• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can someone explain the Trinity please...

moorea944

Well-Known Member
God the Son is literally the same as the Son of God. “And the Word, i.e., the Son of God or God the Son, was with God, i.e., God the Father.”

What is the difference? None!

What is not in the bible is “And the Word was a god” this you should argue with the jw.

The word God is Elohim [SH430] in Hebrew. This is what Deuteronomy 6:4 was actually saying.

Deuteronomy 6:4 "Jehovah our Elohim is one/echad-SH259 Jehovah"

The word “Elohim” being plural shows that God, i.e., [God/Father, God/Son, God/Holy Spirit] is the LORD, is more than one, yet is "ONE/ECHAD-SH259 United Jehovah/LORD". Hence, we have the Trinity. Echad-SH259: a united ONE, and not Yachid-SH3173: an only one.

I think the problem is with your understanding with Elohim. Elohim is plural for Eloah.

El - Power or might. God's power

Eloah - MIghty One. One's whose might is derived from El. Deity in specific manifestation.

Elohim - Plural form of Eloah. Deity in multitudimous manifestation. The word, though plural, is often used with a singular verb, indicating that thought the Elohim may constitute a multitude, one-Etermal Spirit motivates them all, thus revealing Deity in manfiestation. Angels can be Elohim, the judges, Priests, but mostly it's referring to the angels. God manifested in the angels.
 

allfoak

Alchemist
Salvation does not come from the manipulation of the truth.
I could use the same bible to prove my point just like everyone else does.
What good would it do?
Would it show which one of us is more clever or more foolish?
There are already enough people making a mockery of truth.

Fallen, fallen is Babylon the Great!
 

JayJayDee

Avid JW Bible Student
If you can adulterate the very beginning of this gospel, i.e., John 1:1 “And the Word was God” then how can you fully understand the rest of the book? You simply cannot, can you? The same way the Jews in Christ’s time, they could not understand that He is the Christ, the Son of God. They can’t comprehend this then the same way you can’t today.

And you know what's funny....the gospels were not written with a trinity in mind because all the writers were Jewish and the Jews have never believed in a trinity. The trinity did not enter Christianity....it was adopted into Christendom....do you know the difference? Placing any other god in the same position as the Father, whom Jesus himself identified as "the only true God" (John 17:3) is where the real blasphemy lies.

This is what you cannot comprehend.

Today we have the full gospel of John written as our guide on how to understand who the Christ is, unlike the Jews back then they don’t have this gospel of John but they have the Lord Jesus Christ in the flesh right before their very eyes and still they did not believe Him, but the Lord Jesus Christ said to His disciples and not to the unbelieving Jews,

And if you were to read the gospel of John in Greek, you would not see a trinity of any description. If you are trained to read it into verses in the gospels you will see nothing else....but in Greek it is missing, just as a triune godhead was completely missing in the OT. If Jesus was Jewish, he never taught such a blasphemous thing because it is a breach of the first commandment. So who are the "workers of lawlessness"?
 

JayJayDee

Avid JW Bible Student
Those who do not believe that the Lord Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, are not His sheep. Who gives eternal life but God?

Jn 5:21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.

Who gives Jesus his authority to do anything? He does not claim to BE the authority but to have it granted to him by his Father. (Matt 28:19)

Who granted Jesus his power on earth? He could do nothing without the holy spirit. Before his anointing he was just plain Jesus of Nazareth. He became "the Christ" with his anointing at age 30. If he was fully God and fully man, why was this not in evidence before his baptism? Why were his own siblings unconvinced that he was the Messiah until after he died? If he had miraculous abilities, they would have known about it. His fellow countrymen described him as merely "the carpenter's son".....meaning that there was nothing really special about him growing up. If he was fully God, how is it possible that he needed to sit with the teachers of the law asking them questions?

He was not known as a teacher until after his baptism.
 

JayJayDee

Avid JW Bible Student
The Lord Jesus said in verse 29, “My Father is greater than all” and then He said in verse 30, “I and the Father are one”.

Jesus also said "the Father is greater than I am"...what do you make of that? If you apply the same meaning to the words above, then you have a dilemma.

Lev 24:16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.

Who is a blasphemer? One who puts another god in place of Jehovah. What is the name of "The Lord" in this verse?
It's the Tetragrammaton that is in that passage of scripture so who is blaspheming by putting the name of Jesus in place of Jehovah.

Will you ever get this? Apparently not......
 

moorea944

Well-Known Member
Who gives Jesus his authority to do anything? He does not claim to BE the authority but to have it granted to him by his Father. (Matt 28:19)

Who granted Jesus his power on earth? He could do nothing without the holy spirit. Before his anointing he was just plain Jesus of Nazareth. He became "the Christ" with his anointing at age 30. If he was fully God and fully man, why was this not in evidence before his baptism? Why were his own siblings unconvinced that he was the Messiah until after he died? If he had miraculous abilities, they would have known about it. His fellow countrymen described him as merely "the carpenter's son".....meaning that there was nothing really special about him growing up. If he was fully God, how is it possible that he needed to sit with the teachers of the law asking them questions?

He was not known as a teacher until after his baptism.
Good point! So many people of the world dont see this! It's .. Jesus is God and that's it!!! Ugghh... Jesus could do nothing without the Father, he also says that. He was God's only begotten. The first fruits of creation (second creation as Paul puts it). My father is greater than I.... Before Abraham was, I am.... meaning people were taught about the Gospel and about a coming messiah... before Ahraham. .... So many wonderful books and verses about our Lord Jesus.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
John 17:20-21....“I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me."
This is a unity of purpose and spirit, between Jesus and his Father and between them and his disciples.....unless you believe that Jesus' disciples were part of the trinity too?
You’ve been quoting 1Cor 1:10 about divisions in Corinth. This maybe the opportunity to answer that question. Why were they quarrelling in Corinth? Was it because of different doctrines? NO! Not at that time. The doctrine is the same but the people in Corinth were having problems on whom to follow as their leaders. They were divided into three or four factions and as a symbol or sign of their pledge or oath to their leader or group the people were baptized into this group headed by the leader they choose.

Paul asked in verse 13 “Is Christ divided?” Are we today? Yes! Because of different doctrines, but have you notice that these Christians in Corinth all have the same doctrines to begin with and they are not yet divided as we are today.

So, the question is what started the divisions between Christians from Paul’s time to the present time? Different doctrines!

Any church today will require you to be baptized into their doctrine as a pledge or assurance that you are really committed to this particular church. Now, where do you think this idea of baptizing a person so s/he could become a member of a church? 1st Corinthians chapter 1.

Are they all one in Christ or “Is Christ divided”? Only God can know this.

And this is what the Lord Jesus was saying in John 17:20 ”that they may all be one” as in one Body of Christ. Who placed a True Christian into the Body of Christ? Was it not the Holy Spirit? YES!

1CO 12:12 For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.
1CO 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

This is what the Lord Jesus Christ was saying in,

ACTS 1:5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

Baptized with the Holy Spirit into the Body of Christ, and there is only ONE Body of Christ, the True “Church of God which He purchased with His own blood –Acts 20:28”

Now, God/Father unity with His only God/Son is different from their unity with the true believers.

JN 20:17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’ ”

The Lord Jesus Christ said “My Father and your Father and My God and your God

The Lord Jesus’ union with His Father is as “the only begotten God –John 1:18” while the disciples are through adoptions. “He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ –Eph 1:5”, “waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons –Romans 8:23. Read also John 1:12-13.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
You trinity is not in the Bible....but "a man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still". You have your fingers firmly stuck in your trinitarian ears. The devil has you worshipping the wrong "god".
Did you read Deuteronomy 6:4?

The word God is Elohim [SH430] in Hebrew. This is what Deuteronomy 6:4 was actually saying. Deuteronomy 6:4 "Jehovah our Elohim is one/echad-SH259 Jehovah"

The word “Elohim” being plural shows that God, i.e., [God/Father, God/Son, God/Holy Spirit] is the LORD, is more than one, yet is "ONE/ECHAD-SH259 United Jehovah/LORD". Hence, we have the Trinity. Echad-SH259: a united ONE, and not Yachid-SH3173: an only one.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
Anyway you put it, your making Jesus God. So it doesnt matter what I say or write to you. I your eyes, Jesus will always be God. In John 1, Logos is not God Himself. I think you got it wrong on that one. Logos is God's Word, the Word of God. It is not saying that it is Jesus.
I was just following your premise. You said,
The logos was with God, it was God. Of course it was, that was His Word.
”The logos was with God, it was God” Here you have it right from verse 1 in 2nd and 3dr clauses “and the Word was with God” “and the Word was God”, but your problem is you can’t connect the “Word” from verse 1 with the pronoun “HIM” in verse 3 as the same or one person.

I DID NOT ADD VERSE 3 in the gospel of John just to make my point.
IOW, whether I read the gospel of John or not verse 3 will still be there. Therefore, if you and I choose to read the gospel of John, then you and I MUST read it, the gospel, with verse 3 as part of John’s gospel whether we like it or not. If you read it properly the pronoun “HIM” in verse 3 is the “Word” in verse 1.
 
Last edited:

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
I think the problem is with your understanding with Elohim. Elohim is plural for Eloah.


El - Power or might. God's power


Eloah - MIghty One. One's whose might is derived from El. Deity in specific manifestation.


Elohim - Plural form of Eloah. Deity in multitudimous manifestation. The word, though plural, is often used with a singular verb, indicating that thought the Elohim may constitute a multitude, one-Etermal Spirit motivates them all, thus revealing Deity in manfiestation. Angels can be Elohim, the judges, Priests, but mostly it's referring to the angels. God manifested in the angels.
I think the problem is with your analysis from singular “EL” the root word of the plural “ELOHIM” and “ELOAH”.

When the word “Elohim” is use in reference to the “LORD” like the one in Deuteronomy 6:4 you cannot deny the plural word “Elohim” as more than one and yet ONE/ECHAD/UNITED/UNIFIED JEHOVAH, can you?

Now, you say “Angels can be Elohim, the judges, Priests” but the context that we are debating, i.e., Dt 6:4 has nothing to with “Angels, judges, Priests”, but with the plural God/Elohim as ONE/ECHAD/UNITED/UNIFIED JEHOVAH.
 

Kolibri

Well-Known Member
I think the problem is with your analysis from singular “EL” the root word of the plural “ELOHIM” and “ELOAH”.

When the word “Elohim” is use in reference to the “LORD” like the one in Deuteronomy 6:4 you cannot deny the plural word “Elohim” as more than one and yet ONE/ECHAD/UNITED/UNIFIED JEHOVAH, can you?

Now, you say “Angels can be Elohim, the judges, Priests” but the context that we are debating, i.e., Dt 6:4 has nothing to with “Angels, judges, Priests”, but with the plural God/Elohim as ONE/ECHAD/UNITED/UNIFIED JEHOVAH.

Plurality does not always mean multiples. 'Elo-him' was also used with non-trinitarian false gods such as Dagon (1 Sa 5:7b), Ashtoreth (1 Ki 11:5), and Marduk (Da 1:2b). These examples show that sometimes the Hebrew uses the plural of 'eloh'ah intensively. It denotes majesty, dignity, or excellence.

'Elo-him' is also used to denote a simple plurality, But you can not assume that to be the case.
 

JayJayDee

Avid JW Bible Student
You’ve been quoting 1Cor 1:10 about divisions in Corinth. This maybe the opportunity to answer that question. Why were they quarrelling in Corinth? Was it because of different doctrines? NO! Not at that time. The doctrine is the same but the people in Corinth were having problems on whom to follow as their leaders. They were divided into three or four factions and as a symbol or sign of their pledge or oath to their leader or group the people were baptized into this group headed by the leader they choose.

Paul asked in verse 13 “Is Christ divided?” Are we today? Yes! Because of different doctrines, but have you notice that these Christians in Corinth all have the same doctrines to begin with and they are not yet divided as we are today.

What is your point?

Division is division. Who created the division?.....men. What are "factions"? Sects centred around following men. If they were united in belief then what was the point of following one person as opposed to another as leader?

"The Greek word (hai′re·sis, from which comes the English word “heresy”) thus translated means “choice” (Lev 22:18, LXX) or “that which is chosen,” hence “a body of men separating themselves from others and following their own tenets [asect or party].” (Thayer’s Greek-EnglishLexiconoftheNewTestament, 1889, p. 16) This term is applied to the adherents of the two prominent branches of Judaism, the Pharisees and Sadducees. (Acts 5:17; 15:5; 26:5) Non-Christians also called Christianity a “sect” or “the sect of the Nazarenes,” possibly viewing it as a break-off from Judaism.—Acts 24:5, 14; 28:22.

Jesus Christ, prayed that unity might prevail among his followers (John 17:21), and the apostles were vitally interested in preserving the oneness of the Christian congregation. (1Cor 1:10; Jude 17-19) Disunity in belief could give rise to fierce disputing, dissension, and even enmity. (Compare Acts 23:7-10.) So sects were to be avoided, being among the works of the flesh. (Gal 5:19-21) Christians were warned against becoming promoters of sects or being led astray by false teachers. (Acts 20:28; 2 Tim 2:17, 18; 2 Pet 2:1) In his letter to Titus, the apostle Paul directed that, after being admonished twice, a man who continued promoting a sect be rejected, evidently meaning that he be expelled from the congregation. (Titus 3:10) Those who refused to become involved in creating divisions within the congregation or in supporting a particular faction would distinguish themselves by their faithful course and give evidence of having God’s approval. " (Insight Volumes "Sects" WTBTS)

There was to be no division on any basis. Paul made that clear, so where does that leave Christendom? Epic fail!

Are they all one in Christ or “Is Christ divided”? Only God can know this.

We had better know this too or else how would we obey God's command to "get out of Babylon the great" before God brings her to her end? (Rev 18:4, 5) In the harvest time, angels are instructed to gather the "weeds" of false Christianity first and pitch them into the oven for destruction. Then he will gather the "wheat" into his storehouse. That time is rapidly approaching. The angels are ready to reap their harvest.

And this is what the Lord Jesus was saying in John 17:20 ”that they may all be one” as in one Body of Christ. Who placed a True Christian into the Body of Christ? Was it not the Holy Spirit? YES!

1CO 12:12 For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.
1CO 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

This is what the Lord Jesus Christ was saying in,

ACTS 1:5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

Baptized with the Holy Spirit into the Body of Christ, and there is only ONE Body of Christ, the True “Church of God which He purchased with His own blood –Acts 20:28”
Actually the Interlinear translates that a little differently......

Acts 20:28 "Watch out for yourselves and for all the flock in which the Holy Spirit has placed you overseers, to shepherd the church of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own Son." (Mounce Interlinear)

Bias towards the trinity in your translation......much? o_O


Paul's words apply only to those with "the heavenly calling" (Heb 3:1) Not all Christians have "the heavenly calling" for the simple reason that these are chosen by God for rulership with Christ in his kingdom. As "kings and priests" they are not going to rule one another, nor do they need priests because they have left their imperfect flesh behind and are no longer sinners.
So over whom do these ones rule and for whom do they perform their duties as priests?
They need subjects and sinners......who are they? You never answer this.


Now, God/Father unity with His only God/Son is different from their unity with the true believers.

Scripture to back this up please. This is the same oneness......where does it state a different "oneness"?

JN 20:17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’ ”

The Lord Jesus Christ said “My Father and your Father and My God and your God

Jesus is equating his relationship with God to Mary's. He is the same God and Father to Jesus as he is to Mary. How can you not see that?

The Lord Jesus’ union with His Father is as “the only begotten God –John 1:18” while the disciples are through adoptions. “He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ –Eph 1:5”, “waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons –Romans 8:23. Read also John 1:12-13.

Exactly. Jesus is the already part of Jehovah's heavenly family because he is the natural "only begotten son" of his Father.
Those who are chosen to be his "brothers" must be "adopted" because one cannot become part of the heavenly family unless they undergo a new birth as spirit beings to dwell in heaven. This is what it means to be "born again"...given a new birth in a completely different body.

What on earth do you believe the reason for going to heaven is? If they are to be "kings and priests" who are resurrected "first", (Rev 20:6) then who are their subjects and who are resurrected after them....and where?

In his Revelation, the apostle John sees the heavenly new Jerusalem "coming down" to rule "men". He then describes the life that humans can expect to live......

"Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.” Then He who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” And He said to me, “Write, for these words are true and faithful.
” (Revelation 21:2-5 NKJV)

There will be a return to God's rulership in the very capable hands of Jehovah's appointed king and his "joint-heirs".
This is the kingdom Jesus told us to pray for. Your version makes no sense at all. You have all chiefs and no Indians. :p
 

Trimijopulos

Hard-core atheist
Premium Member
El - Power or might. God's power
El is the God of Israel, the principal God whose son is Yahweh.
Let us not read the Bible selevtively or apply a theological explanation when it is of advantage to our point of view.
The gods in the Tanakh are persons not impersonal powers.

Eloah - MIghty One. One's whose might is derived from El. Deity in specific manifestation.

Elohim - Plural form of Eloah. Deity in multitudimous manifestation. The word, though plural, is often used with a singular verb, indicating that thought the Elohim may constitute a multitude, one-Etermal Spirit motivates them all, thus revealing Deity in manfiestation. Angels can be Elohim, the judges, Priests, but mostly it's referring to the angels. God manifested in the angels.
If the term “lords” is used in translating “Elohim” there is no need to distinguish between Judges, Angels, gods and God.

The word Elohim is unique among all the languages: it is used as the name of the gods during the various stages they went through until becoming immaterial heavenly beings. That is, Shepherds, Bulls (the Israelites returned to the Bull worship while Moses was on the mountain), Judges, Messengers (Angels), gods and God.

You may not like the fact that the concept of gods was not originated by the Jewish or the Christian theologians, but it remains a fact. The concept went through the above mentioned stages starting with that of the “Shepherd” (the lord of the human flock) and so the God is still called Shepherd.
 

Trimijopulos

Hard-core atheist
Premium Member
I DID NOT ADD VERSE 3 in the gospel of John just to make my point.
IOW, whether I read the gospel of John or not verse 3 will still be there. Therefore, if you and I choose to read the gospel of John, then you and I MUST read it, the gospel, with verse 3 as part of John’s gospel whether we like it or not. If you read it properly the pronoun “HIM” in verse 3 is the “Word” in verse 1.

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

There are differences among the various translations but all the versions available of the original Greek text agree with the above.
The trick used is that they intentionally mistranslate the last clause.

λόγος = word
θεὸς
= God

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος,
In the beginning was the Word,

καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν,
and the Word was with God,

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
and God was the Word.

not as in every English translation: and the Word was God

The term λόγος had been borrowed from the ancient Greek idealistic philosophy where every philosopher provided his own understanding of the term - as its main meanings are word (spoken word) and reason, logic.
In other words none of them had something particular in mind and the writer of the gospel in question used it with the intention to present the God (the creator, not Jesus) as something impersonal, vague, something not clearly perceptible.

Cunning philosophizing theologians.;)

Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν.
He was in the beginning with God.

The God who was the Word nhimself, was in the beginning with God himself!!

And now verse 3:

πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν ὃ γέγονεν.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The translation is correct but the sense of the verse stinks. It is clear here that the word spoken by God is meant (the command for universe to come into being) and so what we are to understand is that if God was mute, without words, there would have been no universe!!

Sheer theological meaningless verbocity.
They were imitating the ancient Egyptian theology where the self-created god (one of the many, not the God of monotheism) was known to the Greeks as «Καμήφης» Kamefes from the Egyptian Ka-mut-ef meaning the Bull of his mother, i.e. he who impregnated his mother in order to give birth to him.:eek:
 

moorea944

Well-Known Member
El is the God of Israel, the principal God whose son is Yahweh.
Let us not read the Bible selevtively or apply a theological explanation when it is of advantage to our point of view.
The gods in the Tanakh are persons not impersonal powers.


If the term “lords” is used in translating “Elohim” there is no need to distinguish between Judges, Angels, gods and God.

The word Elohim is unique among all the languages: it is used as the name of the gods during the various stages they went through until becoming immaterial heavenly beings. That is, Shepherds, Bulls (the Israelites returned to the Bull worship while Moses was on the mountain), Judges, Messengers (Angels), gods and God.

You may not like the fact that the concept of gods was not originated by the Jewish or the Christian theologians, but it remains a fact. The concept went through the above mentioned stages starting with that of the “Shepherd” (the lord of the human flock) and so the God is still called Shepherd.
Your version......
 

Unification

Well-Known Member
Reincarnation is not a bible teaching. It is not even hinted at. Reincarnation does not equate with resurrection at all. Whatever spirit is inspiring this guy to believe or "remember" as he does, it is not the holy spirit.

A Spirit who's bible isn't their God.
 

Unification

Well-Known Member
I am not going to report you. I can however explain my position and your position and why my conclusions are so very much different. it is tied to one statement you made: "The Bible is corrupt."
You, and you can correct me if I am wrong, believe that the Bible is unreliable and full of error. I, on the other hand, see it as having thousands of of manuscripts and fragments to review. A history that makes it virtually completely and reliably translatable.

People claim what they have is God's thoughts, and thus claim they are prophets. But we are in essence told a Galatians 1:6-9 and Acts 17:11 that we need to prove a teacher's words against already revealed Scripture. Because what this man teaches and "remembers" does not match the Bible I see what he has, at best, something "artfully contrived", and yet still a "false story." (2 Peter 1:16)

If my comments were baseless I would apologize. If I felt I was slandering him, as a person, I would apologize. But I am not, I am explaining why I feel @cataway is correct in saying this is "over the top". The information he has is not in line with the Bible, so the information, and whatever unseen influence there is in this man's life, is proved misleading. As far as I know, he could be very sincere in his misinformation.
John 21:25King James Version (KJV)
25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
 

cataway

Well-Known Member
You are promoting a bible as God and going past what is written in the OT.
I can honestly say I have never promoted the bible ''as God''. I have however promoted the bible as the written word of God.

you have also said, at post #1678 that ,'' i am going past what is written in the OT '' . and yet for some unknown reason you promote doctrines that are not even in the bible .
for your part ,it would be good if you would ask us what we hold to be true. and please stop making accusations about what we hold to be true.
 
Top