Runningman
Active Member
Read the Old Testament verses that cited in Romans 10. They prove you are wrong about Jesus being YHWH.The evidence I supplied (which you ignored) proves otherwise.
Read the Old Testament verses that cited in Romans 10. They prove you are wrong about Jesus being YHWH.The evidence I supplied (which you ignored) proves otherwise.
YHWH is never called Son in all of Scripture. YHWH is called the Father, explicitly and repeatedly.Well we have proven that YHWH equals the Son.
Read the Old Testament verses that cited in Romans 10.
Proves Jesus isn't YHWH.Been there, done that.
Your heresy is still heresy.
Proves Jesus isn't YHWH.
It's ok if you don't care what the Bible says. As long as you can't actually change it then it's ok for me.Proof isn't proof just because you say it is.
Love it!
It's ok if you don't care what the Bible says.
Head in the sand denial of scripture.Correction: I don't care what your heresy says about the Bible.
Get it straight.
Head in the sand denial of scripture.
Isaiah 28
16So this is what the Lord GOD says:
“See, I lay a stone in Zion,
a tested stone,
a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation;
the one who believes will never be shaken.
Um, the LORD (YHWH) is not the Lord Jesus. Bible basics 101.Which proves Romans 10:11 is in reference to Jesus.
The same with Romans 10:12
The same with Romans 10:13.
Thanks for making this easy for me.
Um, the LORD (YHWH) is not the Lord Jesus. Bible basics 101.
Psalm 110
1 The LORD said to my Lord:
“Sit at My right hand
until I make Your enemies
a footstool for Your feet.”
A unitarian's concept is so easy that a first grader can know everything about God.
You keep saying such stupid things, and demonstrating through this picture that you have your eyes shut as tight as you can get them to prevent yourself from seeing the truth.There's no Trinity...
The verses that are used to try to teach it are all taken out of context, or not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation. It's an evil Catholic concept that was sold to the world mostly by the power of the sword.
The folks back then weren't allowed to have Bibles to read for themselves. The rejection of the Trinity often brought severe punishment including the loss of your job, intimidation, harassment, confiscation of property, jail or imprisonment, torture, and even burning at the stake.
But now I have noticed intelligent and informed input on the subject of debating the Trinity comes from the unitarian camp. It seems low intelligence, ignorance, and an incapacity for critical thought are prerequisites for membership in trinitarian circles.
Here's an example...
Concerning 1 John 5:7-8 where it has the words "In heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth" are words that are not found in any Greek Manuscript before the 15th or 16th century and in no ancient Version. - E. W. Bullinger., A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament: (London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1975), p. 11 of Appendix A.
Trinitarians...
You are changing the Scriptures. Or 2 Peter 2:21 says the Bible is not to be privately interpreted. Or why are you denying the words of the Apostles?
View attachment 2138
Again, this is my whole point. You folks keep using Scripture that's either taken out of context, or not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation.You keep saying such stupid things, and demonstrating through this picture that you have your eyes shut as tight as you can get them to prevent yourself from seeing the truth.
Matt 3:16-17 - "After He was baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and settling on Him, 17 and behold, a voice from the heavens [Father] said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”"
Matt 28:19 - "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"
Here's how it works. If you quote a verse about Jesus then you're quoting a verse about Jesus. If you quote a verse about the Father then you're quoting a verse about the Father. If you quote a verse about the Holy Spirit then you're quoting a verse about the Holy Spirit. We all can agree on that much. Super simple.You keep saying such stupid things, and demonstrating through this picture that you have your eyes shut as tight as you can get them to prevent yourself from seeing the truth.
Matt 3:16-17 - "After He was baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and settling on Him, 17 and behold, a voice from the heavens [Father] said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”"
Matt 28:19 - "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit"
There is not a single translation of Scripture that does not include all three in Matt 28:19. These words were not added, but were part of the original text of the oldest manuscripts of the book of Matthew.Again, this is my whole point. You folks keep using Scripture that's either taken out of context, or not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation.
The early church was always baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus until the development of the Trinity doctrine in the 2nd century. The Catholics acknowledge baptism was changed and Scripture such as Matthew 28:19 that was never in the Bible was added by them.
Baptism was changed from the name of Jesus to the words Father, Son and Holy Ghost in the 2nd Century. -Britannica Encyclopedia, 11th Edition, Volume 3, page 365.
Some did, as is indicated in Acts 2:38, but the majority seem to have used all three names in baptism. Canney seems to be a very biased, human authored book, and does not appear to be very reliable.The early church baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus until the second century. - Canney Encyclopedia of Religion, page 53.
Again, a biased, human authored book.Christian baptism was administered using the words "in the name of Jesus." page 377. Baptism was always done in the name of Jesus until the time of Justin Martyr, page 389. - Hastings Encyclopedia of Religion,Volume 2.
Catholics have changed so much that the Scripture teaches that they are barely Christian at all; they are more papist than Christian. But if they are claiming to have "changed" the "baptismal formula", then it had been changed before and they were correcting it to what Scripture shows in Matt 28:19.Here the authors acknowledged that the baptismal formula was changed by their church. - Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 2, page 263.
Let's look at this verse closely for a minute.Here's how it works. If you quote a verse about Jesus then you're quoting a verse about Jesus. If you quote a verse about the Father then you're quoting a verse about the Father. If you quote a verse about the Holy Spirit then you're quoting a verse about the Holy Spirit. We all can agree on that much. Super simple.
What you cannot do is quote a verse about the Trinity, anything that defines God as three persons, or any such similar sort of formula that define God as three. Hence, Trinitarianism is a doctrine and a theology, not actually Scripture. The Bible doesn't invite anyone to define God outside of one person.
God is explicitly defined as one person:
1 Corinthians 8
6But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.