Trinity Not In Bible

[hanif]

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 6:4)"

"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. (From the NIV Bible, Mark 12:29)"​

Notice also how Jesus said "our God", which included him to be under GOD Almighty's creation and Divine Authority, and not someone or an entity that is equal to GOD Almighty.

The Bible's New Testament also records Jesus saying: ""Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good–except God alone." (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"

If Jesus doesn't consider himself as "good", then how can any sane person put him on the same level as GOD Almighty?
I have yet to see a good answer to this one by any polytheist trinitarian.

Also, another important point to notice in Mark 10:18 is the word "alone": ""Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good–except God alone." (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"
Jesus in this verse is clearly giving exclusivity to GOD Almighty when he said "alone". If Jesus was truly part of GOD Almighty and/or the trinity lie was true, then Jesus, to say the least, would not have said that.

My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's absurdities regarding Mark 10:18 where Jesus said he was not "good".
Answering Trinity: ​

*** Trinitarian Christians often refer to trinity as the "Holy Trinity". A very powerful statement indeed for a satanic word that doesn't even exist, not even once, in the Bible!!

(a) The Absolute Oneness of GOD Almighty in the Bible:
The early Christians rejected Trinity. Early Christians had major problems and disagreements about who truly Jesus was and whether or not he got crucified or not.
Early Christians' Doctrines confirm Jesus DID NOT GET crucified. See proofs that the early Christians' scriptures during the 1st and 2nd centuries claimed that GOD Almighty Saved Jesus from crucifixion.
The New Testament confirms the Apocalypse (Revelation in Greek) of Peter which claims that Jesus never died on the cross!
The "God" title in the Bible was given to others in the Old and New Testaments. Answering Isaiah 9:6. The "El" (God) title that was given to Jesus in the Old Testament, and the "HOTHEOS" (God) title in the New Testament, were given to others before and after Jesus in the Bible. The only UNIQUE title that exists in the Bible is "Yahweh", which means "The Eternal".

Emanuel, Emmanuel, Yahshua, Yeshua, Yashua, Immanuel and Imanuel. These were all "Godly" names given to others before and after Jesus in the Bible. None of them is unique. Only "Yahweh" was GOD Almighty's Unique Name.

My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's "How can Jesus be God when the Hebrew Bible says God is not a man?" article.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Boy, the fonts and color really help.

I'll remember that the next time I cut and paste religious propaganda.

 

[sojourner]

Some people just can't help buying that wonderful swampland property...:cover:

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Some people just can't help buying that wonderful swampland property...:cover:

Well I never knew that the Trinity wasn't in the Bible. :no:

"Dodge this."

 

[sojourner]

Well I never knew that the Trinity wasn't in the Bible. :no:

"Dodge this."

Darn! There goes my clandestine, evil plan to subjugate the rich and powerful!

 

[SoyLeche]

*** Trinitarian Christians often refer to trinity as the "Holy Trinity". A very powerful statement indeed for a satanic word that doesn't even exist, not even once, in the Bible!!

I may not agree with the traditional concept of the Trinity, but, cummon. It's a satanic word now?

 

[ΩRôghênΩ]

well i dont agree that the holy spirit is ever mentioned as part of the trinity, yet i beliee it. i know that jesus said that I and the father are one, making it dso far a confirmed duality

 

[ΩRôghênΩ]

well i dont agree that the holy spirit is ever mentioned as part of the trinity, yet i belieeve it. i know that jesus said that I and the father are one, making it dso far a confirmed duality

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

In spite of the cut and paste propagandist nature of the OP, he makes some valid points, IMHO. There was some real issue in the early Christianities (and that was intentionally left plural, no typo) including the Marcianites, the Ebbianites and others, regarding the Christology of Jesus. Many different theories were posited as to Jesus' divinity, including the idea that he was born a man, had the spirit of a divine entity enter him at his baptism, and leave him on the cross . . . i.e. . . . "My God, my God, why has thou forsaken (left) me?"

Other early Christian ideas included that Jesus was never a man, but only appeared to be human, a phantasm if you will. I, personally was unaware of these ideas until I heard, recently, a lecture series entitled "The Lost Christianities" from The Great Courses www.TEACH12.com if anyone is interested, and they have many different titles available for listening in the car.

The idea of a Trinity apparently was not settled upon until approximately 300 to 400 years after the time of the historical Jesus. And be aware, Trinity was just one of many competing ideologies regarding Jesus' Christology/Relationship to Yah-wey, it just happens to be the view that survived in what became the Orthodox view of Christianity.

Remember, Orthodoxy/Heresy are merely terms used to describe an accepted vs. un-accepted version, based upon your own vantage point.

B.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Remember, Orthodoxy/Heresy are merely terms used to describe an accepted vs. un-accepted version, based upon your own vantage point.

B.

:ignore:

 

[angellous_evangellous]

In spite of the cut and paste propagandist nature of the OP

The propagandist nature of the OP is a blatant refusal of the poster to interact responsibly with any data - either his point of view or that which he opposes. I don't see any reason why we should dignify such anti-intellectual filth with any type of responsible discussion whatsoever.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

The propagandist nature of the OP is a blatant refusal of the poster to interact responsibly with any data - either his point of view or that which he opposes. I don't see any reason why we should dignify such anti-intellectual filth with any type of responsible discussion whatsoever.

All valid points, tho I still think it could make for an interesting thread, especially if one wants to explore the theistic reasons for the different, competing ideas of Jesus' divinity/Christology.

B.

 

[Booko]

post omitted

Sheesh, hanif, could you post something *readable*?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Sheesh, hanif, could you post something *readable*?

My eyes still hurt from the OP. All that color. :cover:

 

[Booko]

My eyes still hurt from the OP. All that color. :cover:

And random size changes. :faint:

Can we give gifts of the AP Style Guide? It has good info in there on how not to write anything that will stop the eye.

In this instance, my eyes didn't stop...they hurriedly avoided further contact with such busy text. ack

 

[hanif]

READ THIS
The Bible's New Testament also records Jesus saying: ""Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good–except God alone." (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"

If Jesus doesn't consider himself as "good", then how can any sane person put him on the same level as GOD Almighty?
I have yet to see a good answer to this one by any polytheist trinitarian​

 

[sojourner]

READ THIS
The Bible's New Testament also records Jesus saying: ""Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good–except God alone." (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"

If Jesus doesn't consider himself as "good", then how can any sane person put him on the same level as GOD Almighty?
I have yet to see a good answer to this one by any polytheist trinitarian​

I didn't know there could be such a thing as a "polytheist trinitarian." Those two terms are mutually exclusive.:beach:

 

[michel]

READ THIS
The Bible's New Testament also records Jesus saying: ""Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good–except God alone." (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"

If Jesus doesn't consider himself as "good", then how can any sane person put him on the same level as GOD Almighty?​

I have yet to see a good answer to this one by any polytheist trinitarian​

Hanif,

I have decided that there is no purpose whatsoever in trying to explain something to you that you appear to refuse to understand.

Why don't we just leave it at that ? You don't understand our faith, and I have tried, on several occasions, to explain the above points to you. If you can't ot won't understand the explanations, I suggest we call it a day, and give this up.

polytheist trinitarian

That alone goes to show that you appear not to have understood one word of what has been explained to you on many occasions.

 

[Haas]

Father, Son, and Holy spirit are all given attributes of deity in the Bible and there is only 1 God. Therefore the term "tri-unity" or trinity was given to somehow describe Gods unfathomable being... Why can a simple glass of water have these attributes but not the almighty God? Take this simple glass of water, pour a third into an icecube tray, and a third into a pot and boil it til it steams. You come up with gas, liquid, and solid, 3 from 1. Or a scientific term would be, plurality in singularity.

 

[sojourner]

Father, Son, and Holy spirit are all given attributes of deity in the Bible and there is only 1 God. Therefore the term "tri-unity" or trinity was given to somehow describe Gods unfathomable being... Why can a simple glass of water have these attributes but not the almighty God? Take this simple glass of water, pour a third into an icecube tray, and a third into a pot and boil it til it steams. You come up with gas, liquid, and solid, 3 from 1. Or a scientific term would be, plurality in singularity.

wait a minute... that's one of the classic heresies -- that there are simply three different manifestations of the same God. The doctrine of the Trinity states that there are three distinct persons, but one God.