible really teaches, and according to scriptures, the people that truly do this, would be hated and be in the minority (John 15: 18-20, Matthew 5:12, Matthew 7: 13, 14, and 21-23). In fact as stated previously by me in response to you, God’s people have never been in the majority EVER, nor popular, not in ancient Bible times, or the times of the Jews and or with the First Century Christian Congregations, and to expect something different, is your choice and right, but not Biblical!!! You are using a poor uncanny divining rod to discern or discover who is teaching the “Truth” about God and his Son today, and one not based on Bible, but again, opinion of humans!!! Good for you!

Therefore in conclusion, “Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!” as the Bible, get it, the BIBLE, does not teach this God dishonoring doctrine, and just because this view is in the minority does not automatically make it wrong; just wrong in your eyes and those who think like you!!!

Nice try, but utterly lacking!


TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

As stated in several previous post, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is not Christian. Mr. Tonyp has acknowledged as much. One who do good to remember Jim Jones & David Koresh, both, found all their dogma in the Bible. Castrating the Word of God is the only way these cults have to prove themselves.

ps. Mr. Tonyp, fyi. You should have done the research I suggest before. The amazing thing is, you will not find a single ex-Christian who joined the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. But nearly every ex-JW has joined Christianity.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

In the end, you do not find JW’s flocking over to you way of thinking (human teachings) but instead, the other way around, with millions of them coming from all sorts of religions and disciplines etc!

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=ex-jw&ei=utf-8&fr=b1ie7

Plausibility, what a thing of beauty.

[praetorian]

Dear Rev TATM:

The fact that a post states something, does not mean it is so, therego, your statement, “As stated in several previous post, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is not Christian” does not it is true, as it is not! No other Christian Group goes out of their way worldwide in obedience to their Lord and Master Christ Jesus words to preach about him, and his Father’s Kingdom, in fact well over 1 billion hours everywhere in the world! You are very much mistaken, always letting your emotions act as an authority for your mouth and writings!

My dear follow, your ignorance is showing, we do not have “one man shows” as you probably do in your church, there is no human leaders among the JW’s but you find them in all of the usual typical churches of Christendom, so what you describe is probably found in the church you attend or manage as a Reverend!!!! Again, you are very much mistaken and confused, though with you, it may be more of out right lies, having more to do with the poor information you express!

If anyone is “castrating the Word of God” it is you as I quote Bible and you quote it is you that does this, leave the Bible, “You may recall your post found on page 21 of this string, dated 2-14-09, post number 401 that quoted from Polycarp, Ignatius etc. but nothing, again NOTHING FROM THE BIBLE!!!!!!! So, you read the Bible, but ignore it for your beliefs, choosing Polycarp etc in order to mold your beliefs! Well, Good For You, as I don’t!!!

Your arrogance continues to show, so zip up your fly, as your assumption (and you know what one does when one “assumes”, don’t ya) that I “should have done the research” you suggested, fellow, NOTHING you suggested, NOTHING has not been followed up on my end, and in fact I have provided you with representations that I have indeed completely read the references, you brought up and some others, you failed to mention, so the issue, oh half witted one, is that I have done the work you claim you did, and we don’t agree!!! There it is!!!! Excuse Me!!!!! There are literally millions of “Ex-Christians” of other so called Christian faiths that make up the 7 Million plus JW’s found in all nations of the earth, you are truly mistaken here!!! And as to what an “ex-JW” has done or not done, I cannot say for sure, but I do know, being one who has been a disfellowshipped JW, that many come back, and most do nothing, and some, yes some become like you, while rare it is true! Again, this is no different in the days of the Jews, or the First Century Christian Congregation, as some walked away from God to do other things! So be it! Your statements prove nothing other than validate your state of mind, and sinister statements full of lies!

Since you have again, tried to take this off the topic, let me bring you back!Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

P.S. Your reference to the website, is old news, and in the end, does nothing to prove explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

[easeltine]

"Lord and Master Christ Jesus"

Jesus Christ is my Lord and Master, this is why I worship Him. He who is Lord and Master of my life controls my life and therefore is my God. To make Him "a god" is polytheism, and one has more than one God. This is forbidden by Scripture.

By the way, it is The Athanasian Creed, named after Athanasius, not Anathasian.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

"Lord and Master Christ Jesus"

Jesus Christ is my Lord and Master, this is why I worship Him. He who is Lord and Master of my life controls my life and therefore is my God. To make Him "a god" is polytheism, and one has more than one God. This is forbidden by Scripture.

By the way, it is The Athanasian Creed, named after Athanasius, not Anathasian.

Come, OH! so great King of Waffles, you forgot to tell us which jesus you worship. By the way, what does this mean "lean not unto your own understanding?" We have compared all your religion's dogmas to the Bible and you can not seem to find them. On whose understanding do you lean?

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

praetorian;376830]Dear Rev TATM:

The fact that a post states something, does not mean it is so, therego, your statement, “As stated in several previous post, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is not Christian” does not it is true, as it is not! No other Christian Group goes out of their way worldwide in obedience to their Lord and Master Christ Jesus words to preach about him, and his Father’s Kingdom, in fact well over 1 billion hours everywhere in the world! You are very much mistaken, always letting your emotions act as an authority for your mouth and writings!

One might wish to compare that statement to a similur one found on the Church of Jeus Christ of Latter-day Saints website. The Mormons also claim to be Christians. All apologetic websites list the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society as cultic. As to one billion hours, based on required daily prayer time - required scripture reading - mosque, how many hours do muslims spend worshipping God? Yes, this is an apt comparsion. Both Muslims and the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society deny Jesus Christ's deity. As stated, Mr. Tonyp can not name a single Christian association or organization or congregation that calls the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society Christian. period end of discussion.

My dear follow, your ignorance is showing, we do not have “one man shows” as you probably do in your church, there is no human leaders among the JW’s but you find them in all of the usual typical churches of Christendom, so what you describe is probably found in the church you attend or manage as a Reverend!!!! Again, you are very much mistaken and confused, though with you, it may be more of out right lies, having more to do with the poor information you express!

Botting, Heather; Gary Botting (1984). The Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses. University of Toronto Press. pp. 60–75. ISBN 0-8020-6545-7.

That is an excellent study on the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. I might also add this website, http://www.watchtower.org/e/jt/article_02.htm It clearly indicates WB&TS is under the leadership of mortal man. Again, Mr. Tonyp has been proven wrong by his own religion.

If anyone is “castrating the Word of God” it is you as I quote Bible and you quote it is you that does this, leave the Bible, “You may recall your post found on page 21 of this string, dated 2-14-09, post number 401 that quoted from Polycarp, Ignatius etc. but nothing, again NOTHING FROM THE BIBLE!!!!!!! So, you read the Bible, but ignore it for your beliefs, choosing Polycarp etc in order to mold your beliefs! Well, Good For You, as I don’t!!!

Thank you. I did positively prove beyond any doubt that the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity existed centuries before any creeds were written.

Your arrogance continues to show, so zip up your fly, as your assumption (and you know what one does when one “assumes”, don’t ya) that I “should have done the research” you suggested, fellow, NOTHING you suggested, NOTHING has not been followed up on my end, and in fact I have provided you with representations that I have indeed completely read the references, you brought up and some others, you failed to mention, so the issue, oh half witted one, is that I have done the work you claim you did, and we don’t agree!!! There it is!!!! Excuse Me!!!!! There are literally millions of “Ex-Christians” of other so called Christian faiths that make up the 7 Million plus JW’s found in all nations of the earth, you are truly mistaken here!!! And as to what an “ex-JW” has done or not done, I cannot say for sure, but I do know, being one who has been a disfellowshipped JW, that many come back, and most do nothing, and some, yes some become like you, while rare it is true! Again, this is no different in the days of the Jews, or the First Century Christian Congregation, as some walked away from God to do other things! So be it! Your statements prove nothing other than validate your state of mind, and sinister statements full of lies!

Amazing how quickly one turns to insult to distract from the truth.

Since you have again, tried to take this off the topic, let me bring you back!Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

P.S. Your reference to the website, is old news, and in the end, does nothing to prove explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

Plausibility is based on two equally creditable witnesses. I have shown you far less than creditable.

[praetorian]

"Lord and Master Christ Jesus"

Jesus Christ is my Lord and Master, this is why I worship Him. He who is Lord and Master of my life controls my life and therefore is my God. To make Him "a god" is polytheism, and one has more than one God. This is forbidden by Scripture.

By the way, it is The Athanasian Creed, named after Athanasius, not Anathasian.


Dear Easeltine:

With all due respect, your understanding is not correct for the following reasons, that I would like you to consider.

My reply is from the Bible and not dogma, creeds and theology (hereafter referred to by me in this post as “DCT.”) You are coming from the place that believes that our “Lord and Master Jesus Christ” is to be worshipped, and we are told NO WHERE in the Bible to worship Jesus, EVER!

Acts 10:40-43, tells us that “…God appointed as judge of the living and the dead” but not that he is to be worshipped! Hebrews 1:2 states in part, that God made him “…his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things…” but again nothing about worship!

Now, in Matthew 4:10, Jesus inn reply to the Devil, quotes Deuteronomy 6:13, telling him and us to read today, to worship God, thereby distinguishing himself from his “God and Father” who the scriptures tell us over and over again, is the “God and Father of Jesus Christ” and also in Hebrew, this scripture (Duet 6:13) appears either with God’s personal name, Jehovah in English or as “LORD” in ALL caps as distinguished from “Lord”. This is incontrovertible Bible FACT! (NOTE: Take a look at Exodus 5:22 where the two are easily distinguished or at any Hebrew Interlinear for proof of the same, or look here online for free to a NON JW site, www.scripture4all.org for evidence of the same). Jesus never said, not did the Apostles or scriptures, that He “Jesus is to be worshipped” or “I Jesus am to be worshipped-EVER!!! It is DCT that says this, NOT BIBLE!

It should also be note, that at Matthew 8:1-3 the King James Version, (by this I mean the most common one, the original 1611) states, “When He [Jesus] was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed Him. And, behold, there came a leper and worshiped Him, saying, ‘Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst make me clean.’ Now, note what the following English Bibles state (taken from www.biblegateway.com, so those of you can easily follow along):

Therefore if you only used this ONE Bible, it is would very easy to mistakenly conclude that Jesus is indeed worshipped even though again, neither Jesus (as he told people to worship God) nor any Bible inspired writers ever tell us to worship Jesus; However, regarding this same scripture above in Matthew 8: 1-3, note what other Bibles state here in this SAME EXACT VERSE as they do not use the word “WORSHIP”: The NIV states, “knelt before him”; New American Standard Bible, “bowed down before him”; The Message Bible, “went to his knees”; Amplified Bible, “prostrated himself before him”; New Living Translation, “knelt before him”; English Standard Version, “knelt before him.”; Contemporary English Version, “knelt before him”; New Century Version, “bowed down before him”; Young’s Literal Translation, “was bowing down to him”; New Life Version, “got down before him”; Holman Christian Standard Bible, “knelt before him”; New International Readers Version, “got down on his knees”; Worldwide English (New Testament), “came and kneeled in front of”; New International-UK Version, “knelt before him”; Today’s New International Version, “knelt before him”; Darby Translation uses “homage” which agrees with the majority!

The above totals 16 Bibles that do not use the word “worship” here, but instead, clearly state it differently than the King James Version!!!! Also, to be fair, the Wycliffe New Testament, the 21st Century King James Version, and the New King James Version all use the word “Worshipped” in this same verse, thereby totaling four Bible’s using the word “worshipped” in this verse.

Therefore while the Bible calls the Son of God, that means that as Son of God, he must be like his Father (as the scriptures state so) a God, but distinguishes between Jesus as a God (Isaiah 9:6,7 tells us that the Messiah would be a God) who is NOT worshipped as God’s appointed King and representative, verses the “God and Father of Jesus Christ” who is worshipped! The Bible also speaks of other “gods” that God appoints however and again, they are NOT EVER worshipped!

You end, your post by stating, “By the way, it is The Athanasian Creed, named after Athanasius, not Anathasian?” and I thank you for pointing that out, as I was clearly aware of this, though note, that it is written these two different ways, in textbooks.

In closing, YHWH of in English Jehovah, is the Almighty God, who has never had a beginning and his Son, who is Godlike, a God, (and in the Bible, God calls others “gods” LITTLE G) and God created him first before all other things (See Colossians 1:15, in the NASB, “…first born of all creation”) as “the God and Father of Jesus Christ” has never been the first born of anything creation or otherwise!!!!

I conclude by stating, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[turtle]

Three wise men came and worshipped Jesus. Mary at the tomb in John 19 worshipped Jesus. Many fell and worshipped Jesus including the lepered that came back out of ten. Jesus never rebuke anyone that worshipped Him. Revelations 1 John fell at Christ feet and worship Him. Jesus was truly worshipped.

[praetorian]

Dear Rev TATM:

You begin your post by quoting me and then replying below it, so I respond in kind by first listing my quote, then your reply, and then my current reply below as:

YOU QUOTE ME HERE:

“The fact that a post states something, does not mean it is so, therego, your statement, “As stated in several previous post, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is not Christian” does not it is true, as it is not! No other Christian Group goes out of their way worldwide in obedience to their Lord and Master Christ Jesus words to preach about him, and his Father’s Kingdom, in fact well over 1 billion hours everywhere in the world! You are very much mistaken, always letting your emotions act as an authority for your mouth and writings!” End Quote.

You state in reply QUOTE:

One might wish to compare that statement to a similur one found on the Church of Jeus Christ of Latter-day Saints website. The Mormons also claim to be Christians. All apologetic websites list the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society as cultic. As to one billion hours, based on required daily prayer time - required scripture reading - mosque, how many hours do muslims spend worshipping God? Yes, this is an apt comparsion. Both Muslims and the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society deny Jesus Christ's deity. As stated, Mr. Tonyp can not name a single Christian association or organization or congregation that calls the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society Christian. period end of discussion. End Quote.

My Reply:

My reply was my reply, whether or not my reply is similar to what you say is found on another website of an organization claiming to be Christian, (what a coincidence as you do to) is irrelevant to the topic at hand and proves nothing other than you and others “feel” that you can play judge and jury and decide “who is” and “who is not” a Christian rather than letting the Bible decide this for you! Therefore, I guess I am free to take the position and draw a comparison to what Hitler did, when deciding on “who is” and “who is not” going to die! I am glad your opinion means nothing in terms of deciding this, as it is God, through his Son Jesus Christ (note the two being distinguished here) God’s King Designate who will decide this as simply expressed in the Bible that will do this! (See 1 John 4:1) As to being a cult, you and others will believe what you want to believe and I am, responding here, not my faith as JW’s or any other faith, as I am not that arrogant to speak for anyone other than myself, whether it be friend and or foe! The Billion plus hours spent by JW’s is ONLY on preaching the Good News (Matthew 24:14) of God’s Kingdom ALONE, and not individual prayer, or (as one is NOT required to do anything other than be truthful and clean in ones’ dealings with God and his fellow) personal Bible study, reading etc and all this GET THIS; with NO PAID CLERGY, Reverend, so what is your salary? Attack that all you want, Rev, and let us see how you would fare in doing what you call “God’s work” without getting paid!!!!
The fact that others, who do not worship “the God and Father of Jesus Christ”, who is clearly called and or named, Jehovah, (which includes you folks of Christendom as you worship God’s Son Jesus and not his Father and God Jehovah) and pray and also worship “God” means nothing to the “God and Father of Jesus Christ” Jehovah-God, and therefore means nothing to me! You express that JW’s (and others, as I cannot speak for others) and reply for me, that I nor the JW’s EVER DENY Christ’s Deity as expressed in the Bible, as Jesus is clearly Divine, as he is a God, and God like, and IS clearly THE SON OF GOD OR THE BIBLE WOULD NOT CALL HIM THAT!!! However, what you mean, is that I and or the JW’s deny what your dogma, creeds and theology teaches you about Jesus being “Divine” as the same person as his Father, Jehovah God, and we do not accept this because the Bible (NOTE THE BIBLE) does not explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking state that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” and instead you MUST infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD! So, in order to accurately explain yourself or the circumstance of our differences, then you should accurately state that I and or the JW’s do believe in the Deity of Jesus in the same manner you choose to believe it, via what you have been taught to believe in your dogma, creeds and theologies!!!! You always lie and get caught!!!

You then state, “As stated, Mr. Tonyp can not name a single Christian association or organization or congregation that calls the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society Christian. period end of discussion” and while I agree that for the most part most if not nearly All of those of Christendom take this position, that does not mean that it is true PERIOD END OF DISCUSSION, and repeat, that if you are using this as some sort of divining rod for truth, then you should be able to use a Bible scripture to support the same! As I can show you many Bible scriptures and examples that demonstrate that your reasoning is false, as God’s people have never been in the majority nor popularity nor accepted EVER, so I, my faith and way of life are in good company to those folks described in the Bible that truly worshiped God with Spirit and Truth!!!!

YOU QUOTE ME HERE:

My dear follow, your ignorance is showing, we do not have “one man shows” as you probably do in your church, there is no human leaders among the JW’s but you find them in all of the usual typical churches of Christendom, so what you describe is probably found in the church you attend or manage as a Reverend!!!! Again, you are very much mistaken and confused, though with you, it may be more of out right lies, having more to do with the poor information you express! End Quote.

You state in Reply Quote:

Botting, Heather; Gary Botting (1984). The Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses. University of Toronto Press. pp. 60–75. ISBN 0-8020-6545-7. And also, That is an excellent study on the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. I might also add this website, http://www.watchtower.org/e/jt/article_02.htm It clearly indicates WB&TS is under the leadership of mortal man. Again, Mr. Tonyp has been proven wrong by his own religion.

My reply:

Well good for you, that as a NON JW, you feel “qualified” as though you can reference this publication as a “excellent study” on the WBTS! If you want to know what a doctor does, ask a doctor not a patient, as you can, but it is not coming from the same prospective! If you want to know what JW’s believe or not, then you should go to the source and ask a Witness, as folks who were never one, cannot possibly provide you with a JW prospective, as they simply are not one of them!!!! Also, if you go to a source, which was a former JW, then again, one is dealing with people with axes to grind as they no longer agree with them, therefore they can paint any picture they want, which is distorted and you will believe it as it does not matter so long as it is something against JW’s for you! This is true of any discipline of life and if you were being honest and unbiased then you would readily understand this, but alas, you want to believe everything and anything you want, that is vile and or against them, because you don’t agree with me and or them, so there go your standard, (sounds like an emotional problem) that you like and approve of, like what these and other negative sources say, that are NOT JW sources!!!! Well Good For You, but know that this is NOT the way, to find a true standard and measure of any subject matter let alone this one! And as to “leadership of mortal man” DUH, God is using only what he has available to him, and that is humans made of dust! If you want something more, than by all means, hurry up your eventual demise and see if you really go to meet your maker in heaven!!!! Your final statement here, “Again, Mr. Tonyp has been proven wrong by his own religion” presumes, that since I do not agree with you and or these particular writers, or those chosen by you, then, we MUST BE WRONG! OK, you are entitled to your opinion as me and seven million others of my brothers and sisters from around the world in every land are, as well!!!!

You Quote Me Here:

If anyone is “castrating the Word of God” it is you as I quote Bible and you quote it is you that does this, leave the Bible, “You may recall your post found on page 21 of this string, dated 2-14-09, post number 401 that quoted from Polycarp, Ignatius etc. but nothing, again NOTHING FROM THE BIBLE!!!!!!! So, you read the Bible, but ignore it for your beliefs, choosing Polycarp etc in order to mold your beliefs! Well, Good For You, as I don’t!!! End Quote.

You state in reply Quote:

Thank you. I did positively prove beyond any doubt that the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity existed centuries before any creeds were written.
My Reply:

Are you missing something!!! No you did not! First, your posts above did not prove anything like that, as those like Polycarp etc, are clearly from outside the Bible AFTER THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN AND COMPLETE!!!! Nothing you showed establishes that the Apostles or Jesus, nor the Jews before them, believed and or taught this lie!!!! EVER!!! Also, the Holy Trinity is in fact older than the NT, as it is found in many pagan religions like the ancient Babylonians, (read the Two Babylon’s, I actually read and studied this, not just refer you to books in ignorance like you do that I have never read before) Egyptians, Hindus and the like!!!! You are lying here and your own writings are the evidence against you!!!!!

You Quote me Here:

Your arrogance continues to show, so zip up your fly, as your assumption (and you know what one does when one “assumes”, don’t ya) that I “should have done the research” you suggested, fellow, NOTHING you suggested, NOTHING has not been followed up on my end, and in fact I have provided you with representations that I have indeed completely read the references, you brought up and some others, you failed to mention, so the issue, oh half witted one, is that I have done the work you claim you did, and we don’t agree!!! There it is!!!! Excuse Me!!!!! There are literally millions of “Ex-Christians” of other so called Christian faiths that make up the 7 Million plus JW’s found in all nations of the earth, you are truly mistaken here!!! And as to what an “ex-JW” has done or not done, I cannot say for sure, but I do know, being one who has been a disfellowshipped JW, that many come back, and most do nothing, and some, yes some become like you, while rare it is true! Again, this is no different in the days of the Jews, or the First Century Christian Congregation, as some walked away from God to do other things! So be it! Your statements prove nothing other than validate your state of mind, and sinister statements full of lies! End Quote.
Your state in reply Quote:

Amazing how quickly one turns to insult to distract from the truth.
My Reply:

That’s it!!!! You “feel” you have the truth, so it MUST BE SO!!!! WOW!! Well then, we have the almighty salaried (apparently not enough money) Rev here to provide his words in a ‘winsome reply’ opinion wow, you are amazing, just in a different sort of way, and NOT one with flattering terms!!!! Just take my quote above and rinse, lather and repeat, by taking a good shower very carefully, as your reply, stinks!

YOU QUOTE ME HERE:

Since you have again, tried to take this off the topic, let me bring you back! Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

P.S. Your reference to the website, is old news, and in the end, does nothing to prove explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD! End Quote.
Your state in reply Quote:

Plausibility is based on two equally creditable witnesses. I have shown you far less than creditable.

My Reply:

First plausibility is based on more than just “two equally credible witnesses” (and by the way I have seven million of them ALL with more credibility than a paid Rev) and I have used the Bible for ALL of my views and you have used man, which is your right, however I believe that basing my thoughts SOLELY on the Bible is the only way to go!!!! You do not!!!! Good Boy, Good for you, now here is your bone below”

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[praetorian]

An ignorant soul, that was not supposed to deal with this on here with me, posted something ignorant above. Sadly it is very easy to throw human feces and or animal feces onto other people verses, the time it takes to clean oneself up!

First of all, Matthew 2:1, there were no “WISE MEN” that came to see Jesus, (not were there 3 as the Bible does not give a number) they were “Magi” or “Mago” in fact astrologers, false prophets or sorcerer, they are NOT CALLED THIS IN ANY GREEK MANUSCRIPT EVER!!!!! See this webpage (A NON JW site) for details:
http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/NewTestamentGreek/grk.cgi?search=3097&version=kjv&type=eng

Now, Matthew 2:11, is what ignorant is referring to, and note, not all Bibles translate or use the word “worship” here, as note how it is rendered in Young’s Literal Translation states it as “…having fallen down they bowed to him.” The Darby Translation states “…and falling down did him homage.” While most other Bibles use the word, “worship” there is a REASON why NOT ALL BIBLES (NOTE NOT USING A JW BIBLE HERE) So, it is NOT as cut and dry when it comes to the Greek word used here, there are matters relating to Bias and Dogma that enters into the translating of the word! The same holds true for Matthew 8: 1-3, where MOST Bibles phrases like the ones used here by Young’s and Darby, though not “worship.”

The point: If all Bibles would agree then you at best would have a reason to “believe” that Jesus is worshipped, but NOT that Jesus is God nor that God is Triune, however, the fact remains that NOT all Bibles agree here at all!!!! Why does that SIMPLE truth not cause you folks to open you minds and hearts to find out why, rather than just assume I am telling you an untruth!!!! That is because your Father is the Father of the lie as you want to believe what you want to believe, right or wrong does not matter!!!!!

Perhaps, I am mistaken, as Mary does not do Jesus homage or obeisance (or even worship) in John 19 or 20 at all! Where do you folks get this nonsense from?

At Luke 17:16, none of the 20 Bibles found on (www.biblegateway.com) use the word worship in connection to one of the ten lepers that turned back to thank Jesus for curing him, instead (which is the SAME EXACT GREEK WORD USED ABOVE at Matthew 2:11, and Matthew 8:1-3, and as found in ALL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS).


Jesus is NEVER worshipped in Revelation Chapter 1, as when John falls down to do an act of worship, (I believe twice) the angel rebuked and correct him for doing so!

Therefore the further ignorant statement made here, “Jesus never rebuke anyone that worshipped Him” is completely wrong, as it ASSUMES that your thinking is corroborated by scripture and it is NOT!!!!! So, the question makes no sense, and reply, that Jesus did not have to, as the Greek Text clearly shows us that NO ONE WORSHIPPED JESUS, but rather, they worshipped “the God and Father of Jesus” as after all, Jehovah is the God and Father of Jesus!!!!!

Therefore the state, “Jesus was truly worshipped” is not only FALSE, from the standpoint of Bible (not as to Creeds, Dogma and theology, because in these, Jesus is worshipped) Jesus is NOT worshipped at all!!!

TP

[turtle]

An ignorant soul, that was not supposed to deal with this on here with me, posted something ignorant above. Sadly it is very easy to throw human feces and or animal feces onto other people verses, the time it takes to clean oneself up!

First of all, Matthew 2:1, there were no “WISE MEN” that came to see Jesus, (not were there 3 as the Bible does not give a number) they were “Magi” or “Mago” in fact astrologers, false prophets or sorcerer, they are NOT CALLED THIS IN ANY GREEK MANUSCRIPT EVER!!!!! See this webpage (A NON JW site) for details:
http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/NewTestamentGreek/grk.cgi?search=3097&version=kjv&type=eng

Now, Matthew 2:11, is what ignorant is referring to, and note, not all Bibles translate or use the word “worship” here, as note how it is rendered in Young’s Literal Translation states it as “…having fallen down they bowed to him.” The Darby Translation states “…and falling down did him homage.” While most other Bibles use the word, “worship” there is a REASON why NOT ALL BIBLES (NOTE NOT USING A JW BIBLE HERE) So, it is NOT as cut and dry when it comes to the Greek word used here, there are matters relating to Bias and Dogma that enters into the translating of the word! The same holds true for Matthew 8: 1-3, where MOST Bibles phrases like the ones used here by Young’s and Darby, though not “worship.”

The point: If all Bibles would agree then you at best would have a reason to “believe” that Jesus is worshipped, but NOT that Jesus is God nor that God is Triune, however, the fact remains that NOT all Bibles agree here at all!!!! Why does that SIMPLE truth not cause you folks to open you minds and hearts to find out why, rather than just assume I am telling you an untruth!!!! That is because your Father is the Father of the lie as you want to believe what you want to believe, right or wrong does not matter!!!!!

Perhaps, I am mistaken, as Mary does not do Jesus homage or obeisance (or even worship) in John 19 or 20 at all! Where do you folks get this nonsense from?

At Luke 17:16, none of the 20 Bibles found on (www.biblegateway.com) use the word worship in connection to one of the ten lepers that turned back to thank Jesus for curing him, instead (which is the SAME EXACT GREEK WORD USED ABOVE at Matthew 2:11, and Matthew 8:1-3, and as found in ALL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS).


Jesus is NEVER worshipped in Revelation Chapter 1, as when John falls down to do an act of worship, (I believe twice) the angel rebuked and correct him for doing so!

Therefore the further ignorant statement made here, “Jesus never rebuke anyone that worshipped Him” is completely wrong, as it ASSUMES that your thinking is corroborated by scripture and it is NOT!!!!! So, the question makes no sense, and reply, that Jesus did not have to, as the Greek Text clearly shows us that NO ONE WORSHIPPED JESUS, but rather, they worshipped “the God and Father of Jesus” as after all, Jehovah is the God and Father of Jesus!!!!!

Therefore the state, “Jesus was truly worshipped” is not only FALSE, from the standpoint of Bible (not as to Creeds, Dogma and theology, because in these, Jesus is worshipped) Jesus is NOT worshipped at all!!!

TP

Simple you fall to read a passage in scripture

Mat 21:9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.

Mat 21:15 And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; they were sore displeased,

Mar 11:9 And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:

Mar 11:10 Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.

Joh 12:13 Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Hosanna - adoration, adoration is worship of the Lord.

Now back to your wise men the Bible uses the word wise men.


Matthew 2:2 KJV
(2) Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.

The wise men came to wroship and yes the wise men are assyrians. Some of them are very bright. Not as bright as the star that was over Jesus. Worship means to pay homage or adoration. To adore. We adore Christ, we worship Jesus.

You need to go and read your Bible praetorian I am through with your insults. If you can not talk nice you should not be allowd on the board.

When did Christ ever rebuke anyone when they worshipped Him. He did tell them not to tell anyone.

[praetorian]

Matthew 21:9, does not tell you that Jesus was worshipped or that Jesus is God or that God is Triune! In fact it speaks of God and Jesus separate as Jesus comes in “the name of the Lord” meaning the Almighty God and Father of Jesus, Jehovah!

Matthew 21:15, does not tell you that Jesus was worshipped or that Jesus is God or that God is Triune!

Mark 11:9, does not tell you that Jesus was worshipped or that Jesus is God or that God is Triune! In fact it speaks of God and Jesus separate as Jesus comes in “the name of the Lord” meaning the Almighty God and Father of Jesus, Jehovah!

Mark 11:10, does not tell you that Jesus was worshipped or that Jesus is God or that God is Triune! In fact it speaks of God and Jesus separate as Jesus comes in “the name of the Lord” meaning the Almighty God and Father of Jesus, Jehovah!

John 12:13, does not tell you that Jesus was worshipped or that Jesus is God or that God is Triune! In fact it speaks of God and Jesus separate as Jesus comes in “the name of the Lord” meaning the Almighty God and Father of Jesus, Jehovah!

Yes, “Hosanna - adoration, adoration is worship of the Lord” but this is speaking to the “God and Father of Jesus Christ.”

Your ignorance continues to show, as all you do is IGNORE Bible FACTS and SCRIPTURES that show you are wrong!!!!!!

Matthew 2:2, NOT ALL BIBLE translate or use the WORD WORSHIP HERE, and unless you are an EXPERT, which YOU BY FAR ARE NOT, what is your reason for choosing one over the other, as choosing because of your beliefs is IGNORANT!!!!!!

No, “Worship” DOES NOT MEAN TO “pay homage” as Kings, Presidents, Judges men in the Bible receive homage, or obeisance, out of respect, even today, but they are not worshipped!!!!! I adore my wife and I do not worship her!!!!! YOU ARE WRONG!!!

I am civil and to the point while calling expressing what it is you are doing, and you are ignorant for ONLY choosing scriptures that you agree with while plainly ignoring those that don’t! And further, you stated you were staying away, so I am simply point out your obvious indecision and mental state!

Go Away Satan is has a scriptural basis for my concluding comments!

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!

[turtle]

Study and look up things yourself do not take praetorians word or my word for it. You can download a good program called www.e-sword.net it has a lot of helpful Bible tools to download and use. use it to help educate yourself or use some of the good Bible sites on the web. It will teach you what you need to know even if you are not a Hebrew or Greek expert.

If you can not download that is okay there pleny of help on the web if you look.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Study and look up things yourself do not take praetorians word or my word for it. You can download a good program called www.e-sword.net it has a lot of helpful Bible tools to download and use. use it to help educate yourself or use some of the good Bible sites on the web. It will teach you what you need to know even if you are not a Hebrew or Greek expert.

If you can not download that is okay there pleny of help on the web if you look.

So why haven't you used them yourself?

[praetorian]

Study and look up things yourself do not take praetorians word or my word for it. You can download a good program called www.e-sword.net it has a lot of helpful Bible tools to download and use. use it to help educate yourself or use some of the good Bible sites on the web. It will teach you what you need to know even if you are not a Hebrew or Greek expert.

If you can not download that is okay there pleny of help on the web if you look.


I have that program. I do not need to be educated in dogma, creeds and theology! If you can establish what you believe in the Bible, ALL Bibles and or the manuscripts, then do so, if NOT, then go away as nothing you show here or anywhere else, nor on this site, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

If you continue to post to me, I will continue to repeat this as you or anyone else cannot answer this, without again, interpretation and implication as the Scriptures explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically express and distinguish between The Almighty God YHWH, and his Son Jesus Christ as clearly as you and TC and TATM not being the same exact person!!!!


TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Bible AFTER THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN AND COMPLETE!!!!

How udderly hilarious!

Bible:
Function:noun
Etymology:Middle English, from Old French, from Medieval Latin biblia, from Greek, plural of biblion book, diminutive of byblos papyrus, book, from Byblos, ancient Phoenician city from which papyrus was exported
Date:14th century

1 capitalized a : the sacred scriptures of Christians comprising the Old Testament and the New Testament b : the sacred scriptures of some other religion (as Judaism)
2 obsolete : BOOK
3 capitalized : a copy or an edition of the Bible
4 : a publication that is preeminent especially in authoritativeness or wide readership
Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary

The word Bible did not come into use until the fourteen century, to begin with. More important, the Bible was not gathered together until the cannonization process was complete several centuries after the death of the authors. In fact, not a single first century document exist today.

Since you have again, tried to take this off the topic, let me bring you back! Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

“You may recall your post found on page 21 of this string, dated 2-14-09, post number 401 that quoted from Polycarp, Ignatius etc.


Now why do you suppose someone is incapable of telling the truth? I suggest you go back and read the post above. All these men worshipped the Holy Trinity long before any council was convened.

That’s it!!!! You “feel” you have the truth, so it MUST BE SO!!!! WOW!! Well then, we have the almighty salaried (apparently not enough money) Rev here to provide his words in a ‘winsome reply’ opinion wow, you are amazing, just in a different sort of way, and NOT one with flattering terms!!!! Just take my quote above and rinse, lather and repeat, by taking a good shower very carefully, as your reply, stinks!


My friend, the truth is you can not name a single Christian organization, association or congregation that agrees with your religion's dogma. Facts is facts.

As to determining who is Christian and who is not, we have a more reliable authority. "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1 (KJV)

Now think carefully, how do we know a false prophet? "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously:
thou shalt not be afraid of him." Deuteronomy 18:21 & 22 (KJV)

quote: Not all that was expected to happen in 1914 did happen. End quote.

http://www.watchtower.org/e/jt/article_02.htm

In fact, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society has named the end of the world several times, including 9/11. Yet, we know the world continues to exist. As can be plainly seen, God declared the WB&TS a liar, end of conversation.

[praetorian]

As stated in several previous post, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is not Christian. Mr. Tonyp has acknowledged as much. One who do good to remember Jim Jones & David Koresh, both, found all their dogma in the Bible. Castrating the Word of God is the only way these cults have to prove themselves.

ps. Mr. Tonyp, fyi. You should have done the research I suggest before. The amazing thing is, you will not find a single ex-Christian who joined the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. But nearly every ex-JW has joined Christianity.

TATM:

That all you got Reverend? As to the WBTS not being Christian, this claim is absurd and belongs to those like you who want to believe anything so long as it is their way of thinking! Good for you! If you believe I have “acknowledged” that we are NOT Christian, then it should be no problem to establish the same, by a direct quote, you know, like the way you do when you imply and or infer things in the Bible! I both know who my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is, and what’s more I serve him loyally everyday! Jones, & David Koresh have more to do with you Reverend Sandy Bryant than it does with me and or my faith as JW’s! You are holding yourself out as the one any only person that can make these decisions, just like Koresh and Jones did, and that cannot happen in and among JW’s EVER!!!!

You state, “Castrating the Word of God is the only way these cults have to prove themselves” and certainly talk big, but you can’t walk the walk as to date, other than you mouth-words, you have not shown anything discussed on this and or any other Bible topic, that you believe as truly coming from the Bible, as opposed to what I have demonstrated here several times! We just have your word, like Jones and Koresh, just TRUST YOU, please get a life and job and stop taking a salary for suckering people!!!

You state, “ps. Mr. Tonyp, fyi. You should have done the research I suggest before. The amazing thing is, you will not find a single ex-Christian who joined the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. But nearly every ex-JW has joined Christianity” and reply, that you are totally confused, and insane as where do you think most of the Christians who become JW’s come from? For instance, in Italy is predominately a so called Christian country, and since JW’s are the second largest religion (as well as in Mexico and other countries etc.) where do you think many of them are coming from!

Last night on CBS Evening News with Katie Couric, I trust you heard that all religions, especially those of Christendom are on massive decline, and interesting enough, more than 300K people from around the globe become JW’s! EVERY YEAR AND CLIMBING, though in the end, it will always be relatively small in comparison to Christendom in general and the world’s population!

Your facts are as unfounded as all of your emotional posts!!!

Therefore and again, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

Tp

[praetorian]

How udderly hilarious!

Bible:
Function:noun
Etymology:Middle English, from Old French, from Medieval Latin biblia, from Greek, plural of biblion book, diminutive of byblos papyrus, book, from Byblos, ancient Phoenician city from which papyrus was exported
Date:14th century

1 capitalized a : the sacred scriptures of Christians comprising the Old Testament and the New Testament b : the sacred scriptures of some other religion (as Judaism)
2 obsolete : BOOK
3 capitalized : a copy or an edition of the Bible
4 : a publication that is preeminent especially in authoritativeness or wide readership
Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary

The word Bible did not come into use until the fourteen century, to begin with. More important, the Bible was not gathered together until the cannonization process was complete several centuries after the death of the authors. In fact, not a single first century document exist today.






Now why do you suppose someone is incapable of telling the truth? I suggest you go back and read the post above. All these men worshipped the Holy Trinity long before any council was convened.



My friend, the truth is you can not name a single Christian organization, association or congregation that agrees with your religion's dogma. Facts is facts.

As to determining who is Christian and who is not, we have a more reliable authority. "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1 (KJV)

Now think carefully, how do we know a false prophet? "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously:
thou shalt not be afraid of him." Deuteronomy 18:21 & 22 (KJV)

quote: Not all that was expected to happen in 1914 did happen. End quote.

http://www.watchtower.org/e/jt/article_02.htm

In fact, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society has named the end of the world several times, including 9/11. Yet, we know the world continues to exist. As can be plainly seen, God declared the WB&TS a liar, end of conversation.

TATM:

You are simply not that bright of person and I am sorry that I gave you too much credit, so I will explain this a little differently here!

You are indeed correct that the Bible, via the Latin term Bible was in fact compiled later by a Catholic Monk by the name of Jerome much later with regards to Chapter and Verses etc, HOWEVER, (STAY WITH ME JIMBO STAY WITH ME) the writings, in Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek, that make up the Bible (the Bible actually calls or refers to itself as The Holy Scriptures) was in fact completed BEFORE all of the things and writers you refer to came to existence, as you point out on page 21 of this string, dated 2-14-09, post number 401 wherein you quoted from Polycarp, Ignatius etc!!!! THIS IS FACT!!!! In fact you have the unmitigated gall to refer to God’s word and “obsolete” “book” good for you! I again, choose what you refer to as obsolete, over your thinking, oh Rev!!!!

Now why you insist on speaking about yourself in such poor terms I will never understand, “Now why do you suppose someone is incapable of telling the truth?” as you cannot be speaking with reference to myself! I have come to appreciate that you Sir have more respect for men, who lived some time after the Apostle John died, and when the Holy Scriptures were completed, then the Apostles and inspired writers of the Holy Scriptures (Bible) and I do not! Good for you!!!!

While you are correct in stating “All these men worshipped the Holy Trinity long before any council was convened” with regards to the “Bible” we use today, you are DEAD WRONG with regards to The Holy Scriptures themselves! You are just DEAD WRONG! WOW!!! With what do you use to reason? Humm!!!! LOL

You state, “My friend, the truth is you can not name a single Christian organization, association or congregation that agrees with your religion's dogma. Facts is facts” and reply, I am not your friend, and this point no only has nothing to do with the string/thread, it does nothing to establish your “feelings” or “opinion” as over or better than mine or anyone else!

Now here you really show your complete ignorance; QUOTE: Now think carefully, how do we know a false prophet? "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." Deuteronomy 18:21 & 22 (KJV) END QUOTE, and reply; Wow, I didn’t see this coming oh brilliantly mentally challenged Reverend one!!!! First, as a Christian, we are NOT under the Mosaic law, and this scripture you quote from applies specifically to those prophets in the days of Israel, that prophesied falsely! Second JW’s or no Christian today, can rightly call themselves prophets as the last one was God’s Son, the Messiah, Jesus Christ!!!! (See Hebrew Chapter 1: 1, 2) Therefore we as a people, despite what you may read or hear, HAVE NEVER UTTERED PROHESHY as only people inspired with God’s Holy Spirit can do this, and neither I nor any JW or anyone else is today!!!!! Nice try but again, utterly lacking!!!!

You state, “Not all that was expected to happen in 1914 did happen” and reply that this is completely true, as again, this was not a prophesy, and many not all who were JW’s thought certain events would occur regarding end times, that did not happen! I know you know this but, this same occurred with Jesus Apostles and others, of having failed expectations but that did not mean they were not being used by God or were not Apostles of Jesus because of it! (See Luke 19:11 and Acts 1:6) In fact Peter made the mistake of denying Christ but was still counted worthy as an Apostle! Please you know nothing!!!!

Your next quote is a BOLD FACE LIE AS IS MOST ALL OF YOUR REPLIES, QUOTE: In fact, the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society has named the end of the world several times, including 9/11. Yet, we know the world continues to exist. As can be plainly seen, God declared the WB&TS a liar, end of conversation End Quote, and I challenge you to produce PROOF of "one" of their articles that clamied or stated “the end of the world” not several, BUT ONE, (should be real easy enough right) and the same with 911, as these are all lies you and others like you, repeat and disseminate, that are simply not true, the same way you state your dogma, creeds and theology as though it “were coming from the Bible” when it clearly does not!!!!! Now, take the challenge fellow, and PROVE IT, as the only thing you can do, is quote other's lies, that are neither accurate nor true!!!!

If I am right, you will have a lot to answer for, but first why don’t you try showing me something from the Bible that supports your dogmas, creeds and theology!!!!! That would truly be different!!!!

In conclusion, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[turtle]

So why haven't you used them yourself?

I do and have used it here. So live with it. But I also use my on brain.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come, Mr. Tonyp, which Bible was written in the first century? Name please and just more of your mumbo-jumbo garbage. I can even play your game. Name the manuscript written in the first century.

For those who may not have thought your way through Mr. Tonyp's claims, Mexico Canada and . . . the rest of the world for that matter, does have have the advantage of freedom of religion. In other words, they are forced to join the state church. The growth claimed is dismal to say the least. The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is barred from several countries althogether.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

I do and have used it here. So live with it. But I also use my on brain.

Come, Rev. Ms. Turtle, you can tell us the truth. Why are you so ashame of your religion?

[praetorian]

Come, Mr. Tonyp, which Bible was written in the first century? Name please and just more of your mumbo-jumbo garbage. I can even play your game. Name the manuscript written in the first century.

For those who may not have thought your way through Mr. Tonyp's claims, Mexico Canada and . . . the rest of the world for that matter, does have have the advantage of freedom of religion. In other words, they are forced to join the state church. The growth claimed is dismal to say the least. The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is barred from several countries althogether.

TATM:

It is shocking (well actually perhaps NOT, though the people in the pew you teach should know what you actually believe) that you are a “Reverend” and that you do NOT know these things about The Holy Scriptures that we today call the Bible! On the other hand, you do well know your dogma, creeds and theology, isn’t that a hoot! Too bad parishioners, or members of the Church you work for, or should I say, “minister” too, do not know how you REALLY FEEL ABOUT GOD’s WORD!!!

Since you have little or NO training in the Holy Scriptures, (Not Dogma, Creeds or Theology--Stay with ME JIMBO) what we call or refer to as the Holy Bible today, let me try to offer you some information here for your unreasoning mind, that you will throw away or view as of no account (though perhaps some here will not):

First and foremost, no other writings in the world, even all of the ones you quote from like Polycarp et al, can claim divine inspiration as The Holy Writings can and in fact DO, (2 Timothy 3:16,17 etc.) thus it is a work or product of Holy Spirit, and as such, must be accepted in faith, and viewed from a spiritual standpoint, and not just as literature where, these elements are clearly NOT found. You Reverend do not believe this, so I often wonder why you even make issues over Bible subjects when you have little or respect for the Bible to begin with!

The Bible as we know it today is made up of 66 smaller Books, thus the Latin name Biblia, which means, in effect, “little [or smaller] books.” Thus it is a collection of, in total, 66 Books.

The Old Testament, or rather the more appropriate name for this, The Hebrew Scriptures (containing small parts with Aramaic) is made up of 39 smaller books (Genesis to Malachi) which make up two thirds of the Holy Scriptures (Bible) we have today. All of these were written BEFORE our God, transferred the life of his Son, who was with Him-God in heaven; our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, into the womb of the Jewish virgin girl Mary. Jesus and writers of the New Testament or rather more appropriately, the Christian Greek Scriptures, referred to the body-collection of these sacred writings as “the Scriptures,” or “the holy Scriptures,” “the holy writings.” (See Mathew 21:42; Mark 14:49; Luke 24:32; John 5:39; Acts 18:24; Romans 1:2; 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:15, 16). This collection is the written expression of a communicating God, the Word of God, and this is acknowledged in phrases such as “expression of God’s (Jehovah’s) mouth” (Deuteronomy 8:3), “sayings of God or Jehovah” (Joshua 24:27), “commandments of God or Jehovah” (Ezra 7:11), “law of God or Jehovah,” “reminder of God or Jehovah,” “orders from God or Jehovah” (Psalms 19:7, 8), “word of God or Jehovah” (Isaiah 38:4), ‘utterance of God or Jehovah’ (Matthew 4:4), “God or Jehovah’s word” (1 Thessalonians 4:15). Repeatedly these writings are spoken of as “sacred pronouncements of God.” Romans 3:2; Acts 7:38; Hebrews 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11.

NOTE: As an FYI: By combining some of these books, (the 39 above) the Jews had a total of only 22 or 24 books, yet these embraced the same material. It also appears to have been their custom to subdivide the Scriptures into three parts; ‘the law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms’ which they refer to today, as the Tanak. (or Tanahk with some variations etc).

Moses began the first of these writings in and around the year 1513 B.C.E, give or take a few years, which ends with Malachi in and around the year 443 B.C.E. (give or take a few years) well before Christ appeared on earth!

Jesus, and the inspired writers of the NT-or rather the Christian Greek Scriptures (which are made up of the remainder of our Bible’s today, are made up of 27 Books from Matthew through to Revelation) quoted from the Hebrew writings, innumerable times, verse what was customarily done by the Jew Religious Leaders at that time, that of quoting prominent men of the time, and just before them, (sound familiar TATM) instead of sticking to the then Bible text of the Hebrew Scriptures. This clearly accounts for what Jesus expressed to the Jewish religious leaders, found at John 5: 39-47, which in effect tells you the reason why the Jews rejected Jesus; as they had moved far away from the then Bible-Hebrew writings, in favor of the words, teachings and traditions of men; in effect opting to believe the dogma, creeds and theologies of men over the Holy Hebrew Writings! Sound familiar yet TATM?

The Christian Greek Scriptures-NT (Matthew to Revelation) was begun after Christ died, by Matthew in about 41 CE, with 23 of the 27 books being written on and or BEFORE the year 65. The remainder of the books, 4 of them, was written by John between 96 and 98 CE. Now, all of the writers of the “NT” were men known by all of the Apostles intimately, and some were Apostles, such as Matthew, Peter and John, however they also included, again prominent men KNOWN TO THE APOSTLES in the First Century Christian Congregation like Mark, Luke, James and Jude (both brothers, or half brothers of Jesus Christ) and the Apostle Paul. With regards to the Apostle Paul, Peter makes mention of his writings in 2 Peter 3:15 and 16, as Paul wrote most of the books in the “NT”. Therefore all of these fellows, were known to the Apostles personally, all of them had actual gifts of the Holy Spirit and were able to cure people, truly speak in tongues, bring them back from the dead and so on!

All of these above, are the ones that make up what is known as the Bible cannon we have today, and it is with good reason, as again, they were all known to each other and some known associates of God’s Son Jesus Christ not to mention Moses and the prophets of old! It is these writings that are to be distinguished from Polycarp and company et al (and in fact all other writings, like the Koran, Bagavagita, Confusius, etc) which I add, is where we are to take our beliefs from, as this is where we get knowledge of God and his Son in the very first place-to begin with! Not some other writings, OUTSIDE of these, that tell us their ideas on what the Holy Scriptures state, as we have the HOLY SCRIIPTURES and what they express available to us today! It is YOU that chooses not to believe in them over the writings of others!!!! YOU DO THIS NOT ME!!!!

Therefore Reverend TATM, it is these writings I refer to when speaking of the Bible, and it is these writings I have expressed, which you refer to as “more of your mumbo-jumbo garbage.” I am not interested in playing games with you, arrogant ant, I am interested in providing information here that is from the Bible, (and you now know what I mean when I use that word, BIBLE) and not from other human teachings, such as found in your dogma, creeds and theologies!

You continue to express your ignorance, by stating, QUOTE, “For those who may not have thought your way through Mr. Tonyp's claims, Mexico Canada and . . . the rest of the world for that matter, does have have the advantage of freedom of religion. In other words, they are forced to join the state church. The growth claimed is dismal to say the least. The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is barred from several countries althogether” and reply.

First, when I referred to Italy, are you stating they do not have freedom of religion? Are you also stating the same thing with Canada that I did not bring up, you did here, as I highlighted a few countries where JW’s are the second largest religion as there are more! As to Mexico, are you taking the position that they do not have religious freedom? Sir they are predominantly Catholic as are most Latin American Countries, and know, that I go there often for vacation and visit our places of worship there, (known as Kingdom Halls) in various parts of that country, and also see the many other churches of Christendom and others there as well!!! Are you further stating (do you believe your own lies-BS???) that the JW’s are the STATE RELIGION there-Mexico or elsewhere? You are out of your mind as the only other options are STUPID and or SATANIC as you are stating things that NON JW’s EVEN KNOW, in fact grade school kids know!!!! So why is it you feel the need to express yourself in continuous LIES???!!!

Yes, it is true that the JW’s are in fact banned in many countries, as is many other main stream religions of Christendom as most recently in Russia etc, where they have opted to make the Russian Orthodox Church (of Christendom) the STATE RELIGION and has outlawed all others including YOURS, and so, what is your point?????

You are so misinformed that it defies reason! Your repeated sham Rev, of skewing the subject matter is clearly seen right through again; As nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!


TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Can't answer the question can you? Why do you have such a hard time dealing with direct question? Name the Bible or manuscript that was completed in the first century. Or better yet, admit you can not.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

May I laugh out loud at fools? Canada has two state religions. As any dimwit will tell you, the eastern half of Canada was founded by the British, the western half by France. Canada, by design, has two state sponsored religions, the Church of England and the Roman Church. Canada, also, has two state sponsored languages, English and French. How ignorance can people really be?

hehehehehhehehehehe

[praetorian]

Can't answer the question can you? Why do you have such a hard time dealing with direct question? Name the Bible or manuscript that was completed in the first century. Or better yet, admit you can not.

TATM:

You must have been a real problem child for your parents as you are now as an adult! It is clear that nothing I write will suffice for you, EVER, (you only want lies that fits your agenda) unless and of course it is from your Father (John 8:44, 45) but here goes, oh enlightened one!

Some (not all) of the evidence of available existing “OT” Hebrew extant manuscripts (and Greek OT extant manuscripts) and parts of extant manuscripts while several, include but are not limited to: 1. The Dead Sea Scrolls, which date from about 200 B.C.E. to 70 C.E. 2. Aramaic Targums of the complete OT, which date to about 400 B.C.E. just after Malachi was completed and 3. The Greek Septuagint, or LXX, which contain the entire OT, dates back to about 250 B.C.E and though there are fragments of others that go back even farther.

With regards to the “NT”, there is the “P 52” (“P” for papyrus) which is the complete “NT” and dates back to about 125 C.E. though there are fragments, parts of various books of the “NT” that go farther back, close to when the autographs of the Apostle John did his writings! The oldest translations of the “NT’ into other languages, from the Greek (though there is evidence that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew though later translated into Greek) date to around 180 C.E., which were Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions and then soon thereafter that begin to appear in around 195 C.E. with the first known combined “OT” and “NT” Holy Scriptures; and you should know this as you quote from these folks a lot over the Bible, as Tertullian quoted from these, and lived around 160-220 A.D. in north Africa and wrote his treatises on theology which is part of what you choose to believe over the Bible meaning The Holy Scriptures, the “OT” and the “NT” combined in all 66 books!

From here, other completed “OT” and “NT” texts, together and or separate (as it was still not referred to as a Bible yet) began to appear, that later gave birth to what is commonly referred to as the Latin Vulgate which was translated by Jerome around 380 C.E, wherein he placed for the first time chapters and verses to the texts, for easy reference and it grew from there!

Now here this oh illuminati one, from scata; nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[praetorian]

May I laugh out loud at fools? Canada has two state religions. As any dimwit will tell you, the eastern half of Canada was founded by the British, the western half by France. Canada, by design, has two state sponsored religions, the Church of England and the Roman Church. Canada, also, has two state sponsored languages, English and French. How ignorance can people really be?

hehehehehhehehehehe

TATM:

You must be one “unique” or really “special” mind, so I will do my best here to help you with you own thoughts!

You see my post of 3-10-09 number 696, states in paragraph 3, QUOTE: You state, “ps. Mr. Tonyp, fyi. You should have done the research I suggest before. The amazing thing is, you will not find a single ex-Christian who joined the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. But nearly every ex-JW has joined Christianity” and reply, that you are totally confused, and insane as where do you think most of the Christians who become JW’s come from? For instance, in Italy is predominately a so called Christian country, and since JW’s are the second largest religion (as well as in Mexico and other countries etc.) where do you think many of them are coming from! END QUOTE and reply;

Now, for the door prize to answer the trick question; where do you see the word or mention by me of “Canada” here in these words????? You don’t!

Now, you take it upon yourself (you do that a lot however, a person with your mental abilities, should not try to hurt yourself, and should wear a sign, to helps others, so “Here’s Your Sign!) and you reply to me in your post number 699 of 3-11-09 as though it was “I” that said or mentioned something about “Canada” when I did not, though we are certainly found there as well, though we are not the second largest religion in that country and I did mention Italy and Mexico, where we are; and also mentioned that we are the second largest on other lands as well!!!

GET IT! YOU MENTION CANADA, now repeat after me, I, meaning you SAID THIS!!!!

Therefore I never mentioned anything about that country, in order for you to speak of it at all, so if there is someone here that is truly a “dimwit” it is you, as you are doing this all by your lonesome!

Now here this oh “dimwit” one; nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

P.S. hehehehehhehehehehe-Get Help!!! You do know that there are some on this site that can in fact read and see your mind showing, yes!!!!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

What liars the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society are!!

Italy:
Roman Catholic 90% (approximately; about one-third practicing), other 10% (includes mature Protestant and Jewish communities and a growing Muslim immigrant community)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/it.html

Mexico:
Roman Catholic 76.5%, Protestant 6.3% (Pentecostal 1.4%, Jehovah's Witnesses 1.1%, other 3.8%), other 0.3%, unspecified 13.8%, none 3.1% (2000 census)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/mx.html

hahahahhhahahahhahahhahahaha!!!!!!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

I am still waiting for the name of the Bible that was completed in the first century. Come now, tell us the truth for once.

[praetorian]

What liars the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society are!!

Italy:
Roman Catholic 90% (approximately; about one-third practicing), other 10% (includes mature Protestant and Jewish communities and a growing Muslim immigrant community)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/it.html

Mexico:
Roman Catholic 76.5%, Protestant 6.3% (Pentecostal 1.4%, Jehovah's Witnesses 1.1%, other 3.8%), other 0.3%, unspecified 13.8%, none 3.1% (2000 census)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/mx.html

hahahahhhahahahhahahhahahaha!!!!!!


TATM:

It is not beyond me, as I am not like you (apparently infallible) to make mistakes, so I will check where I found this information and report back to you, as it is only fair that since I made the statement Bucko, that I be the one to substantiate it! As to taking this and making me out to be a liar, well, beside the fact that we shall see, it does nothing to establish that I “LIED” as there is a distinct difference (STAY WITHM ME JIMBO REV, STAY WITH ME) between a LIE and an ERROR!!! \

TATM, I never said that as the “second” faith in those countries, that they were in the numbers as all of those other "peace loving" Christians are in the country! And yet so many problems, 2 Billions “Christians” in the world like YOU, wow! How interesting!!!!

However and again, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

hahahahhhahahahhahahhahahaha!!!!!!

TP

[praetorian]

I am still waiting for the name of the Bible that was completed in the first century. Come now, tell us the truth for once.

TATM POO:

I already provided you with this information, and you are being an obstinate goat, to say the least by playing semantics with me. I gave you the SPECIFIC NAMES where the Old Testament, and New Testament inspired writings were found, and BEFORE your so called writers that taught dogma, creeds and theologies, unless and of course you suffer from that dreaded disease of “selective reading” as that can be a bear indeed!!!

As to Bible, that word like with the name Jesus; as I know you know YOU MUST this as you are a Reverend, salaried worker of “God”, was NOT called JESUS in the first century as this working “JESUS” is an English rendering of our Lord and Masters name, so like that, the Bible, the English word Bible did not come into existence, THE WORD BUCKO, until much later, however the writings that are contained therein were clearly refereed to by NAME above in my reply to you, marked as number 704, GET IT, you know like your making up “CANADA” totally MADE UP NOT ERROR!

And re-read the post for specific names!!!!!!

No wait; I am not being fair as that may be too much to ask such a unique and special mind like yours so here it is again, identified with the Specific Names used then!!!!!

You must have been a real problem child for your parents as you are now as an adult! It is clear that nothing I write will suffice for you, EVER, (you only want lies that fits your agenda) unless and of course it is from your Father (John 8:44, 45) but here goes, oh enlightened one!

Some (not all) of the evidence of available existing “OT” Hebrew extant manuscripts (and Greek OT extant manuscripts) and parts of extant manuscripts while several, include but are not limited to: 1. The Dead Sea Scrolls, which date from about 200 B.C.E. to 70 C.E. 2. Aramaic Targums of the complete OT, which date to about 400 B.C.E. just after Malachi was completed and 3. The Greek Septuagint, or LXX, which contain the entire OT, dates back to about 250 B.C.E and though there are fragments of others that go back even farther.

SO TWO THIRDS OF WHAT WE NOW CALL THE BIBLE TODAY AS DESCRIBED ABOVE WAS IN EXISTENCE WELL BEFORE THE FIRST CENTURY!!!!

With regards to the “NT”, there is the “P 52” (“P” for papyrus) which is the complete “NT” and dates back to about 125 C.E. though there are fragments, parts of various books of the “NT” that go farther back, close to when the autographs of the Apostle John did his writings! The oldest translations of the “NT’ into other languages, from the Greek (though there is evidence that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew though later translated into Greek) date to around 180 C.E., which were Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions and then soon thereafter that begin to appear in around 195 C.E. with the first known combined “OT” and “NT” Holy Scriptures; and you should know this as you quote from these folks a lot over the Bible, as Tertullian quoted from these, and lived around 160-220 A.D. in north Africa and wrote his treatises on theology which is part of what you choose to believe over the Bible meaning The Holy Scriptures, the “OT” and the “NT” combined in all 66 books!

SO THE OTHER THIRD OF WHAT WE NOW CALL THE BIBLE TODAY AS DESCRIBED ABOVE WAS COMPLETED LATER IN AND BY THE FIRST CENTURY!

From here, other completed “OT” and “NT” texts, together and or separate (as it was still not referred to as a Bible yet) began to FURTHER appear, GET IT FURTHER APPEAR, that later gave birth to what is commonly referred to as the Latin Vulgate which was translated by Jerome around 380 C.E, wherein he placed for the first time chapters and verses to the texts, for easy reference and it grew from there!

Now here this oh illuminati one, from scata; nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

I used to think that no one was that dense, but I was wrong about that!!!!!


Hehehehehhehehehehe


TP

It just dawned on me that you are actually fighting against the Word of God, not ME or anyone else! Take it up with Him and his Son since you are that cocked sure of yourself and totally IGNORE FACTS!!!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come, my friend, name the Bible that was completed in the first century. or Shut up.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Fact: There are no existing documents or manuscripts dating from the first century. No, not none. Sorry, no not any. Sorry again, no not a single one.

Fact: The word “scripture” as used in the present day Bible means “writing.” It does not mean the Holy Bible.

Fact: The wery best manuscripts available today date from the eighth through the tenth century, not the first century.

Fact: No one began collecting or cataloging the books of the Bible until Jerome came along.

Fact: The world’s oldest Bible (collection of holy writings) is the Ethiopian Bible. The second oldest is the Latin Vulgate. The oldest (so-called) protestant Bible (Wickliffe’s) is not available to the general public today.

Fact: John Wickliffe translated twenty-two-books from the Latin Vulgate into the vulgar language (English). Luther translated an additional twenty-six-books into German.

Fact: The King James Bible was translated from the most reliable texts available (not the Latin Vulgate with one exception).

Fact: The Old Testament of the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic Text dating from the seventh through the tenth century.

Fact: The LXX (Septuagint) is quoted by the Christian New Testament and by the Apostolic Fathers. The oldest surviving codices of LXX (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) date to the fourth century AD.

Fact: The quotes of scripture from the Old Testament found in the New Testament are from the LXX. The Old Testament used in the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic text of the tenth century.

Fact: The original AKJV Bible contained the books often referred to as the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

Fact: Not a single author of a book found in the present day Bible knew anything about a Bible.

Fact: Not all the authors of books found in the New Testament knew the apostles. The Book of Hebrews is an excellent example.

Fact: Factnet has had many great discussions on the subject of the Bible. Look under the title/thread Doctrine Belief Proofs Religious Practices.

Fact: There is not a single copy of any Bible, Codex, Manuscript or sacred writing from the first century extant today. No, not none!!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

TATM YOU POMPOUS IGNORANT MULE.

As I have said in the past and will say into the future, the only hope for the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is through insults.

[praetorian]

Come, my friend, name the Bible that was completed in the first century. or Shut up.

TATM: Your above quoted statement here has been asked and answered ad nauseam.

Re-read the posts above as a person with an 8th grade reading level can see and understand that 2/3 of The Holy Writings clearly named and identified above, that make up what we call the Bible today pre-dates the First Century by about 200 hundreds years or more, though it was NOT CALLED BIBLE YOU BOOB AS THIS WORD WAS INVENTED LATER!!!! Also, The Holy Writings clearly named and identified above that make up what we call the Bible today was 97-8% completed near the middle of the First Century with only four others being added BEFORE THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY, however, though it was NOT CALLED BIBLE YOU BOOB AS THIS WORD WAS INVENTED LATER!!!!

FACT!!!!!

HEHEHEHEHEHEH

And note, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[praetorian]

TATM:

The following information (though I do not speak of Canada) is taken from the link below:

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGkxT2IblJ7R0BYSJXNyoA?p=%22the+seco nd+largest+Christian+religion%22&fr=yfp-t-501

On this you will find the following entitled: “Jehovah's Witnesses and the responsibility of religious freedom: the European experience” published in the “Journal of Church and State - June 22, 2001” by Carolyn R. Wah, which you can find in published in the “J.M. Dawson Studies in Church and State” at Baylor University website, http://www.baylor.edu/church_state/splash.php

For further reference it was published in the June 22, 2001, Volume 43, Issue 3, beginning on page 579, of the J.M. Dawson Studies in Church and State, cited in the previous paragraph, just above this one.

CAROLYN R. WAH (B.A., State University of New York; J.D., Rutgers University Law School; M.A.L.S., State University of New York. Her articles have appeared in American Journal of Family Law, Family Law Quarterly, and Family and Conciliation Courts Review. Special interests include human rights, and law
in Asia.

The writing of 17 pages, states in part, QUOTE, “The German report met almost immediate criticism from several legal experts and university professors who reproached the commission for advancement of unsubstantiated suspicions and intolerance of minority religious groups. One member of the commission later referred to "the freehand methodological approach" and "a certain nonchalance in dealing with the information available." And also, “For example, he explained that "[e]specially in the first year, there was a tendency to take all information critical of sects and cults at face value, while at the same time information provided by the religious groups themselves was usually regarded as unreliable apologetics." End QUOTE.

And also, QUOTE: “Throughout this process, with the exception of the
Netherlands' commission, Jehovah's Witnesses were subject to an investigation. Why have Jehovah's Witnesses, now the SECOND LARGEST CHRISTIAN RELIGION in many European countries, drawn critical attention from Europe's larger established churches, some governmental agencies, and the media?
One reason is sloppy scholarship and lack of reliable research among the commissions. This lack of scholarship meant that the commissions attempted to evaluate without clear or objective standards and guidelines for evaluation. END QUOTE, and capital letters in this paragraph were added by me for emphasis.

The writing quotes for it’s figures for this, as a reference (among several) QUOTE” (46.) Swedish Government Commission on New Religious Movements, "In Good Faith: Society and the New Religious Movements," CESNUR, http://www.cesnur.org/swedish.htm, (1998): sec. 1.5.” END QUOTE. (This reference is found on www.cennur.org)

The following below site mentions the second largest religion in Italy, starting back in 1997, note, “South-Western College Publishing, ITALY back in Jan 1997

http://www.swlearning.com/marketing/zikmund/97_1_global_matters.html

End Quote:

I do not take lightly to being called a liar, especially and ironically from a factual habitual LIAR, himself Mr. Rev Sandy Bryant. BTW? Are you a male or female as Sandy goes both ways? As the your purposeful lying is here for any and all to see, with only an 8th grade reading level!

In conclusion, therefore, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

HEHEHEHEHEHEH

TP

[praetorian]

As I have said in the past and will say into the future, the only hope for the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is through insults.

YOU ignorant BOOB, I addressed you not the JW's or the WBTS, nor am I a spokesmen for them etc, as they would not dignify you with a response at all, as that is what one usually does for a sow! 2 Peter 2:22!

Unfortunately, I do reply in kind to people who treat me that way, and in that, I MAN ENOUGH TO totally admit it!

Too Bad!

You want respect, and good treatment, try by earning it, treating those the way you want others to treat you; oops, I forgot, you do in fact do that, so that it was I have obliged you!!!!

You just don’t get away with you Cow Poop and lies here Rev!!!!

And note, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!


TP

[praetorian]

Fact: There are no existing documents or manuscripts dating from the first century. No, not none. Sorry, no not any. Sorry again, no not a single one.

Fact: The word “scripture” as used in the present day Bible means “writing.” It does not mean the Holy Bible.

Fact: The wery best manuscripts available today date from the eighth through the tenth century, not the first century.

Fact: No one began collecting or cataloging the books of the Bible until Jerome came along.

Fact: The world’s oldest Bible (collection of holy writings) is the Ethiopian Bible. The second oldest is the Latin Vulgate. The oldest (so-called) protestant Bible (Wickliffe’s) is not available to the general public today.

Fact: John Wickliffe translated twenty-two-books from the Latin Vulgate into the vulgar language (English). Luther translated an additional twenty-six-books into German.

Fact: The King James Bible was translated from the most reliable texts available (not the Latin Vulgate with one exception).

Fact: The Old Testament of the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic Text dating from the seventh through the tenth century.

Fact: The LXX (Septuagint) is quoted by the Christian New Testament and by the Apostolic Fathers. The oldest surviving codices of LXX (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) date to the fourth century AD.

Fact: The quotes of scripture from the Old Testament found in the New Testament are from the LXX. The Old Testament used in the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic text of the tenth century.

Fact: The original AKJV Bible contained the books often referred to as the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

Fact: Not a single author of a book found in the present day Bible knew anything about a Bible.

Fact: Not all the authors of books found in the New Testament knew the apostles. The Book of Hebrews is an excellent example.

Fact: Factnet has had many great discussions on the subject of the Bible. Look under the title/thread Doctrine Belief Proofs Religious Practices.

Fact: There is not a single copy of any Bible, Codex, Manuscript or sacred writing from the first century extant today. No, not none!!

TATM:

Time does not permit me to respond to this now, however, I will very much enjoy doing so here, if not later today, tomorrow!!! What you do show to all of your supporters of the Trinity here, is that you have no respect for the Bible as you do for the writings of men outside the Bible!!! Isn't that a hoot for all of you who agree! You have all chosen a real good advocate, to support you all!!! LOL

But know, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

HEHEHEHEHEH

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

TATM:

The following information (though I do not speak of Canada) is taken from the link below:

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGkxT2IblJ7R0BYSJXNyoA?p=%22the+seco nd+largest+Christian+religion%22&fr=yfp-t-501

On this you will find the following entitled: “Jehovah's Witnesses and the responsibility of religious freedom: the European experience” published in the “Journal of Church and State - June 22, 2001” by Carolyn R. Wah, which you can find in published in the “J.M. Dawson Studies in Church and State” at Baylor University website, http://www.baylor.edu/church_state/splash.php

For further reference it was published in the June 22, 2001, Volume 43, Issue 3, beginning on page 579, of the J.M. Dawson Studies in Church and State, cited in the previous paragraph, just above this one.

CAROLYN R. WAH (B.A., State University of New York; J.D., Rutgers University Law School; M.A.L.S., State University of New York. Her articles have appeared in American Journal of Family Law, Family Law Quarterly, and Family and Conciliation Courts Review. Special interests include human rights, and law
in Asia.

The writing of 17 pages, states in part, QUOTE, “The German report met almost immediate criticism from several legal experts and university professors who reproached the commission for advancement of unsubstantiated suspicions and intolerance of minority religious groups. One member of the commission later referred to "the freehand methodological approach" and "a certain nonchalance in dealing with the information available." And also, “For example, he explained that "[e]specially in the first year, there was a tendency to take all information critical of sects and cults at face value, while at the same time information provided by the religious groups themselves was usually regarded as unreliable apologetics." End QUOTE.

And also, QUOTE: “Throughout this process, with the exception of the
Netherlands' commission, Jehovah's Witnesses were subject to an investigation. Why have Jehovah's Witnesses, now the SECOND LARGEST CHRISTIAN RELIGION in many European countries, drawn critical attention from Europe's larger established churches, some governmental agencies, and the media?
One reason is sloppy scholarship and lack of reliable research among the commissions. This lack of scholarship meant that the commissions attempted to evaluate without clear or objective standards and guidelines for evaluation. END QUOTE, and capital letters in this paragraph were added by me for emphasis.

The writing quotes for it’s figures for this, as a reference (among several) QUOTE” (46.) Swedish Government Commission on New Religious Movements, "In Good Faith: Society and the New Religious Movements," CESNUR, http://www.cesnur.org/swedish.htm, (1998): sec. 1.5.” END QUOTE. (This reference is found on www.cennur.org)

The following below site mentions the second largest religion in Italy, starting back in 1997, note, “South-Western College Publishing, ITALY back in Jan 1997

http://www.swlearning.com/marketing/zikmund/97_1_global_matters.html

End Quote:

I do not take lightly to being called a liar, especially and ironically from a factual habitual LIAR, himself Mr. Rev Sandy Bryant. BTW? Are you a male or female as Sandy goes both ways? As the your purposeful lying is here for any and all to see, with only an 8th grade reading level!

In conclusion, therefore, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

HEHEHEHEHEHEH

TP

Great sources. But anyone with even a halfwit can see the CIA is a more reliable source of info. Disinterested party . . . look that up some time.

[turtle]

Isaiah 45:7 KJV
(7) I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.


And by the way just to add insult to injury the word Lord here is Jehovah. Jehovah is called Lord. And we call Jesus Lord. Who is Jehovah.

The word in Greek for Lord in reference to Christ Jesus is: Thayer Greek Dictionary.

G2962
κύριος
kurios
Thayer Definition:
1) he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has power of deciding; master, lord
1a) the possessor and disposer of a thing
1a1) the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
1a2) in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
1b) is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master
1c) this title is given to: God, the Messiah
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from kuros (supremacy)
Citing in TDNT: 3:1039, 486


And in Stronge's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary

G2962
κύριος
kurios
koo'-ree-os
From κῦρος kuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, that is, (as noun) controller; by implication Mr. (as a respectful title): - God, Lord, master, Sir.



H3068
יהוה
yehôvâh
yeh-ho-vaw'
From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: - Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.

brown, Driver and briggs Hebrew dictionary

H3068
יהוה
yehôvâh
BDB Definition:
Jehovah = “the existing One”
1) the proper name of the one true God
1a) unpronounced except with the vowel pointings of H136
Part of Speech: noun proper deity
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H1961
Same Word by TWOT Number: 484a

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=...2&fr=yfp-t-501
Does not work.

http://www.baylor.edu/church_state/splash.php

Do you know the meaning of vested interest? You really need to learn to look up authors.

http://www.cesnur.org/swedish.htm

Does not work.

www.cennur.org

Does not work.

http://www.swlearning.com/marketing/...l_matters.html

Written in 01/1997.

CIA World Fact Book is updated every two weeks.

You see, Homer, the sources listed by the WB&TS are all from sources with a vested interst and mostly out-of-date. Quality research begins with research. CIA is a disinterested party, for one thing. Then of course, The World Fact Book is updated biweekly.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Come, Rev. Ms. Turtle, you said you were leaving. However, if you insist on staying, please take the time to tell us why you are ashame of your filthy religion?

[praetorian]

Fact: There are no existing documents or manuscripts dating from the first century. No, not none. Sorry, no not any. Sorry again, no not a single one.

Fact: The word “scripture” as used in the present day Bible means “writing.” It does not mean the Holy Bible.

Fact: The wery best manuscripts available today date from the eighth through the tenth century, not the first century.

Fact: No one began collecting or cataloging the books of the Bible until Jerome came along.

Fact: The world’s oldest Bible (collection of holy writings) is the Ethiopian Bible. The second oldest is the Latin Vulgate. The oldest (so-called) protestant Bible (Wickliffe’s) is not available to the general public today.

Fact: John Wickliffe translated twenty-two-books from the Latin Vulgate into the vulgar language (English). Luther translated an additional twenty-six-books into German.

Fact: The King James Bible was translated from the most reliable texts available (not the Latin Vulgate with one exception).

Fact: The Old Testament of the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic Text dating from the seventh through the tenth century.

Fact: The LXX (Septuagint) is quoted by the Christian New Testament and by the Apostolic Fathers. The oldest surviving codices of LXX (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) date to the fourth century AD.

Fact: The quotes of scripture from the Old Testament found in the New Testament are from the LXX. The Old Testament used in the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic text of the tenth century.

Fact: The original AKJV Bible contained the books often referred to as the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

Fact: Not a single author of a book found in the present day Bible knew anything about a Bible.

Fact: Not all the authors of books found in the New Testament knew the apostles. The Book of Hebrews is an excellent example.

Fact: Factnet has had many great discussions on the subject of the Bible. Look under the title/thread Doctrine Belief Proofs Religious Practices.

Fact: There is not a single copy of any Bible, Codex, Manuscript or sacred writing from the first century extant today. No, not none!!

TATM:

Before I begin to reply to your post, I want to point out, what you are actually saying; In effect, while acknowledging Almighty God as being omnipotent, and omniscient, who created the Universe, heaven and earth and all the things in them, life, animals, humans etc; that while God can do all of this in fact ANYTHING he is apparently, UNABLE to ensure that His inspired writings, his communications that he wants his earthly children to know, that they came down to us today, in the manner that he had originally inspired them to be written! THIS IS YOUR POINT!!! It is good to point out here a scripture found both in Hebrews Chapter 11 (as you may or may not know this is the chapter that defines and or explains what Faith is) and note what it states in verse 6, (NIV) “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” Also and just as important, there is the scriptures found at Proverbs 3: 5-6, (American Standard Version) “Trust in Jehovah with all thy heart, And lean not upon thine own understanding: In all thy ways acknowledge him, And he will direct thy paths.” So we are to trust the God and Father of Jesus Christ and his Son Jesus, BY NOT LEANING ON OUR OWN UNDERSTANDING-THINKING!!!

This is truly an unbridgeable chasm between us, as I wholeheartedly accept that God can and did in fact do this with the writings that are contained in what we today call the Bible along with it’s Canon the known 66 Books, and will venture further to say; that MANY NON JW’s, meaning Christians from mainstream Christendom, that while not agreeing with my personal beliefs or those of JW’s, believe this as well, that God can and has in fact provided his Holy Writings, preserved for us today in what we refer to as The Bible in the readily identified 66 books contained in all Bibles of the world in existence today!

Since we speak from diametrically opposed views, (accepting verses not accepting the Bible with it’s Canon of 66 Books) then you should have made this clear from the beginning, as you wasted time and space on this board, exchanging posts on the Trinity AS FROM THE BIBLE, when you yourself do not truly believe it and or in ALL of it, but rather, only of the parts that you Rev approve of!!!

Your reasoning or thinking on this, (which is diametrically opposed to my thinking) also makes light of the words of our Lord and Savior, basically calling him a liar, as he clearly represented things as found in part at John 18:37 (NIV) “Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me” also John 14:6, “6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” and also at John 4:23-24, “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth” also, John: 31-32, “31To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free"; as Jesus words clearly establish and express that his followers (DOWN THROUGH AND EVEN TODAY) would be able to know the Truth about him and his Father and God, for which he was sent to the earth and died for, in order to be able to clearly separate them from untruths and or lies!!!

Your position also takes a stand against the words found at 2 Timothy 3:16, 17 that clearly tells us that “ALL SCRIPTURE” is inspired of God, or that it is GOD BREATHED” (NOTE TO: that when Paul uttered this inspired statement, all of the OT was complete and nearly all of the NT was complete, but for John’s writings IN THE FIRST CENTURY) and also 2 Peter 1: 20-21, which was also completed IN THE FIRST ABOUT THE SAME TIME PAUL WROTE THESE WORDS IN THE FIRST CENTURY BEFORE JOHN’S WRITINGS) that clearly tells us that “prophecy of Scripture” is from GOD AND NOT MAN!!!!!

We do differ greatly on this and wonder if as a Reverend and can’t help but wonder, if you disclose your beliefs to your parishioners (who pay your salary) about your view of God’s Word the Bible? Very interesting and hopefully some here reading this, that despite not agreeing with me, will plainly see what there while not agreeing with me, that their Reverends, Ministers, Priests etc. ALL get the same and or similar training like this REVEREND HERE (TATM-REV Sandy Bryant-Hey maybe some of your Church people will read this) do not really believe the Bible, but rather, instead they do so in accordance to what they are taught in seminary schools and or in their studies of theology, where they are taught dogma, creeds and theology, as though it were BIBLE and then turn around and teach this to the people in their churches and congregations!!!!!

Now onto your post, wherein I will post your statement and then a reply below it:

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: There are no existing documents or manuscripts dating from the first century. No, not none. Sorry, no not any. Sorry again, no not a single one.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer: Well Yes, and No, meaning this is NOT totally accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT! Also unlike writings of your "Apostolic Fathers" (meaning non Bible writers and better defined below) these of what we present day call the Bible have thousands of extant copies, that cannot compare to the ones you put more faith in (and not inspired) by your (defined later below in this writing) "Apostolic Fathers."

Long Answer: First, you are grossly mistaken and also, we need to separate this into two parts, first, the Old Testament/Hebrew Scriptures (the Canon of 39 known today) which represent about 2/3rds of what we refer to today as the BIBLE, which were completed about 400 hundred years BEFORE the First Century, and while there are no autographs (originals) in existence today, there were many “thousand” extant copies in existence in the First Century, (and today, either in whole and or in part) and while true, that it is was NOT called the “Bible”, then, it is clearly referred to as the Bible today; it was referred to then (In the First Century) as The “Hebrew Scriptures” as discussed above in my previous posts, where I also mentioned The Dead Sea Scrolls that date from 200 B.C. E. through about 70 C.E. (First Century) that contain copies of the entire book of Isaiah and portions of EVERY OTHER BOOK OF THE Old Testament other than Esther! One cannot help but appreciate truly remarkable nature of find of The Dead Sea Scrolls as when found, they were about 2000 older than the oldest available extant Hebrew Manuscripts available in the 1940’s, which caused folks like you, (that do not really believe in the Bible-as we call it today) to think that this would clearly unravel the Bible as we know it, (due to it being older than so many other existing extant copies) to only find out, by comparison that other than changes relating specifically to the writing style, there were NO, substantive changes between the available manuscripts, which in and of itself was truly remarkable, serving to silence critics of the Bible like you, about the OT coming down to us today, as when penned by Moses and Prophets!!! Then there are the ones called and or referred to as the “Aramaic Targums” (this is what it was called or NAMED THEN) which again was well BEFORE THE FIRST CENTURY, that having the complete OT, or Hebrew Scriptures and again, while not called “Bible” it is what makes up 2/3rds of what later came to be referred to as the “BIBLE”, and these works of the Hebrew Scriptures date to about 400 B.C.E. just after Malachi was completed!!!! Again well BEFORE the First Century!!!!

Now, the Greek Septuagint, or LXX, which also contain the entire OT, dates back to about 250 B.C.E and though there are fragments of others that go back even farther. It is also critical to note here, that the early copies of the LXX (discussed further below) did contain the Divine and Personal Name of the “God and Father of Jesus Christ” (Jehovah in Hebrew letters) and also DID NOT CONTAIN ANY OF THE WRITINGS OF THE APOCCRYPHA, as opposed to the later copies of the LXX, many centuries later that did; which you refer to later on in your post further addressed below)

Now, regarding the Greek Septuagint, (the LXX) again, this too also dates back to about 250 B.C.E. with whole copies, (BEFORE THE FIRST CENTURY) though with the earliest known discoveries to date, in fragments, like the ones referred to as the “P. Fouad INV 266”, which consist of a dozen out of about 117 or so fragments of this inventory that contain God’s personal name. NOTE: You can purchase the book by Zaki Aly and Ludwig Koenen, under the Title, “The Three Rolls of the Early Septuagint: Genesis and Deuteronomy” as it can also be found on the webpage below and locations also for viewing it:

http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/3774914176

Finally, the most obvious matter of ALL, that Jesus, his Apostles and disciples all existed in the FIRST CENTURY and NOTE: quoted from and used as references, the Old Testament, (from both the Hebrew and Greek) and one would clearly expect that our Lord and Master would have set the record straight, if then manuscripts he quoted from, the OT, when speaking to others and as in response to Satan himself who also quoted from the OT as told to us at Matthew and Luke Chapter 4, and where Jesus and the other disciples quoted many, many scriptures; yet conspicuously missing is any comment about anything missing added and or incorrect texts, which Jesus was not shy about doing, that is offering correction and setting things straight!!!!!

This then brings us to the second part of your inaccurate outrageous statement (so-called opinion masquerading as “fact”) above, regarding the New Testament, or Christian Greek Scriptures, and AGAIN, while not called the Bible then, these SPECIFIC First Century Writings (readily identified and known the 27, of the Canon in all Bibles today) later came to make up the remaining 1/3 of what we now refer to and call the Bible today!!! And, as again, these were known Jesus’ intimate Apostles were alive on earth in the First Century!!! Note what Peter states about Paul’s writings at 2 Peter 3:15, 16, where research will show you, that these words of Peter were penned when all of Paul’s inspired writings were complete, though before the Apostle John finished his final writings, all five of them!!!!

Therefore the Apostles (KNOWN TO JESUS which includes Paul) and others KNOWN TO THEM (The Apostles), wrote their inspired works NOTE: in the FIRST CENTURY, meaning, the autographs, originals were available then early to middle First Century! The only one who wrote late into the First Century was John when he penned Revelation, 1st through 3rd John and the Book of John (five though I mistakenly said 4 above) again all in the FIRST CENTURY!!!!!! Also, note how you will NEVER see a reference in what we call the Bible today, to the so-called early Church Fathers, excluding the obvious ones, like the Apostles John, Peter, Paul and others like James, Jude etc) as these folks, like Polycarp, Ignatius etc, have writings also refereed to as “Christian Writings” which are not part of the NT Canon of the 27 Books; which clearly need to be distinguished in order to avoid confusion; as these “Christian Writings” are what you and others base your beliefs on the Trinity etc on!!!

Now in addition to these things, which took place in the cotton picking FIRST CENTURY (that is also why one can clearly refer and identify the “First Century Christian Congregation”) one can find NT extant COPIES (as no autographs exist today) that date back to about 125 C.E., though there are fragments, parts of various books of the “NT” that go farther back, closer to when the autographs of the Apostle John and existed and did their writings!!!! [If my memory serves me correctly here, I believe (not exactly sure, and did not have the time to look it up) the “NT” Canon was formally adopted by the “Synod of Carthage” in the late 300’s C.E. though it was already utilized at such, in the NT, as previously mentioned above in this paragraph and below in this writing.]

By way of a recap here, note again, the oldest translations of the “NT’ (Hebrew Scriptures) into other languages, from the Greek and Hebrew date to around 180 C.E., which were you find the Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions of the NT and then soon thereafter that begin to appear in around 195 C.E. with the first known combined “OT” and “NT” Holy Scriptures Canon of the 66 Books; and you should know this as you quote from folks a lot over the Bible itself, like Tertullian, as he and others quoted from these (that later came to be called the Bible) and who lived (Tertullian in particular and for example) around 160-220 A.D. in north Africa and wrote his, NOTE: “treatises on theology” which is part of what you and others to CHOOSE to believe (as this is what you were taught) over the Bible, meaning The Holy Scriptures, the “OT” and the “NT” combined in all 66 books identified as the Bible Canon!

Therefore, in reply to this issue, I am not sure how you fee that you can call your statement a “FACT” when it is rather, your opinion, or even take the following dogmatic view that “There are no existing documents or manuscripts dating from the first century. No, not none. Sorry, no not any. Sorry again, no not a single one” and again reply, that you are absolutely DEAD wrong on this and further note, that I did not quote and or refer to ALL of the available documents, manuscripts or fragments available today that only serve to bolster the above reply!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The word “scripture” as used in the present day Bible means “writing.” It does not mean the Holy Bible.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short answer with translation/definitions: Yes, you are some what correct, though more specifically; the Hebrew word “Miktab” which is writing in Hebrew, translates as “writing” in English. The Hebrew word “Kathab” which is “scripture” in Hebrew, and translates “scripture”, “writing” and “register” in English. The Greek word “Pinakidion” which is “writing table” in Greek (and singular and without the article “the”) translates into English as “writing table.” The Greek word “Graphe” which is “the writings” in Greek, (note with the article “the”) translates as the “scripture” in English; therefore Greek uses “one” word (with the article) for the English words, writing(s) and scripture(s).

Long Answer without translation/definitions: You are indeed some what correct, though you are clearly playing games with semantics here, as you know full well, as explained above, that the “writing(s)” of the “scripture(s)” of the OT and the NT, are what later became known to us as the Bible! In other words, it is the word today, that is used universally, that serves to identify in any language, the combined writings (scriptures) of the OT and NT, totally and specifically the 66 that are considered Canon to mean the standard or criteria for establishing these books as the ones, that are genuinely inspired by God as opposed to those “Hebrew” and or “Christian Writings” that are not! And the discussion on the Canon, while being another subject are referred to as such as many of the NT writers quoted from the OT as opposed to the writings of the Apocrypha that do clearly do not!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The wery [sic] best manuscripts available today date from the eighth through the tenth century, not the first century.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer: Yes and no as your statement, which is opinion; this is NOT accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT! Further, your statement is “selectively” accurate and employees the use of the word “best” which implies OPINION, “subjective” opinion, and since you clearly have little regard for the Bible in general as opposed to other non Canon inspired writings do you are clearly biased (TO SAY THE LEAST) so again, unless you can provide empirical and incontrovertible proof of this, then it is you opinion verses the FACTS as I presented them above, and note, that NONE OF IT COMES FROM THE JW’s!!!
(FYI NOTE: Liars, cheats and Cons do what you do, and that is “selectively” provide one with a bit of truth, and or a small accurate statement, mixed in with many untruths).

Long Answer: There is no such thing as the agree to “best” in the community of Bible Hebrew and Greek scholars, as recent developments in archaeology and Biblical scholarship have made possible a number of modern, more accurate English translations of the scriptures today than in yesteryears! These newer versions are translated from what are CONSIDERED to be “the best available ancient Hebrew and Greek manuscripts”, as compared to and or speaking with reference to the King James Version or the Latin Vulgate!!! Therefore it is a relative statement of “FACT” made it most scholars state this when comparing it a work that is 400 years old and counting!

It is often pointed out that modern translations omit a few of the verses found in the KJV, (like the known spurious edition of 1 John 5:7) which is seen by scholars in general to be an attempt to “distort” the Bible's teachings. However, the reason is that certain verses are not found in the “oldest” manuscripts, which is why the OLDEST are at times referred to as “BEST” Bible manuscripts but, (GET IT BEST OFTEN REFERS TO OLDEST) not that you can make a sweeping “FACTUAL” STATEMENT, taking it out of context, when you use your “opinion” as “fact” above, for which there is no basis to make such a statement as an “across the board” rule, as good and accurate Bible translation is derived from using MANY (NOT JUST ONE) manuscripts old and new, in order to achieve accuracy and especially one without Bias!!! Also verses like the spurious addition of 1 John 5:7, are omitted by new Bible translations, in order to faithfully or accurately preserve the original Bible text to best possible extent!!!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: No one began collecting or cataloging the books of the Bible until Jerome came along.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer: This fact is accurate and half wrong again making it opinion! Note, this is NOT totally accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT!

Long Answer: While it is true that Jerome added the chapter and verse numbers he worked from a well established body of word, discussed above known as the OT-Hebrew Scriptures and their translated works (extant manuscripts) into Greek and other languages (which were established and used BEFORE the First Century and at the time Jesus and the Apostles were on the earth as they used, worked with and quote from them) and NT-Christian Greek Scriptures, that were mostly all complete around the middle of the First Century and completed before the end of the First Century, that were already found in Bibles well BEFORE Jerome, (though without chapter and verse) wherein both the OT and the NT were now combined around where one finds the Holy Scriptures in Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions around 195 C.E., that again were compiled from previous existing extant manuscripts containing the OT and the NT separately!!!!! Therefore and again, Jerome’s work included working with existing Scriptures, while adding the Chapters and Verses!!!!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The world’s oldest Bible (collection of holy writings) is the Ethiopian Bible. The second oldest is the Latin Vulgate. The oldest (so-called) protestant Bible (Wickliffe’s) is not available to the general public today.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer: No, this is NOT accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT!

Long Answer: The Ethiopian Bible is NOT the “world’s oldest Bible) and also, it is first and foremost a translation of the OT ONLY!!!! It also contains the Books of the Apocrypha, (and other non Canon ‘historic’ writings) which were not CLEARLY contained in the Hebrew Scriptures at the Time of Christ in the First Century; as Christ and the Apostles worked from Hebrew, Greek-LXX, and Aramaic extant manuscripts-Scriptures-writings) and this particular subject matter is discussed above in this writing.

With regards to the Latin Vulgate by Jerome, was not a work from scratch, but instead, it should be noted that he worked from and was indeed commissioned to start with the “older Latin Translations” already in existence, (I think a Pope Damascus ordered this in those words) that also included the work of the Apocrypha, and other non Canon writings, which again, is discussed herein above ad nauseam! Therefore what Jerome did is work with those scriptures that were in Canon etc, though added the Chapters and Verses for reference!

With regards to the Wycliffe Bible (note there are many variations to the spelling of his name) this is the First, English Translation to include the Apocrypha! And again, Wycliffe translated his Bible, working from a Latin manuscript, from already existing manuscripts of the Holy Writings, or Scriptures, as discussed ad nauseam above!!!

I will also agree as FACT (as this is NOT opinion) that not only is the Wycliffe not available to the general public (but is found in museums like the Bible museum in California) the same can be said of the so-called KJV 1611 (and others) where it is not available to the general public!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The Old Testament of the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic Text dating from the seventh through the tenth century.

Short Answer only: This issue is not completely in controversy here, so no need to discuss the historical accuracy of this statement as opinion verses fact, as it is moot to the point of discussion here as to Bibles, (and that left the Trinity train) and unless and of course there is something in particular you wish to discuss here, that you feel is critical to this discussion and wish it addressed; otherwise do not ASSUME (as you do know what you become if you do, right) that I chose not to discuss this on point-on purpose! However, I add, that while I do not address it fully here in this paragraph, I do address parts of this subject matter here below, in the next Short and Long answer with specific regards to next quote.

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The King James Bible was translated from the most reliable texts available (not the Latin Vulgate with one exception).

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer: No, this is NOT accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT!

Long Answer: The King James Version is called a VERSION for a reason! Check with any legitimate reference work like an Encyclopedia etc, (not just some online blog) as you will then find, that NT of the KJV (so called 1611, meaning the first one, which began in 1601) actually translated their NT, from a LATIN text, extant manuscript called the Textus Receptus (for Received Text) which were apparently translated from what appears were a series of Greek text’d though I am not sure of they were specicially named! The OT of the KJV, was translated from the Masoretic Hebrew text, that contained other known non Canon Jewish writings, while the Apocrypha of the KJV was translated from the available parts of the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate. Thus, your opinon is not valid as the KJV was not directly translated from the “older” often called “best” reliable manuscripts, thus why it cannot call itself, a Translation, but a VERSION and to argue differently is moot as the name itself is testimony to what it is!!!! Also, the Latin has many unique attributes that are not found in other languages, thus one glaring problem is that it does not differentiate between “proper” and “common” nouns, i.e. man, or John Smith, or like “God” and “god” as they look the same in Latin, which is part and parcel of one of innermerable problems with this translation not to mention it’s age, where since then, there have been thousands of new discoveres that have come to light allowing for more accurate and better renderings, and on this I will simply point to the sole discovery of The Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, making the translating of that verison in efffect, if not obsolete, archaic at best!!!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The LXX (Septuagint) is quoted by the Christian New Testament and by the Apostolic Fathers. The oldest surviving codices of LXX (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) date to the fourth century AD.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer and Long Answer: This issue is not completely in controversy here, so no need to discuss the historical accuracy of this statement as opinion verses fact, as it is moot to the point of discussion here as to Bibles, (and that left the Trinity train) and unless and of course there is something in particular you wish to discuss here, that you feel is critical to this discussion and wish it addressed; otherwise do not ASSUME (as you do know what you become if you do, right) that I chose not to discuss this on point-on purpose! Basically nothing you mention in your statement quoted above affects anything discussed above! I do add, when you refer to the “Christian New Testament” it is only fair you identify by name which one you specifically refer to, as I did above, as per your request so that we could be on the same page. I further add, if you are speaking with reference to the “Apostolic Father” since this could very well mean different things to different people, I will define it here, and feel free to correct the same if it is inaccurate: This term is often a misnomer, as one is forced to distinguish the ones referred to as Apostles” in the Bible, verses what this phrase, “Apostolic Father” is actually referring to as the phrase “Apostolic Fathers” are a small number of early Christian authors who lived and wrote in the second half of the 1st century and the first half of the 2nd century, who are NOT credited with writing the Christ Inpsures Writings of accepted Cannon, of which the entire 66 books of what we today refer to as the Bible, include, but instead, these folks are often acknowledged (by many or most people) as leaders in the early church, but their writings were not included in the inspired New Testament Cannon. By way of example, they include St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St. Polycarp of Smyrna. Therefore the fact that some of these so-called (identfied here) “Apostolic Father” quoted from the Bible is no different than to say that Satan did the same thing.

Finally, you certainly cannot support your position that the writingsn of these “Apostolic Fathers” should be given greater weight or authority than the writings of the Apostles themselves as this is what you are doing, and they do not even compare, THAT IS WHY THEIR WRITINGS ARE NOT IN THE BIBLE CANNON AND ARE EASILY RECOGNIZED DUE TO THIS FACT!!!!!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The quotes of scripture from the Old Testament found in the New Testament are from the LXX. The Old Testament used in the AKJV Bible is from the Masoretic text of the tenth century.

End Quote and Reply below:

This issue is not completely in controversy here, so no need to discuss the historical accuracy of this statement as opinion verses fact, as it is moot to the point of discussion here as to Bibles, (and that left the Trinity train) and unless and of course there is something in particular you wish to discuss here, that you feel is critical to this discussion and wish it addressed; otherwise do not ASSUME (as you do know what you become if you do, right) that I chose not to discuss this on point-on purpose! Basically nothing you mention in your statement quoted above affects anything discussed above!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: The original AKJV Bible contained the books often referred to as the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

End Quote and Reply below:

This issue is not completely in controversy here, so no need to discuss the historical accuracy of this statement as opinion verses fact, as it is moot to the point of discussion here as to Bibles, (and that left the Trinity train) and unless and of course there is something in particular you wish to discuss here, that you feel is critical to this discussion and wish it addressed; otherwise do not ASSUME (as you do know what you become if you do, right) that I chose not to discuss this on point-on purpose! Basically nothing you mention in your statement quoted above affects anything discussed above! Though I add, that the Apocrypha made it’s appearance in later more recent copies of the LXX and those languages like Latin etc. that translated from these texts, as they did not appear in the earlier, certainly no in Jesus day, older often referred to as the “best” ones to use, due to their being oldest! Also interesting to note that none of Apostles or other NT writers, quote from ONE SINLE PART OF ANY OF THEM, INCLUDING THE APOCRYPHA OR THE WRITINGS OF THE SO CALLED NON BIBLE “APOSTOLIC FATHERS” FURTHER IDENTIFIED ABOVE IN THIS WRITING!!!!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: Not a single author of a book found in the present day Bible knew anything about a Bible.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short and Long Answer: No, this is NOT even remotely accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT! First of all, the writers of what has come down to us in the “present day Bible” are the same exact person who wrote what we now call TODAY THE BIBLE, IT IS THE NAME THAT IS CHANGED NOT THE WRITINGS! FACT AND ESTABLISHED ABOVE AS WELL AS BY HISTORY AND MANY MANY OTHER REFERENCE SOURCES!!! What they did know, was the writings, and it was handed down through the centuries via the copyists, and did not suffer any substansive variation as proven by many things, though my favorite is The Dead Sea Scrolls!!! As for the NT writings, it is interesting that you give so much credence to their surviving through the present day, than you do the “NT Christian Writings” that we refer to as 1/3 of the present day Bible in all lands and languages around the Globe!!!!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: Not all the authors of books found in the New Testament knew the apostles. The Book of Hebrews is an excellent example.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer: No, this is NOT totally accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT! That is an outright ignorant statement, made without anything to back it up! The fact is, in the NT, not all the inspired writers used by God, made “their” writings by God obvious, but that is in the very few, minority as the opposite is true of the majority of the NT.

Long Answer: While Paul is best known as the apostle “to the nations” many make the mistake to think his ministry was solely confined to the non-Jews, which is not the case at all! Just before Paul was baptized and commissioned for his work, the Lord Jesus said to Ananias at Acts 9:15, (NIV) “But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man [Paul] is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel.” (See also Galatians 2:8, 9) The writing of the book of Hebrews was truly in line with Paul’s commission to bear the name of Jesus to the Jews!
However, some critics doubt Paul’s writership of Hebrews. One objection is that Paul’s name does not appear in the letter. But this is really no obstacle, as many other canonical books fail to name the writer, who is often identified by internal evidence. Moreover, some feel that Paul may have deliberately omitted his name in writing to the Hebrew Christians in Judea, since his name had been made an object of hatred by the Jews there. (See Acts 21:28) Neither is the change of style from his other epistles any real objection to Paul’s writership. Whether addressing pagans, Jews, or Christians, Paul always showed his ability to “become all things to people of all sorts.” Here his reasoning is presented to Jews as from a Jew, arguments that they could fully understand and appreciate. (See 1 Corinthians 9:22)
The internal evidence of the book is all in support of Paul’s writership. The writer was in Italy and was associated with Timothy. These facts fit Paul. (See Hebrews 13:23, 24)

Furthermore, the doctrine is typical of Paul, though the arguments are presented from a Jewish viewpoint, designed to appeal to the strictly Hebrew congregation to which the letter was addressed. On this point “Clarke’s Commentary”, Volume 6, page 681, says concerning Hebrews: “That it was written to Jews, naturally such, the whole structure of the epistle proves. Had it been written to the Gentiles, not one in ten thousand of them could have comprehended the argument, because unacquainted with the Jewish system; the knowledge of which the writer of this epistle everywhere supposes.” This helps to account for the difference of style when compared with Paul’s other letters.

Also, the discovery in about 1930 of the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) has provided further evidence of Paul’s writership. Commenting on this papyrus codex, which was written only about a century and a half after Paul’s death, the eminent British textual critic Sir Frederic Kenyon said: “It is noticeable that Hebrews is placed immediately after Romans (an almost unprecedented position), which shows that at the early date when this manuscript was written no doubt was felt as to its Pauline authorship.” On this same question, McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia states pointedly: “There is no substantial evidence, external or internal, in favor of any claimant to the authorship of this epistle except Paul.” You will note that I have cited here three well established and known scholarly works, that take a position against what you express, clearly showing your “FACT” to be what it truly is, a misinformed, opinion, no more and no less!!!!!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: Factnet has had many great discussions on the subject of the Bible. Look under the title/thread Doctrine Belief Proofs Religious Practices.

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer Only: No thank you, as I have read through this particular thread and found them to be lacking! (And BTW this is where you and I should have posted these writings) While it is factually true, that “Factnet” has “many great discussions on the subject of the Bible” (this is FACT) not all of it is totally a accurate as people tend to argue on this site using personal opinions as FACTS, when they are simply not only opinion, but poor ones at that!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

Fact: There is not a single copy of any Bible, Codex, Manuscript or sacred writing from the first century extant today. No, not none!!

End Quote and Reply below:

Short Answer Only: No, this is NOT totally accurate and is clearly misleading meaning it is your opinion masquerading as “FACT” when it is NOT FACT!!! I ask that you post support for your opinion where it then can be established and considered empirical and incontrovertible, in order for you to refer to this statement as FACT! That is an outright ignorant statement, made without anything to back it up! Again you are playing with semantics as this entire writing and body of references and general “known knowledge” used within the four corners of this painstaking reply establishes your opinion here as simply incorrect!!!

In conclusion, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” you must instead infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

P.S. Please pardon in advance any mistakes in grammar and or other, since this writing is long, and done over several interruptions and I did not have the time it needed in order to review it for mistakes etc.

[praetorian]

Isaiah 45:7 KJV
(7) I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.


And by the way just to add insult to injury the word Lord here is Jehovah. Jehovah is called Lord. And we call Jesus Lord. Who is Jehovah.

The word in Greek for Lord in reference to Christ Jesus is: Thayer Greek Dictionary.

G2962
κύριος
kurios
Thayer Definition:
1) he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has power of deciding; master, lord
1a) the possessor and disposer of a thing
1a1) the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
1a2) in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
1b) is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master
1c) this title is given to: God, the Messiah
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from kuros (supremacy)
Citing in TDNT: 3:1039, 486


And in Stronge's Hebrew and Greek Dictionary

G2962
κύριος
kurios
koo'-ree-os
From κῦρος kuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, that is, (as noun) controller; by implication Mr. (as a respectful title): - God, Lord, master, Sir.



H3068
יהוה
yehôvâh
yeh-ho-vaw'
From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: - Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.

brown, Driver and briggs Hebrew dictionary

H3068
יהוה
yehôvâh
BDB Definition:
Jehovah = “the existing One”
1) the proper name of the one true God
1a) unpronounced except with the vowel pointings of H136
Part of Speech: noun proper deity
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H1961
Same Word by TWOT Number: 484a

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

[praetorian]

Great sources. But anyone with even a halfwit can see the CIA is a more reliable source of info. Disinterested party . . . look that up some time.

Besides that I may have in fact used them as a reference, however, I am not sure where I actually did, so please provide me with the comment that disturbs you, or do do not agree with so that I can then look up the particilar matter in another reference your "Humble Reverence" will approve of!!!

TP

HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEH

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Besides that I may have in fact used them as a reference, however, I am not sure where I actually did, so please provide me with the comment that disturbs you, or do do not agree with so that I can then look up the particilar matter in another reference your "Humble Reverence" will approve of!!!

TP

HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEH

Talk about WB&TS!!!! I quoted the CIA's World Fact Book to disprove your WB&TS madeup claim of supremcy.

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that God is omnipresent or all knowing FROM THE BIBLE!

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/3774914176

You have got to be kidding me!! One real link, please. Pardon me, I was going to take your respose apart one piece at a time. However, it is so filled with arrogant hypocrisy as to be useless. So let me start over, thusly.

Welcome to Myth Bible, the continuing saga of Watchtower Bible & Tract Society deceptions.

Myth: 66 book Canonized Bible.

Fact:
The only Canonized Bible in existent today is the Latin Vulgate.

The Vulgate Bible is an early 5th century translation of the Bible into Latin made by Jerome on the orders of Pope Damasus I in 382. It takes its name from the phrase versio vulgata, "the common (i.e., popular) version" (cf. Vulgar Latin), and was written in an everyday Latin used in conscious distinction to the elegant Ciceronian Latin of which Jerome was a master. The Vulgate was designed to be a definitive translation of the Bible, improving upon several divergent translations then in use. It was the first, and for many centuries the only, Christian Bible with an Old Testament translated directly from the Hebrew rather than from the Greek Septuagint. In 405 A.D., he completed the protocanonical books of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and the deuterocanonical books of Tobias and Judith from the Aramaic. Among the various Christian churches, the Vulgate has been most commonly used by Roman Catholics. There are 73 books in the Vulgate Bible (not counting 3 in the Apocrypha), 46 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New.

http://articles.gourt.com/en/Vulgate

Myth: Manuscripts exist from the first century.

Fact:
A number of early manuscripts witnessing to the early Vulgate still survive today. Dating to the 8th century, the Codex Amiatinus is the earliest surviving complete manuscript of the Vulgate. The Codex Fuldensis, from around 545, is an earlier surviving manuscript that is based on the Vulgate, however the gospels are an edited version of the Diatessaron.

Over the course of the Middle Ages, the Vulgate had succumbed to the inevitable changes wrought by human error in the countless copying of the text in monasteries across Europe. From its earliest days, readings from the Vetus Latina were introduced. Marginal notes were erroneously interpolated into the text. No one copy was the same as the other as scribes added, removed, misspelled, or mis-corrected verses in the Latin Bible.

About 550, Cassiodorus made an attempt at restoring the Vulgate to its original purity. Alcuin of York oversaw efforts to make a corrected Vulgate, which he presented to Charlemagne in 801. Similar attempts were repeated by Theodulphus Bishop of Orleans (787?- 821), Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury (1070-1089), Stephen Harding, Abbot of Cîteaux (1109-1134), and Deacon Nicolaus Maniacoria (about the beginning of the thirteenth century).

At this time the University of Paris created a uniform Bible for the use of its faculty and students. It standardized the order of the books and content of their texts. This Paris Bible (Biblia Parisiensis) became the basis of the early printed editions of the Vulgate. Though the advent of printing greatly reduced the potential of human error and increased the consistency and uniformity of the text, even the Vulgate as produced by Gutenberg was not entirely without mistakes as the several editions of the first printed work varied one from the other.

http://articles.gourt.com/en/Vulgate


Myth Bible will be right back!

[praetorian]

Talk about WB&TS!!!! I quoted the CIA's World Fact Book to disprove your WB&TS madeup claim of supremcy.

Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that God is omnipresent or all knowing FROM THE BIBLE!

TATM:

You state, quote: Talk about WB&TS!!!! I quoted the CIA's World Fact Book to disprove your WB&TS madeup claim of supremacy” and I reply, I nor the WBTS NEVER made any CLAIM OF SUPREMACY, so I am unable to respond to this latest canard of yours!!! Where do you get this stuff, oops, Got it, Satan, your Father of course, I see!!! If you do find that I made such a “CLAIM” please point it out specifically so that I (and those in the board who can read) can see it clearly expressed! K! The same with the WBTS-K! (A little Valley Girl combo Bill Engvald inflection here please!!!!).

As to the “CIA” info, easy boy, down, relax, I was having fun with you, to break up the monotony, but I guess my attempt at humor failed!!! Well, anyway I thought it was funny as I attempted to do something patently unreasonable, turning it around as if it were me, to illustrate, the way you selectively read, to ONLY JUMP on that slim hope and sliver, that will some how show your views and those of the NON Bible “Apostolic Father-Writers” to be better than God’s own views as found in ONLY THE BIBLE! You are having trouble admitting this, I SEE, get help!

In conclusion, your statement which is a re-write of mine, (that bad huh) to fit the other non Trinity point you wish to make; “Nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that God is omnipresent or all knowing FROM THE BIBLE!” is incompatible to itself, as God is NOT omnipresent, (speaking from the standpoint of the Bible) but he is ALL KNOWNING (NOT THE SAME WORD PHRASE BUCKO) as opposed to what the Bible does state explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that God is in fact omnipotent and omniscient---as this is the word, BUCKO for ALL KNOWING! However, that is another subject (as again you are indeed proficient at changing subject matters) and should you wish to discuss this here, or open a topic for the same I will be more than happy to address it!

I close by stating, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!


TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Myth: It is often pointed out that modern translations omit a few of the verses found in the KJV, (like the known spurious edition of 1 John 5:7) which is seen by scholars in general to be an attempt to “distort” the Bible's teachings.

Fact:
Verses such as Mark 16:9 - 20 and John 8:1 - 11 are not found in the better manuscripts, while 1 John 5:7 is. 1 John 5:7 causes a great deal of pain for those teaching a false dogma denying the deity of Jesus Christ. The "scholars" spoken of above refers to those caught up in the WB&TS, not true Bible scholars.

1) 200 - Tertullian quotes the verse (Gill, "An exposition of the NT", Vol 2, pp. 907-8)

2) 250 - Cyprian, who writes, "And again concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit it is written: 'and the Three are One'" (Vienna, vol. iii, p. 215)

3) 350 - Priscillian cites the verse (Vienna, vol. xviii, p. 6)

4) 350 - Idacius Clarus cites the verse (MPL, vol. 62, col. 359)

5) 350 - Athanasius cites the verse (Gill)

6) 415 - Council of Carthage appeals to the verse as a basic text proving a fundamental doctrine when contending with the Arians (Ruckman, "History of the NT Church", Vol. I, p. 146)

7) 450-530 - several orthodox African writers quote the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:

A) Vigilius Tapensis (MPL, vol. 62, col. 243)

B) Victor Vitensis (Vienna, vol. vii, p. 60)

C) Fulgentius (MPL, vol. 65, col. 500)

8) 500 - Cassiodorus cites the verse (MPL, vol. 70, col. 1373)

9) 550 - Old Latin ms r has the verse

10) 550 - The "Speculum" contains the verse

11) 750 - Wianburgensis cites the verse

12) 800 - Jerome's Vulgate includes the verse

13) 1150 - minuscule ms 88 in the margin

14) 1200-1400 - Waldensian Bibles have the verse

15) 1500 - ms 61 has the verse

16) various witnesses cited in Nestle's 26th edition for a replacement of the text as it stands with the Comma: 221 v.l.;2318 vg[cl]; 629; 61; 88; 429 v.l.; 636 v.l.; 918; l; r; and other important Latin mss.




Myth Bible shall return.

[praetorian]

http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/3774914176

You have got to be kidding me!! One real link, please. Pardon me, I was going to take your respose apart one piece at a time. However, it is so filled with arrogant hypocrisy as to be useless. So let me start over, thusly.

Welcome to Myth Bible, the continuing saga of Watchtower Bible & Tract Society deceptions.

Myth: 66 book Canonized Bible.

Fact:
The only Canonized Bible in existent today is the Latin Vulgate.

The Vulgate Bible is an early 5th century translation of the Bible into Latin made by Jerome on the orders of Pope Damasus I in 382. It takes its name from the phrase versio vulgata, "the common (i.e., popular) version" (cf. Vulgar Latin), and was written in an everyday Latin used in conscious distinction to the elegant Ciceronian Latin of which Jerome was a master. The Vulgate was designed to be a definitive translation of the Bible, improving upon several divergent translations then in use. It was the first, and for many centuries the only, Christian Bible with an Old Testament translated directly from the Hebrew rather than from the Greek Septuagint. In 405 A.D., he completed the protocanonical books of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and the deuterocanonical books of Tobias and Judith from the Aramaic. Among the various Christian churches, the Vulgate has been most commonly used by Roman Catholics. There are 73 books in the Vulgate Bible (not counting 3 in the Apocrypha), 46 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New.

http://articles.gourt.com/en/Vulgate

Myth: Manuscripts exist from the first century.

Fact:
A number of early manuscripts witnessing to the early Vulgate still survive today. Dating to the 8th century, the Codex Amiatinus is the earliest surviving complete manuscript of the Vulgate. The Codex Fuldensis, from around 545, is an earlier surviving manuscript that is based on the Vulgate, however the gospels are an edited version of the Diatessaron.

Over the course of the Middle Ages, the Vulgate had succumbed to the inevitable changes wrought by human error in the countless copying of the text in monasteries across Europe. From its earliest days, readings from the Vetus Latina were introduced. Marginal notes were erroneously interpolated into the text. No one copy was the same as the other as scribes added, removed, misspelled, or mis-corrected verses in the Latin Bible.

About 550, Cassiodorus made an attempt at restoring the Vulgate to its original purity. Alcuin of York oversaw efforts to make a corrected Vulgate, which he presented to Charlemagne in 801. Similar attempts were repeated by Theodulphus Bishop of Orleans (787?- 821), Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury (1070-1089), Stephen Harding, Abbot of Cîteaux (1109-1134), and Deacon Nicolaus Maniacoria (about the beginning of the thirteenth century).

At this time the University of Paris created a uniform Bible for the use of its faculty and students. It standardized the order of the books and content of their texts. This Paris Bible (Biblia Parisiensis) became the basis of the early printed editions of the Vulgate. Though the advent of printing greatly reduced the potential of human error and increased the consistency and uniformity of the text, even the Vulgate as produced by Gutenberg was not entirely without mistakes as the several editions of the first printed work varied one from the other.

http://articles.gourt.com/en/Vulgate


Myth Bible will be right back!

TATM:

You are an ignorant, but worse fool! The link I provided to you at “http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/3774914176” was provided me by Amazon.com, as I am trying to get the publication I referred you to above, by Zaki Aly and Ludwig Koenen, titled as “The Three Rolls of the Early Septuagint: Genesis and Deuteronomy” and they referred me to this webpage in order to make BIDS!!!!

You TWIT! I did not use this webpage as a reference for anything other than to establish where you could find such a publication and view it yourself, if you wanted to! Had you reviewed the page carefully, you would have noted, that there are copies of this rare publication for viewing at locations like UCLA, Stanford University Libraries, University of Texas Libraries and possibly at a place near you, etc. etc. etc. actually providing you with a total of 85 locations where the Book can be seen and or also possibly purchase for at the right bid price!!!! This is what you do, you NEVER really read the post, you skim through it, and selectively choose what you want to selectively reply to! These are poor skills that only cause you to believe the falsehoods you hold to so dearly!!!!

You then state, “Welcome to Myth Bible, the continuing saga of Watchtower Bible & Tract Society deceptions” with nothing else behind it other than you statement or word, for it! Sadly, some who are like you, who want to believe their own lies, will accept such an inaccurate statement as FACT! Good for you, however, I have done my best to demonstrate your thinking as Myth, as you Sir do not believe in the Bible but rather the writings of the Apostolic Fathers (meaning not Bible writers or Apostles) and this is your shame, your bad not mine!!!! You are arguing to prove that the inspired work (again way off topic of the Trinity here and it’s beliefs as found in the Bible when it is NOT) we know it today, as the Bible is NOT the word of God and choose non Bible writings to believe in, again Good For You, as I don’t!!!

You then state, “Myth: 66 book Canonized Bible” and YOUR OPINION masquerading as “FACT” (and a bad one at that) of QUOTE “The only Canonized Bible in existent [sic] today is the Latin Vulgate” and reply, first and foremost, Jerome’s work of The Latin Vulgate is NOT the only “canonized Bible today”, that statement is simply ABSURD as there are over 100 Bible’s today in English ALONE that have the SAME BOOKS and worked and or GOT THEIR MATERIAL, from COPIES of the manuscripts and works JEROME DID AND HAD!!!!! THAT IS JUST INSANE TO EXPRESS NOT TO MENTION IGNORANT!!!!!

Jerome did NOT work from some sort of a NEW BODY OF WORK, but rather an existing established BODY OF WORK that claims inspiration by God, (extant Hebrew, Greek and other foreign language manuscripts) and this cannot be denied, as the OT ITSELF makes up 2/3rds of what is in the Latin Vulgate to begin with, were already completed and accepted by Christ and his Apostles (hundreds of years BEFORE JEROME) when they were on the earth!!!!! The same holds true regarding the remaining 1/3 of the Latin Vulgate, where many of the writers were known to Jesus personally and ALL were personally known to the Apostles PERIOD!!!!! Thus, what Jerome what did, which was NOT done previously, was add Chapters and Verses to these works, and REPEAT that he- JEROME worked form what was already considered Cannon and established by others BEFORE HIM!!!!

You then refer me to the following webpage: http://articles.gourt.com/en/Vulgate,
from where I take the I take the following quotes form and NOTE:
QUOTE, “The Vulgate Bible is an early 5th century translation of the Bible into Latin made by Jerome END QUOTE: STOP, from where did Jerome translate this from? Remember you said, QUOTE: TThe only Canonized Bible in existent [sic] today is the Latin Vulgate” and further reply by quoting other statements like pages (I know this is not from the CIA data, but after all it is the site you chose to make your point from); QUOTE “The Vulgate was designed to be a definitive translation of the Bible, improving upon several divergent translations then in use.” What were they, TATM????? Also, QUOTE, “It was the first, and for many centuries the only, Christian Bible with an Old Testament translated directly from the Hebrew rather than from the Greek Septuagint” and NOTE in what aspect it is “FIRST” oh bright ONE that reads selectively EVEN his own stuff, FIRST IN THAT IT WAS TRANSLATED FROM “the Christian Bible with an Old Testament translated directly from the Hebrew rather than the Greek Septuagint” CAN YOU READ, DID YOU READ WHAT YOU REFERRED TOO HERE!!!!!!!! Now what are the NAMES of the Bibles BEFORE THIS????????

Another quote, from the page you sent me to is; “The Vulgate was designed to be a definitive translation of the Bible, improving upon several divergent translations then in use” so what are the “several divergent translations” that it brags of as being more elegant due to it being in Latin????????

Another most interesting QUOTE: “In 405 A.D., he completed the protocanonical books of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and the deuterocanonical books of Tobias and Judith from the Aramaic. Among the various Christian churches, the Vulgate has been most commonly used by Roman Catholics. There are 73 books in the Vulgate Bible (not counting 3 in the Apocrypha), 46 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New” and note, that Jerome was able to distinguish BETWEEN the “deuterocanical books” and those of the “Apocrypha” as this knowledge was readily known then as it is today!!!!!!!

You state, “Myth: Manuscripts exist from the first century” and reply that this is not completely accurate, and is misleading as while there are no “whole manuscripts” there are parts of several extant manuscripts that go back to the first century and beyond!!!! It is true that there are no “whole” or “complete” manuscripts that go back that far, but again, it is a far cry from the misleading and inaccurate statement you make! The Dead Sea Scrolls themselves, for the OT go back that far and further, and has parts of nearly ALL Bible books and all of some Books!!!!

You state, QUOTE: “A number of early manuscripts witnessing to the early Vulgate still survive today. Dating to the 8th century, the Codex Amiatinus is the earliest surviving complete manuscript of the Vulgate. The Codex Fuldensis, from around 545, is an earlier surviving manuscript that is based on the Vulgate, however the gospels are an edited version of the Diatessaron.” End Quote: and reply, that you seem to IGNORE WHAT JEROME WORKED FROM. AND TO HELP YOU WITH THIS, I AM GOING TO PROVIDE YOU HERE BELOW WITH SOME INFORMATION THAT YOU CAN USE TO VERIFY YOURSELF AS TO IT’S ACCURACY AS YOUR POSITION ON THIS IS WAY WAY OFF BASE!!!!

Since you are bent on making this in issue, then we should deal with what you discuss at its very core though from a different prospective, that hopefully, may be more appealing to you! Factually speaking, it is The Roman Catholic Church that “claims” credit for the decision as to which books should be included in the “Bible canon”, and they often refer to where mention of this is made at the Council of Carthage (397 C.E.), (Before Jerome did his work) where a “catalog” of books was formulated, though actually, the complete opposite is true, because the canon, including the list of books making up the Christian Greek Scriptures, (NT) was already settled by then, (also Before Jerome did his work) that is, not by the decree of any council, but rather by the direction of God’s holy spirit, the same spirit that inspired the writing of those books in the first place and as reflected in the works of earlier people, who catalogued these books. The testimony of later noninspired catalogers is valuable only as an acknowledgment of the Bible canon, which God’s spirit had authorized.
A glance at the chart below this paragraph reveals that a number of fourth-century “catalogs” of the Christian Scriptures (NT), dated prior to the above-mentioned council, (BEFORE JEROME DID HIS WORK) agree exactly with our present canon, (that of today) and some others omit only Revelation. Before the end of the second century, there is universal acceptance of the four Gospels, Acts, and 12 of the Apostle Paul’s letters. Only a few of the smaller writings were doubted in certain areas. Likely this was so because such writings were limited in their initial circulation for one reason or another and thus took longer to become accepted as canonical.

CHART TO USE AS A REFERENCE: (and TATM you should like this as it mention’s some of your “Apostolic Fathers” though not to be confused with the Apostles or Inspired Writers themselves) though I first provide you with a Key-Legend here that to be used along with the dates in order for you to follow along accordingly and in the event you actually want to do the research to verify and validate the same:
The following Letter Keys are used to simply the summary:

A - Accepted without query as Scriptural and canonical

D - Doubted in certain quarters

DA - Doubted in certain quarters, but cataloger accepted it as
Scriptural and canonical

? - Scholars uncertain of the reading of the text or how a
book mentioned is viewed

- A blank space indicates that the book was not used or
mentioned by that authority
Name and Place:

Muratorian Irenaeus, Clement of Tertullian,
Fragment, Asia Minor Alexandria N. Africa
Italy
Approximate
Date C.E. 170 180 190 207

Matthew through Titus: A in all four above
Philemon: A as to 170 and 207 only.
Hebrews: D-170, DA-180 and DA for 207.
James: Missing in all four above.
1 Peter: Some copy references show A for 170 and other copies, question this, while A for all three others above.
2 Peter: D for 170, and A for 180, and missing for 190 and 207.
1 John: A, A, with a DA for 190 and A.
2 John: A, A and a DA for 190 and not in 207.
3 John: A 170, and in some copy references this it is questioned.
Jude: A in 170, missing in 180, DA in 190 and A in 207.
Revelation: A’s in all four above.

Name and Place

Origen, Eusebius, Cyril of Cheltenham
Alexandria Palestine Jerusalem List, N. Africa
Approximate
Date C.E. 230 320 348 365

Matthew through Philemon: A in all four above
Hebrews: DA-230, DA-320 and A on 348 and missing in 365.
James: DA-230, DA-320, and A in 348, missing in 356
1 Peter: A in all four above
2 Peter: DA, DA, A and D
1 John: All in all four above
2 John: DA, DA, A, D
3 John: DA, DA, A and D
Jude: DA, DA, A and missing in 365
Revelation: A, DA, missing in 348, and A

Name and Place
Athanasius, Epiphanius, Gregory Amphilocius,
Alexandria Palestine Nazianzus, Asia Minor
Asia Minor
Approximate
Date C.E. 367 368 370 370

Matthew through Philemon: A in all four above
Hebrews: A, A, A and DA in 370
James and 1 Peter : A in all four above
2 Peter: A, A, A and D in 370
1 John: All in all four above
2 John: A, A, A, and D in 370
3 John: A, A, A and D in 370 above
Jude: A, A, A and D in 370 above
Revelation: A, DA, D and missing above in 370
Name and Place
Philaster, Jerome, Augustine, Third
Italy Italy N. Africa Council of
Carthage,
N. Africa
Approximate
Date C.E. 383 394 397 397

Matthew through Philemon: A in all four above
Hebrews: DA, DA, A, A
James: A, DA, A, A
1 Peter: A in all four above
2 Peter: A, DA, A, A
1 John: A in all four above
2 John: A, DA, A, A
3 John: A, DA, A, A
Jude: A, DA, A, A
Revelation: A, DA, DA, A

One of the most interesting early catalogs is the fragment first mentioned above, discovered by L. A. Muratori in the Ambrosian Library, Milan, Italy, and published by him in 1740. Though the beginning is missing, its reference to Luke as the third Gospel indicates that it first mentioned Matthew and Mark. The Muratorian Fragment, which is in Latin, dates to the latter part of the second century C.E. It is a most interesting document, as the following partial translation shows:

QUOTE: “The third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke. Luke, the well-known physician, wrote it in his own name . . . The fourth book of the Gospel is that of John, one of the disciples. . . . And so to the faith of believers there is no discord, even although different selections are given from the facts in the individual books of the Gospels, because in all [of them] under the one guiding Spirit all the things relative to his nativity, passion, resurrection, conversation with his disciples, and his twofold advent, the first in the humiliation arising from contempt, which took place, and the second in the glory of kingly power, which is yet to come, have been declared. What marvel is it, then, if John adduces so consistently in his epistles these several things, saying in person: ‘what we have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, those things we have written.’ For thus he professes to be not only an eyewitness but also a hearer and narrator of all the wonderful things of the Lord, in their order. Moreover, the acts of all the apostles are written in one book. Luke [so] comprised them for the most excellent Theophilus . . . Now the epistles of Paul, what they are, whence or for what reason they were sent, they themselves make clear to him who will understand. First of all he wrote at length to the Corinthians to prohibit the schism of heresy, then to the Galatians [against] circumcision, and to the Romans on the order of the Scriptures, intimating also that Christ is the chief matter in them—each of which it is necessary for us to discuss, seeing that the blessed Apostle Paul himself, following the example of his predecessor John, writes to no more than seven churches by name in the following order: to the Corinthians (first), to the Ephesians (second), to the Philippians (third), to the Colossians (fourth), to the Galatians (fifth), to the Thessalonians (sixth), to the Romans (seventh). But though he writes twice for the sake of correction to the Corinthians and the Thessalonians, that there is one church diffused throughout the whole earth is shown [?i.e., by this sevenfold writing]; and John also in the Apocalypse, though he writes to seven churches, yet speaks to all. But [he wrote] out of affection and love one to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy; [and these] are held sacred in the honorable esteem of the Church. . . . Further, an epistle of Jude and two bearing the name of John are counted . . . We receive the apocalypses of John and Peter only, which [latter] some of us do not wish to be read in church.” END QUOTE (From the “The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, 1956, Vol. VIII, page 56.”)
It is noted that toward the end of the Muratorian Fragment, mention is made of just two epistles of John. However, on this point the above-mentioned encyclopedia, page 55, notes that these two epistles of John “can only be the second and third, whose writer calls himself merely ‘the elder.’ Having already treated the first, though only incidentally, in connection with the Fourth Gospel, and there declared his unquestioning belief in its Johannine origin, the author felt able here to confine himself to the two smaller letters.” As to the apparent absence of any mention of Peter’s first epistle, this source continues: “The most probable hypothesis is that of the loss of a few words, perhaps a line, in which I Peter and the Apocalypse of John were named as received.” Therefore, from the standpoint of the Muratorian Fragment, this encyclopedia, on page 56, concludes: “The New Testament is regarded as definitely made up of the four Gospels, the Acts, thirteen epistles of Paul, the Apocalypse of John, probably three epistles of his, Jude, and probably I Peter, while the opposition to another of Peter’s writings was not yet silenced.”

Now, Origen, (also mentioned above) about the year 230 C.E., accepted among the inspired Scriptures the books of Hebrews and James, both missing from the Muratorian Fragment. While he indicates that some doubted their canonical quality, this also shows that by this time, the canonicity of most of the Greek Scriptures was accepted, only a few doubting some of the less well-known epistles. Later, Athanasius, Jerome, and Augustine acknowledged the conclusions of earlier lists by defining as the canon the same 27 books that we now have.

Thus the majority of the catalogs above, are specific lists showing which books were accepted as canonical. Those of Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen are completed from the quotations they made, which reveal how they regarded the writings referred to. These are further supplemented from the records of the early historian Eusebius. However, the fact that these writers do not mention certain canonical writings does not argue against their canonicity. It is just that they did not happen to refer to them in their writings either by choice or because of the subjects under discussion. However, why is it, that we do not find exact lists earlier than the Muratorian Fragment?

It was not until critics like Marcion of Sinope came along in the middle of the second century C.E. that an issue arose as to which books Christians should accept. Marcion constructed his own “canon” to suit his doctrines, taking only certain of the Apostle Paul’s letters and along what is known to be an expurgated form of the Gospel of Luke. This, together with the mass of apocryphal literature by then spreading throughout the world, was what led to statements by catalogers then as to which books they accepted as canonical.

This then takes us to the Apocryphal writings. Internal evidence confirms the clear division that was made between the inspired Christian writings (NT) and works that were “spurious” or “uninspired.” The Apocryphal writings are much inferior and often fanciful and childish. They are frequently inaccurate. Note the following statements by scholars on these noncanonical books:

“There is no question of any one’s having excluded them from the New Testament: they have done that for themselves.” (M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, pages xi, xii.)

“We have only to compare our New Testament books as a whole with other literature of the kind to realize how wide is the gulf which separates them from it. The uncanonical gospels, it is often said, are in reality the best evidence for the canonical.” (G. Milligan, The New Testament Documents, page 228.)

“It cannot be said of a single writing preserved to us from the early period of the Church outside the New Testament that it could properly be added to-day to the Canon.” (K. Aland, The Problem of the New Testament Canon, page 24.)

The above clearly separates us from what we refer to as the inspired penmen, which should be a further point is of interest. All the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures in one way or another were closely “associated” with the original First Century Governing Authority in Jerusalem (Acts 15: 22-23) of the First Century Christian congregation, which included apostles personally selected by Jesus. Matthew, John, and Peter were among the original 12 apostles, and Paul was later selected as an apostle but was not reckoned as one of the 12.
Although Paul was not present at the special outpouring of spirit at Pentecost, Matthew, John, and Peter were there, along with James and Jude and probably Mark. (Acts 1:14) Peter specifically counts the letters of Paul in with “the rest of the Scriptures.” (2 Peter 3:15, 16) Mark and Luke were close associates and traveling companions of Paul and Peter. (Acts 12:25; 1 Peter 5:13; Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:11) All these writers were endowed with miraculous abilities by holy spirit, either by special outpouring as occurred at Pentecost and when Paul was converted (Acts 9:17, 18) or, no doubt as in the case of Luke, by the laying on of the apostles’ hands. (Acts 8:14-17) Therefore “ALL” of the writing of the Christian Greek Scriptures (NT) was completed during the time that the special gifts of the spirit were operative.

In the end, faith in the almighty God, who is the Inspirer and Preserver of his Word, makes us confident that he is the one who has guided the gathering together of its various parts. So we true worshippers of God confidently accept the 27 books of the Christian Greek Scriptures (NT) along with the 39 (OT) of the Hebrew Scriptures as the one Bible, by the one Author, who is “the God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ”, Jehovah God! His Word in its 66 books is our guide, and its entire harmony and balance testify to its completeness. All praise to the God and Father of Jesus Christ Jehovah God, the Creator and Originator of this incomparable book!

You then state, QUOTE: Over the course of the Middle Ages, the Vulgate had succumbed to the inevitable changes wrought by human error in the countless copying of the text in monasteries across Europe. From its earliest days, readings from the Vetus Latina were introduced. Marginal notes were erroneously interpolated into the text. No one copy was the same as the other as scribes added, removed, misspelled, or mis-corrected verses in the Latin Bible” END QUOTE and reply, that while a lot of this is true in Latin especially, it does NOT negate, make void and or eliminate the many other thousands (well over 25K of available extant manuscript evidence today) of manuscripts and other discoveries since then, and the many catalogs as delineated above that serve to correct any and all scriptures, which is why one is able to, with effort, easily distinguish between what is and or what is not Holy Scripture, like spurious additions, Apocrypha etc!!!

Your next statement QUOTE “About 550, Cassiodorus made an attempt at restoring the Vulgate to its original purity. Alcuin of York oversaw efforts to make a corrected Vulgate, which he presented to Charlemagne in 801. Similar attempts were repeated by Theodulphus Bishop of Orleans (787?- 821), Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury (1070-1089), Stephen Harding, Abbot of Cîteaux (1109-1134), and Deacon Nicolaus Maniacoria (about the beginning of the thirteenth century)” END QUOTE, and reply that it does not need a reply as it does not speak toward anything that impugns the Bible as we know it today, and the vast body of other extant manuscripts available today, the catalogs etc, but instead serves to somewhat describe other events in history that deal with the Bible and other so-called Christian Writings.

You then state, QUOTE: “At this time the University of Paris created a uniform Bible for the use of its faculty and students. It standardized the order of the books and content of their texts. This Paris Bible (Biblia Parisiensis) became the basis of the early printed editions of the Vulgate. Though the advent of printing greatly reduced the potential of human error and increased the consistency and uniformity of the text, even the Vulgate as produced by Gutenberg was not entirely without mistakes as the several editions of the first printed work varied one from the other” END QUOTE and reply, that again that a lot of this has to do with the Latin and what came from Latin works as the remainder of the paragraph, does not need a reply as it does not speak toward anything that impugns the Bible as we know it today, and the vast body of other extant manuscripts available today, the catalogs etc, that serves to correct mistakes etc, and the remainder of the paragraph instead serves to somewhat describe other events in history that deal with the Bible and other so-called Christian Writings and current events of a few things, (as there are many other etc.) that are being done today regarding the Holy Writings that we know today as the Bible!

In conclusion, even though you have, as always, left off dealing with the subject matter, note, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

P.S. The chart I made above, does not work well with the letters assigned to it, but a careful reading will show you the catalogs separately, therefore the first letter belongs to the first one listed catalogue and so one through to a total of four in each section for a total of 16 catalogs!

[praetorian]

Myth: It is often pointed out that modern translations omit a few of the verses found in the KJV, (like the known spurious edition of 1 John 5:7) which is seen by scholars in general to be an attempt to “distort” the Bible's teachings.

Fact:
Verses such as Mark 16:9 - 20 and John 8:1 - 11 are not found in the better manuscripts, while 1 John 5:7 is. 1 John 5:7 causes a great deal of pain for those teaching a false dogma denying the deity of Jesus Christ. The "scholars" spoken of above refers to those caught up in the WB&TS, not true Bible scholars.

1) 200 - Tertullian quotes the verse (Gill, "An exposition of the NT", Vol 2, pp. 907-8)

2) 250 - Cyprian, who writes, "And again concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit it is written: 'and the Three are One'" (Vienna, vol. iii, p. 215)

3) 350 - Priscillian cites the verse (Vienna, vol. xviii, p. 6)

4) 350 - Idacius Clarus cites the verse (MPL, vol. 62, col. 359)

5) 350 - Athanasius cites the verse (Gill)

6) 415 - Council of Carthage appeals to the verse as a basic text proving a fundamental doctrine when contending with the Arians (Ruckman, "History of the NT Church", Vol. I, p. 146)

7) 450-530 - several orthodox African writers quote the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:

A) Vigilius Tapensis (MPL, vol. 62, col. 243)

B) Victor Vitensis (Vienna, vol. vii, p. 60)

C) Fulgentius (MPL, vol. 65, col. 500)

8) 500 - Cassiodorus cites the verse (MPL, vol. 70, col. 1373)

9) 550 - Old Latin ms r has the verse

10) 550 - The "Speculum" contains the verse

11) 750 - Wianburgensis cites the verse

12) 800 - Jerome's Vulgate includes the verse

13) 1150 - minuscule ms 88 in the margin

14) 1200-1400 - Waldensian Bibles have the verse

15) 1500 - ms 61 has the verse

16) various witnesses cited in Nestle's 26th edition for a replacement of the text as it stands with the Comma: 221 v.l.;2318 vg[cl]; 629; 61; 88; 429 v.l.; 636 v.l.; 918; l; r; and other important Latin mss.

Myth Bible shall return.

TATM:

FACT this spurious addition (1 John 5:7) appears in the LATIN texts as it does not appear in any of the Hebrew and or Greek texts! It also made it's appearance much later and is NOT contained in ANY of the "catalogued" texts that existed BEFORE Jerome worked on his Bible!!!!

There are thousands of texts and catalogues much older than when the Latin Bible made it's appearance! Therefore your quoting those who believe it, means it speaks only as to their opinion of what appeared in LATIN and NOT BEFORE!!!

But even taking the assumptive position you are correct that 1 John 5:7, is “Canon” you still have a body of scriptures that clearly distinguish between Jesus and his “God and Father” and the Holy Spirit in other words, that clearly contradict it!!!

And in conclusion, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[praetorian]

TATM:

There is no shame in what I about to express here or reason for you to be angry! You believe in the Bible though with the added views of those of early history, you refer to you as “Apostolic Father” (not to be confused with the Apostles or inspired writers of the Bible) and I respect that! I do not choose to believe and or accept the writings or views of these ones and or anyone OUTSIDE the Bible itself PERIOD! And that is OK and my right as well!

According to your beliefs, one can see the Trinity in the Bible as expounded on by these “Apostolic Fathers” (not to be confused with the Apostles or inspired writers of the Bible) and according to my beliefs based solely on the Bible, I do not believe that the Trinity is tuaught in the Bible and many of those of main stream Christendom admit this also, and believe like you!

That is the difference between us period and nothing you say will convince you that you should not go outside the Bible and nothing you say to me will convince me that I should go outside the Bible! PLAIN AND SIMPLE!

And so therefore in conclusion, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking in the Bible that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed and early Church Fathers that were not the Apostles or inspired writers themselves PERIOD!!!!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/3774914176”


The page you tried was not found. You may have used an outdated link or may have typed the address (URL) incorrectly.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

I find it udderly hilarious that the WB&TS demands that God was able to get his first century writings to us intact . . . except 1 John 5:7 slipped by. hehehehehehehehehe

[praetorian]

http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/3774914176”


The page you tried was not found. You may have used an outdated link or may have typed the address (URL) incorrectly.

TATM

Enter it without the quotes either in front and or in back of the address as it is here below:

http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/3774914176

Also, you can find it by entering the name of publication I referred you to above, by Zaki Aly and Ludwig Koenen, titled as “The Three Rolls of the Early Septuagint: Genesis and Deuteronomy” though again, without the quotes! However, the above should serve to get you to the page I reffered you to on WorldCat though again, make sure you do not copy or use quotes!

TP

[praetorian]

I find it udderly hilarious that the WB&TS demands that God was able to get his first century writings to us intact . . . except 1 John 5:7 slipped by. hehehehehehehehehe

TATM:

What a coincidence!!! LOL.. You however, are laughing alone in ignorance as the writings referred to above (the catalogs and several others) are the same ones used by those who prepared the Bible’s that Jerome later translated and note there were others in Latin as well!!!! (Check your own website reference for this).

You just did not know about the 16 “catalogs” highlighted above, even by those whom you quote from, did you!?

Therefore neither I (same for the WBTS as they don’t post) did anything here other than refer to older inspired writings and works BEFORE Jerome, substantiating the accuracy of the Bible we have today as coming originally penned by the Author, “the God and Father of Jesus Christ.”

Nothing with 1 John 5:7, slipped by as it is NOT found, GET IT, not found (and this has nothing to do with me or the WBTS) FACTUALLY in any of the older Greek Manuscripts but are found in the later Latin ones FACT!!! Wow, get over this information as it is the information that you have stated that is wrong!!!!

And note, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking in the Bible that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed and early Church Fathers that were not the Apostles or inspired writers themselves PERIOD!!!!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

How hilarious!! OH! OH!! OH!!! God brought his word to modern man intact . . . except he was playing golf when 1 John 5:7 was put in. hehehehehehehhehehehehehe

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Myth: While Paul is best known as the apostle “to the nations” many make the mistake to think his ministry was solely confined to the non-Jews, which is not the case at all! Just before Paul was baptized and commissioned for his work, the Lord Jesus said to Ananias at Acts 9:15, (NIV) “But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man [Paul] is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel.” (See also Galatians 2:8, 9) The writing of the book of Hebrews was truly in line with Paul’s commission to bear the name of Jesus to the Jews!
However, some critics doubt Paul’s writership of Hebrews. One objection is that Paul’s name does not appear in the letter. But this is really no obstacle, as many other canonical books fail to name the writer, who is often identified by internal evidence. Moreover, some feel that Paul may have deliberately omitted his name in writing to the Hebrew Christians in Judea, since his name had been made an object of hatred by the Jews there. (See Acts 21:28) Neither is the change of style from his other epistles any real objection to Paul’s writership. Whether addressing pagans, Jews, or Christians, Paul always showed his ability to “become all things to people of all sorts.” Here his reasoning is presented to Jews as from a Jew, arguments that they could fully understand and appreciate. (See 1 Corinthians 9:22)
The internal evidence of the book is all in support of Paul’s writership. The writer was in Italy and was associated with Timothy. These facts fit Paul. (See Hebrews 13:23, 24)

Furthermore, the doctrine is typical of Paul, though the arguments are presented from a Jewish viewpoint, designed to appeal to the strictly Hebrew congregation to which the letter was addressed. On this point “Clarke’s Commentary”, Volume 6, page 681, says concerning Hebrews: “That it was written to Jews, naturally such, the whole structure of the epistle proves. Had it been written to the Gentiles, not one in ten thousand of them could have comprehended the argument, because unacquainted with the Jewish system; the knowledge of which the writer of this epistle everywhere supposes.” This helps to account for the difference of style when compared with Paul’s other letters.

Also, the discovery in about 1930 of the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) has provided further evidence of Paul’s writership. Commenting on this papyrus codex, which was written only about a century and a half after Paul’s death, the eminent British textual critic Sir Frederic Kenyon said: “It is noticeable that Hebrews is placed immediately after Romans (an almost unprecedented position), which shows that at the early date when this manuscript was written no doubt was felt as to its Pauline authorship.” On this same question, McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia states pointedly: “There is no substantial evidence, external or internal, in favor of any claimant to the authorship of this epistle except Paul.” You will note that I have cited here three well established and known scholarly works, that take a position against what you express, clearly showing your “FACT” to be what it truly is, a misinformed, opinion, no more and no less!!!!!


Fact:
In the fourth century, the church largely agreed to include Hebrews as the fourteenth letter of Paul. Jerome and Augustine of Hippo were influential in affirming Paul's authorship,[2] and the Church affirmed this authorship until the Reformation.

In general, the evidence against Pauline authorship is considered too solid for scholarly dispute. Donald Guthrie, in his New Testament Introduction (1976), commented that "most modern writers find more difficulty in imagining how this Epistle was ever attributed to Paul than in disposing of the theory." Harold Attridge tells us that "it is certainly not a work of the apostle"; Daniel Wallace simply states, "the arguments against Pauline authorship, however, are conclusive."

Guthrie in his volume "New Testament Introduction" states: "Most modern writers find more difficulty in imagining how this Epistle was ever attributed to Paul than in disposing of the theory." Guthrie continues and lists five arguments against a Pauline authorship. Summarized they are as follows: 1. The anonymity of the book is not in keeping with Paul's pattern. 2. Differences in style. 3. The absence or lack of Pauline spiritual experience. 4. Theological differences both theoretical and practical. 5. A different historical position of the writer than Paul. One can also find similar arguments against Paul or a student of Paul's authorship of Hebrew in the research of many able New Testament scholars. Books by Milligan, Zahn, and Allen & Grensted are of note.

A good many years ago, a biblical scholar by the name of Franz Delitzsch observed that this book was "like the great Melchizedek. Like him it marches forth in lonely, royal, and sacerdotal dignity; and like him it is agenealogetos -- we know not whence it cometh or whither it goeth." The Greek word employed by Delitzsch in the above comment appears only twice in the entire NT writings, both times in the book of Hebrews and both times in connection with Melchizedek. It means "without genealogy" ... one whose descent is nowhere recorded; no extant genealogical records. Delitzsch's comparison is an apt one. Like Melchizedek, this epistle to the Hebrews is equally cloaked in mystery for those who seek to trace its origins.

Other names offered for authorship:

Luke --- Proposed by Clement of Alexandria (died c. 215 A.D.), who felt Luke may have been working from a rough draft left by Paul.
Barnabas --- Suggested by Tertullian (160-220 A.D.) and Novatian (c. 250 A.D.). J.D. Davis, in his Dictionary of the Bible, believes Barnabas the most likely choice.
Clement of Rome --- This was the choice of Origen (185-254 A.D.).
Silas --- The view of a scholar named C.F. Boehme.
Peter --- The belief of A. Welch.
Priscilla & Aquila --- Promoted by Bleek & Harnack.
Philip the Deacon --- Suggested by Ramsay.
Aristion (an elder known to Papias) --- Proposed by J. Chapman.


Due partly to the question of authorship, but influenced by several other factors as well, this epistle had a difficult time being accepted into the New Testament canon. Many great scholars and early church "fathers" refused to acknowledge this work as inspired of God. In fact, it was not until late in the fourth century that it was finally accepted as part of the canon by the greater part of the Western Church. Some noted historical figures in church history, however, never really accepted Hebrews. The great reformer Martin Luther (1483-1546), for example (who believed the author to have been Apollos), was so much against the inclusion of this book in the NT canon that, in protest, when he produced his German translation, he moved the epistle of Hebrews from its traditional location (before James) to a new location just before Jude. This was his way of expressing his displeasure with the presence of this book as one of the 27 books of the NT canon (Luther also relocated James, another sign of protest, as he didn't approve of that epistle either).

Origen (185 - 256 AD.) stated ""God only knows" who is the author of Hebrews." The letter has carried its traditional title since Tertullian described it as Barnabae titulus ad Hebraeos in De Pudicitia chapter 20 ("Barnabas's Letter to the Hebrews.")

Paul had nothing to do with the book of Hebrews.

Myth Bible will be right back.

[praetorian]

How hilarious!! OH! OH!! OH!!! God brought his word to modern man intact . . . except he was playing golf when 1 John 5:7 was put in. hehehehehehehhehehehehehe


The above is a totally ignorant statement! It ignores FACTS of what a spurious addition is in the first PLACE!!! That is why it is called a Spurious Addition! FACT IT DOES NOT APPEAR IN ALL MANUSCRIPTS AND DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE OLDER ONES-FACT!

And again, even if it did, the scripture stands in contradiction, opposition to many other scriptures that distinguish between God and his Son Jesus Christ PERIOD!!!!

And, note, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking in the Bible that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed and early Church Fathers that were not the Apostles or inspired writers themselves PERIOD!!!!

What is truly hilarious is your total stubborn view to accept the same!

TP

[praetorian]

Myth: While Paul is best known as the apostle “to the nations” many make the mistake to think his ministry was solely confined to the non-Jews, which is not the case at all! Just before Paul was baptized and commissioned for his work, the Lord Jesus said to Ananias at Acts 9:15, (NIV) “But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man [Paul] is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel.” (See also Galatians 2:8, 9) The writing of the book of Hebrews was truly in line with Paul’s commission to bear the name of Jesus to the Jews!
However, some critics doubt Paul’s writership of Hebrews. One objection is that Paul’s name does not appear in the letter. But this is really no obstacle, as many other canonical books fail to name the writer, who is often identified by internal evidence. Moreover, some feel that Paul may have deliberately omitted his name in writing to the Hebrew Christians in Judea, since his name had been made an object of hatred by the Jews there. (See Acts 21:28) Neither is the change of style from his other epistles any real objection to Paul’s writership. Whether addressing pagans, Jews, or Christians, Paul always showed his ability to “become all things to people of all sorts.” Here his reasoning is presented to Jews as from a Jew, arguments that they could fully understand and appreciate. (See 1 Corinthians 9:22)
The internal evidence of the book is all in support of Paul’s writership. The writer was in Italy and was associated with Timothy. These facts fit Paul. (See Hebrews 13:23, 24)

Furthermore, the doctrine is typical of Paul, though the arguments are presented from a Jewish viewpoint, designed to appeal to the strictly Hebrew congregation to which the letter was addressed. On this point “Clarke’s Commentary”, Volume 6, page 681, says concerning Hebrews: “That it was written to Jews, naturally such, the whole structure of the epistle proves. Had it been written to the Gentiles, not one in ten thousand of them could have comprehended the argument, because unacquainted with the Jewish system; the knowledge of which the writer of this epistle everywhere supposes.” This helps to account for the difference of style when compared with Paul’s other letters.

Also, the discovery in about 1930 of the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) has provided further evidence of Paul’s writership. Commenting on this papyrus codex, which was written only about a century and a half after Paul’s death, the eminent British textual critic Sir Frederic Kenyon said: “It is noticeable that Hebrews is placed immediately after Romans (an almost unprecedented position), which shows that at the early date when this manuscript was written no doubt was felt as to its Pauline authorship.” On this same question, McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia states pointedly: “There is no substantial evidence, external or internal, in favor of any claimant to the authorship of this epistle except Paul.” You will note that I have cited here three well established and known scholarly works, that take a position against what you express, clearly showing your “FACT” to be what it truly is, a misinformed, opinion, no more and no less!!!!!


Fact:
In the fourth century, the church largely agreed to include Hebrews as the fourteenth letter of Paul. Jerome and Augustine of Hippo were influential in affirming Paul's authorship,[2] and the Church affirmed this authorship until the Reformation.

In general, the evidence against Pauline authorship is considered too solid for scholarly dispute. Donald Guthrie, in his New Testament Introduction (1976), commented that "most modern writers find more difficulty in imagining how this Epistle was ever attributed to Paul than in disposing of the theory." Harold Attridge tells us that "it is certainly not a work of the apostle"; Daniel Wallace simply states, "the arguments against Pauline authorship, however, are conclusive."

Guthrie in his volume "New Testament Introduction" states: "Most modern writers find more difficulty in imagining how this Epistle was ever attributed to Paul than in disposing of the theory." Guthrie continues and lists five arguments against a Pauline authorship. Summarized they are as follows: 1. The anonymity of the book is not in keeping with Paul's pattern. 2. Differences in style. 3. The absence or lack of Pauline spiritual experience. 4. Theological differences both theoretical and practical. 5. A different historical position of the writer than Paul. One can also find similar arguments against Paul or a student of Paul's authorship of Hebrew in the research of many able New Testament scholars. Books by Milligan, Zahn, and Allen & Grensted are of note.

A good many years ago, a biblical scholar by the name of Franz Delitzsch observed that this book was "like the great Melchizedek. Like him it marches forth in lonely, royal, and sacerdotal dignity; and like him it is agenealogetos -- we know not whence it cometh or whither it goeth." The Greek word employed by Delitzsch in the above comment appears only twice in the entire NT writings, both times in the book of Hebrews and both times in connection with Melchizedek. It means "without genealogy" ... one whose descent is nowhere recorded; no extant genealogical records. Delitzsch's comparison is an apt one. Like Melchizedek, this epistle to the Hebrews is equally cloaked in mystery for those who seek to trace its origins.

Other names offered for authorship:

Luke --- Proposed by Clement of Alexandria (died c. 215 A.D.), who felt Luke may have been working from a rough draft left by Paul.
Barnabas --- Suggested by Tertullian (160-220 A.D.) and Novatian (c. 250 A.D.). J.D. Davis, in his Dictionary of the Bible, believes Barnabas the most likely choice.
Clement of Rome --- This was the choice of Origen (185-254 A.D.).
Silas --- The view of a scholar named C.F. Boehme.
Peter --- The belief of A. Welch.
Priscilla & Aquila --- Promoted by Bleek & Harnack.
Philip the Deacon --- Suggested by Ramsay.
Aristion (an elder known to Papias) --- Proposed by J. Chapman.


Due partly to the question of authorship, but influenced by several other factors as well, this epistle had a difficult time being accepted into the New Testament canon. Many great scholars and early church "fathers" refused to acknowledge this work as inspired of God. In fact, it was not until late in the fourth century that it was finally accepted as part of the canon by the greater part of the Western Church. Some noted historical figures in church history, however, never really accepted Hebrews. The great reformer Martin Luther (1483-1546), for example (who believed the author to have been Apollos), was so much against the inclusion of this book in the NT canon that, in protest, when he produced his German translation, he moved the epistle of Hebrews from its traditional location (before James) to a new location just before Jude. This was his way of expressing his displeasure with the presence of this book as one of the 27 books of the NT canon (Luther also relocated James, another sign of protest, as he didn't approve of that epistle either).

Origen (185 - 256 AD.) stated ""God only knows" who is the author of Hebrews." The letter has carried its traditional title since Tertullian described it as Barnabae titulus ad Hebraeos in De Pudicitia chapter 20 ("Barnabas's Letter to the Hebrews.")

Paul had nothing to do with the book of Hebrews.

Myth Bible will be right back.


You are indeed entitled to your opinion as I am to mine! And this is indeed fair!

Regarding this, the fact remains that “Clarke’s Commentary”, “McClintock and Strong’s” and “Sir Frederick Kenyon” (and others are of the view that Hebrews wsa penned by Paul) commenting on the discovery (discovery get it, meaning, it was not around when the folks you quote provided their commentary) of the “Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2” which was written about a “century and a half” Paul’s death feel differently, and like you, I have a choice and choose to accept this over your references, to which we are both entitled to do!!!! Just know that my thoughts on this is not arbitrary or caprious, meaning, “cause I feel or think that way’ kinda feeling that you most often do!!!! Bottom Line: Whoever it is, MUST have been known to the Apostles and inspired of God!!!!

In the end, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking in the Bible that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed and early Church Fathers that were not the Apostles or inspired writers themselves PERIOD!!!!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

My friend, I expressed fact. You wimper around on the opinion of your religion. I have asked repeatedly for you to name a single Christian Association, Congregation or Organization that agrees with your religion's dogma. Each time you allude to Christianity's minority status. Christianity has nothing to do with your religion. Get over it. Now, name a single Christian Association or Congregation or Organization that agrees with your religion.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

"Clarke’s Commentary” Perhaps his most controversial position regarded the eternal Sonship of Jesus. Clarke did not believe it Biblically faithful to affirm this doctrine, maintaining that prior to the Incarnation, Jesus was "unoriginated."

“McClintock and Strong’s”
Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature on CD-ROM
Literature by John McClintock and James Strong. This is one of the most exhaustive religious encyclopedias ever published in the English language. It covers the entire field of religious knowledge. In all there are more than 31,000 articles, more than 17 million words, covering 12,400 large 6 3/8 X 9 3/4 inch double column pages, divided among twelve encyclopedia size volumes. The two editors were assisted by a corps of nearly 200 collaborators and contributors of various religious denominations--each one being a specialist in his field. McClintock and Strong's is traditionally regarded as an indispensable reference work in the field of religion. For the past half century it has occupied a key position on the reference shelf of seminaries and departments of religion in universities and colleges. http://jehovah.to/book/software.htm



“Sir Frederick Kenyon” “the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed.”

Amazing those on which you rely or should i say hilarious? hehehehehehhe

[praetorian]

TATM:

This will serve to reply to both of your posts, numbers 739 and 740 respectively.

You have a never ending problem that I do not mind point out to you, those on the board and to the world as the more you write your selective posts, the more foolish you make yourself look as you are attempting to make “FACT” of your “OPINIONS” as though some how YOURS are better than anyone else’s however, OPINIONS are just that, OPINIONS! And it is OK to agree to disagree and that is where we are, with definite positions mine from the Bible ONLY and yours, from the “Apostolic Fathers” (meaning non Apostles and non inspired Bible writers).

Again, I am not your friend, PAL, and no, you express OPINION masquerading as FACT, while intermingling them into selective FACTS, and yes, that is what a con made does, they take a little bit of truth and then add onto to it their own version of Truth and FACT and point to the one minute FACT they have in an attempt to gloss over the remainder which is OPINION and NOT FACT! TATM you know that OPINIONS are like Noses, right, everyone has one, that does not mean that one Nose is better than the next, as you have every right as I and or others do, to believe their “NOSE” is better or nicer than yours!!! Nice try, but NOT! Get over yourself as your writings and my replies serve as a indelible written record against you and what you express!!!

You state that I “wimper [sic] around on the opinion of your religion” and reply, first I think you mean “whimper” not wimper and what a coincidence as I feel the same about you, (NOSES) and I have provided you with Bible and only Bible Scriptures and not teachings of humans (not from the NWT) along with firm references and validations not from my Faith (Religion) but instead solely NON JW references! I showed you NON JW references like the ones found here, (http://www.trumpetcallbooks.com/trinity_truth.html), where mainstream “Christian Scholars”, that readily express that the doctrine of God being Triune (Whether it be Trinity or Oneness) is "not explicitly stated in the Bible." Now, again, I am referring to main stream scholars of Christianity and you keep trying to make this about ME and or my Faith, again nice try but NOT, as I have used sources that are not MINE or from MY FAITH that you IGNORE, but that does not mean that the written record of the same on this string will some how go way, or magically disappear as those who want to be informed “FULLY” about our dialogues via exchange posts, can read for themselves to see if what you express is FALSE or TRUTH!!! Your posts are against you and my posts, from those like you, are against YOU!

Since you feel I do not respond to your question, and instead IGORE IT, let me try to make my REPLY CRYSTAL CLEAR so that an 8th GRADER can get it, GET IT!

YOU STATE QUOTE:

I have asked repeatedly for you to name a single Christian Association, Congregation or Organization that agrees with your religion's dogma. Each time you allude to Christianity's minority status. Christianity has nothing to do with your religion. Get over it. Now, name a single Christian Association or Congregation or Organization that agrees with your religion.

MY REPLY:

I cannot NAME ONE! Again, not ONE! GET IT-GOT IT-GOOD! This is your opinion and you have a right to it as I have to mine!!! And add that your reasoning on this is NOT A VALID METHOD OR TEST TO DETERMINE IF SOMEONE IS TELLING THE TRUTH OR NOT ABOUT GOD HIS SON OR THE BIBLE! PERIOD! I also pointed out that God’s people (Jews and Christians) have never been in the majority, but in the minority, to ADD TO THE REASONING THAT YOUR THINKING; THAT BECAUSE NO “ONE” FROM CHRISTENDOM AGREES WITH MY FAITH ALSO CHRISTIAN, THAT IT MUST THEN BE WRONG, AS NOT BEING A VALID METHOD OR TEST OF DETERMINATION, IN ORDER TO DO SO!

If it is for you, Good for YOU, it is NOT for me, and I submit that this kind of thinking, would not be a valid TEST or METHOD not just in religion, but in any form or discipline of LIFE! As to your other statement, “Christianity has nothing to do with your religion” again this too is opinion, and subjective, and as such I and about seven million others from around the globe, many from Christendom, DISAGREE as is our right, which is at least, as GOOD AS YOURS to FEEL THAT WAY!!!

Now onto your post 740!

Before I reply to this, I add prospective here, in order to avoid losing the point, of why these references works were brought in the first place!!!! Therefore I wish to point why I brought up “Clarke’s Commentary”, “Sir Frederick Kenyon” and ““McClintock and Strong’s” in my above posts in the first place, and that was to address matters relating to your attack on the Bible not being truly the word of God today, verses, that of the “Christian Writings” from the “Apostolic Fathers” (meaning non Apostles and or inspired writers) and more particularly regarding the person God inspired to pen the NT Bible Book of Hebrews!!!!! Therefore, I used these three references to establisht that they AGREED that PAUL was the one used by God to pen the NT Bible Book of Hebrews!!!!

Now, you clearly feel (OPINION-NOSES) and totally reject (AGAIN OPINION-NOSES) “Clarke’s Commentary” and “Sir Frederick Kenyon” but CLEARLY ACCEPT with the following glowing words “McClintok and Strong’s” works as being QUOTE, “McClintock and Strong's is traditionally regarded as an indispensable reference work in the field of religion. For the past half century it has occupied a key position on the reference shelf of seminaries and departments of religion in universities and colleges” and I remind you that this work which you hold in such high esteem, states regarding Hebrews and Paul, QUOTE BELOW AS A STAND ALONE PARAGRAPH:

McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia states pointedly: “There is no substantial evidence, external or internal, in favor of any claimant to the authorship of this epistle except Paul.”

So, therefore the work you cite and refer to so glowingly, is against your thinking on this matter regarding Paul as used by God to pen Hebrews!!!!

However, it is YOU that chooses to selectively IGNORE and ACCEPT what you want to “believe” and or set as a standard, TEST or METHOD for all of your beliefs! This TATM is as hypocritical as it gets!!!!! You want the TRUTH ACCORDING TO TATM THE REVEREND SANDY BRYANT, so therefore wehtehr it is truly right or wrong is not the issue, so long as it is “right” and “ wrong” from you prospective ONLY and those of the “majority” of Christendom that again, AGREE with you, as this website

(http://www.trumpetcallbooks.com/trinity_truth.html), shows mainstream “Christian Scholars” (NON –JW”S) that disagree with you on critical issues to your faith, specifically relating to your view of the Trinity and Oneness!!!!

Now, after you make this glowing remark about “McClintok and Strong’s” (which I agree with as I quoted them to YOU) you then list a reference to a website that is apparently owned and or operated by persons of my faith, (JW’s) found at

http://jehovah.to/book/software.htm, and know, that I do not know them personally, (which also serves to dispel lies about JW’s that you and those like you want to believe) though that specific link you provided above, highlights another link here below:

http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?event=AFF&p=1015391&item_no=679301

Showing where you can buy, “McClintock and Strong’s” for yourself on CD-ROM! Good for you, knowing where to buy it!!!!

Then you end your post with your signature HEHEHEHEHE! Wow, I am sure glad you keep verifying what I express above as coming from NON-JW sources!!!

I again end my post, noting that you nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[praetorian]

POINT OF INTEREST:

The conclusion of the matter, between us, everything as discussed above within this string/thread is; The Old Testament (Hebrew Scriptures) inspired writings were completed, verified and utilized (and “Canonized” from God’s standpoint) when Jesus, the and his Apostles, disciples were on the earth early into the First Century.

The New Testament (Christian Greek Scriptures) inspired writings were completed, verified and utilized (and “Canonized” from God’s standpoint) in the First Century by the Apostles, and people known by and to the Apostles and were “catalogued” by many, (well before Jerome completed his work) which came to be writings we know today as The Bible!

In conclusion, I state, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

Amazing how easy even a child can impeach your witnesses. Yet, you cannot see beyond your religion. You are right. You can not name a single Christian that agrees with your religion's dogma and with good reason, I might add.

(http://www.trumpetcallbooks.com/trinity_truth.html),

Oneness pentecostalism is not quote, unquote "mainline" (whatever that is) Christianinty. Even the pentecostals on this board have labeled them as cultic.

[praetorian]

Amazing how easy even a child can impeach your witnesses. Yet, you cannot see beyond your religion. You are right. You can not name a single Christian that agrees with your religion's dogma and with good reason, I might add.

(http://www.trumpetcallbooks.com/trinity_truth.html),

Oneness pentecostalism is not quote, unquote "mainline" (whatever that is) Christianinty. Even the pentecostals on this board have labeled them as cultic.

TATM:

What a coincidence! I feel the same about you and your faith, that is impeached by the link above and repeated here below from mainstream Christian Religions!

(http://www.trumpetcallbooks.com/trinity_truth.html),

As always, you ASSUME things as facts, as I came from beyond my religion in the first place as I was not raised a JW! I do not need to name another faith that agrees with the JW’s because if they agreed with them, they would be a JW!!!! You make no sense!!! OK, since Oneness is an issue with you, note how the site address referred to above contains the word “Trinity” in it, as this site clearly shows those Bible scholars from mainstream Christian Religions (that do not agree with JW’s or they would be one of them) that admit and acknowledge that this teaching the Trinity is NOT explicitly taught in the Bible, which is the theme (or should have been the theme) of this string/thread and my posts here!!!!

POINT OF INTEREST:

The conclusion of the matter, between us, everything as discussed above within this string/thread is; The Old Testament (Hebrew Scriptures) inspired writings were completed, verified and utilized (and “Canonized” from God’s standpoint) when Jesus, the and his Apostles, disciples were on the earth early into the First Century.

The New Testament (Christian Greek Scriptures) inspired writings were completed, verified and utilized (and “Canonized” from God’s standpoint) in the First Century by the Apostles, and people known by and to the Apostles and were “catalogued” by many, (well before Jerome completed his work) which came to be writings we know today as The Bible!

In conclusion, I state, that nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply it because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

[turtle]

Praetorian,

God's word became flesh, Christ is God's word, Only time God word conceived was when God cover Mary. God Son became flesh. We know this because of John 1. If Jesus was God word before He was created in Mary's womb, He was still God after God created in Mary's womb.

Christ became a individual when He was born as human. Before the time there were visions of Christ or the forth man in the fire episode, or walking and talking with Abraham was God in human form. Never before the birth of Christ had God come as a baby boy. Seeing and feeling all humanity. Christ is God because He is the word of God, part of God literally, yet seperate like three parts of an egg. If you take the shell off you still got a shell, the white and the yoke. It is still part of the egg no matter how you separate it.

Jesus is the same like to prescription bottles with the same dose in each. Though both bottle are actually one bottle, even if you divide equally they are the same. Jesus is the Same as God the Father. Even though God the Father and the Son are separated from the human birth. God still God. Christ is still the word the part of God. Part of the Godhead bodily.

[praetorian]

Turtle:

You had made an arrangement with me, at your initiation to not exchange posts with me, and I agreed as you NEVER make any sense! I would really appreciate your sticking to your Christian Word and NOT LIE by going back on your own arrangements!!!

In reply, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking FROM THE BIBLE that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” AGAIN FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply your beliefs because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

THIS IS A FACT AS words like “GODHEAD” appear in Latin and in the KJV but NOT IN HEBREW OR GREEK TEXTS, that is why NO ALL BIBLES use this man made up word, and are from DOGMA, CREEDS AND THEOLOGY!!!!! Jesus was NOT "CREATED" IN MARY'S WOMB, THE BIBLE DOES NOT STATE THAT but was BORN!!!!!!! This too is dogma, teachings of humans!!!! This Egg analogy is YOURS AND OTHERS, that ignores, that all parts of the EGG ARE NOT EQUAL AT ALL!!!!!!

Your teachings are human BASED they are not explicity stated in the Bible and also, nothing you show here or anywhere else, states explicitly, plainly, clearly, simply grammatically speaking FROM THE BIBLE that “Jesus is God” or that “God is Triune” AGAIN FROM THE BIBLE, instead you must infer and imply your beliefs because of your choosing to believe in man made teachings stemming from The Anathasian Creed PERIOD!

TP

NO NEED TO REPLY!!! GO AWAY!!!!

[turtle]

Luke 5:33-35 KJV
(33) And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink?
(34) And he said unto them, Can ye make the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them?
(35) But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days.

Who is the bride groom, Christ is the bride groom, who is the groom of Israel if Israel is the bride?

[turtle]

Colossians 2:2 KJV
(2) That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;


We know the Father is God yet in this verse we see God and the Father and the Son being separate. The Father is God, but we know God is Spirit. We know Christ is flesh. We know God is love.We know the Spirit(God) is in the Father and the Son. Yet the Holy Spirit is also an person to himself as well as the Father and the Son.

[the_apostolic_truth_ministries]

TATM:

What a coincidence! I feel the same about you and your faith, that is impeached by the link above and repeated here below from mainstream Christian Religions!

(http://www.trumpetcallbooks.com/trinity_truth.html),


TP

I have no idea what a quote, unquote "mainline" Christian is. So perhaps you are right about oneness pentecostalism. On the other hand, I know of no Christian who sees them as anything but cultic. So, perhaps, that is what you mean by quote, unquote "mainline" Christian. Either way, your witnesses remain impreached and worthless.

[turtle]

ATAM-

Personally what I mean by mainline christian would be all protestants and catholics and some pentecostal/charismatic groups fit into this category but not all. What Tony means by it who knows.