Who IS "The Only TRUE God"- as Jesus put it?

[abysslightdarkness]

To those who thinks Jesus and YHWH ARE godS & trinity

Reasons that they are not GOD see below

YHWH can be tempted

DEU 6:16, Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.

JOB 2:3, And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.

ACT 15:10, Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
[SEE ALSO: EXO 17:2; MAL 3:15; MAT 4:7]

plus the temptation story of Jesus already shows very explicitly that Jesus is not perfect.
PLease do compare with James 1:13 (Codex Sinacticus)

Jesus is not god

ISA 43:10, Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

MAR 6:1, And he went out from thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples follow him. ... 5 And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.

MAR 10:18, And Jesus said unto him,Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

JOH 14:28, Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

JOH 20:17, Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

1COR 15:25, For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. ... 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

COL 3:1, If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.

1TIM 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

[SEE ALSO: ISA 45:5; MAT 20:23, 24:36, 27:46; MAR 16:19; LUK 2:52; JOH 5:19, 8:28,40, 16:28; ACT 2:22, 13:23, 17:30-31; ROM 1:3; 2TIM 2:8; HEB 1:1-3, 2:9-18; 1PET 3:21-22, REV 22:16.]

YHWH creates evil

ISA 45:7, I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil.* I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.

JER 18:11, *Now therefore go to, speak to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: ....

(SEE ALSO: GEN 3:1; JUDG 9:23; JOB 42:11; JER 18:11; EZE 20:25; AMO 3:6)

YHWH the "Righteous"

NUM 31:17, *Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 *But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

LEV 26:13, I am the LORD your God, ... 16 I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart: and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it. 17 And I will set my face against you, and ye shall be slain before your enemies: they that hate you shall reign over you; and ye shall flee when none pursueth you. 18 And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.

[SEE ALSO: LEV 26:7-8; NUM 5:1-3; DEU 20:16-17; JOS 10:40; JUDG 14:19; EZE 9:5-7]

Jesus not Omniscient

MAR 13:32, But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

LUK 8:45, And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?

JOH 11:33, When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled, 34 And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.


With the verses above ,they show that Jesus and YHWH both aren't fit to become a god even ,let alone in trinity with something like a god. worse still see below

2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned. God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn us to hell.

Dearest readers ,armed with all the above mentioned verses please be still and think for a while can they be god ? even if they want to…. absolutely not.

To those who thinks Jesus and YHWH ARE godS & trinity please explain the above verses

warmest regards
thanks for reading

"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[sojourner]

To those who thinks Jesus and YHWH ARE godS & trinity

Reasons that they are not GOD see below

YHWH can be tempted

DEU 6:16, Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.

JOB 2:3, And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.

ACT 15:10, Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
[SEE ALSO: EXO 17:2; MAL 3:15; MAT 4:7]

plus the temptation story of Jesus already shows very explicitly that Jesus is not perfect.
PLease do compare with James 1:13 (Codex Sinacticus)

Jesus is not god

ISA 43:10, Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

MAR 6:1, And he went out from thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples follow him. ... 5 And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.

MAR 10:18, And Jesus said unto him,Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

JOH 14:28, Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

JOH 20:17, Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

1COR 15:25, For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. ... 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

COL 3:1, If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.

1TIM 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

[SEE ALSO: ISA 45:5; MAT 20:23, 24:36, 27:46; MAR 16:19; LUK 2:52; JOH 5:19, 8:28,40, 16:28; ACT 2:22, 13:23, 17:30-31; ROM 1:3; 2TIM 2:8; HEB 1:1-3, 2:9-18; 1PET 3:21-22, REV 22:16.]

YHWH creates evil

ISA 45:7, I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil.* I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.

JER 18:11, *Now therefore go to, speak to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: ....

(SEE ALSO: GEN 3:1; JUDG 9:23; JOB 42:11; JER 18:11; EZE 20:25; AMO 3:6)

YHWH the "Righteous"

NUM 31:17, *Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 *But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

LEV 26:13, I am the LORD your God, ... 16 I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart: and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it. 17 And I will set my face against you, and ye shall be slain before your enemies: they that hate you shall reign over you; and ye shall flee when none pursueth you. 18 And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.

[SEE ALSO: LEV 26:7-8; NUM 5:1-3; DEU 20:16-17; JOS 10:40; JUDG 14:19; EZE 9:5-7]

Jesus not Omniscient

MAR 13:32, But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

LUK 8:45, And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?

JOH 11:33, When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled, 34 And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.


With the verses above ,they show that Jesus and YHWH both aren't fit to become a god even ,let alone in trinity with something like a god. worse still see below

2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned. God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn us to hell.

Dearest readers ,armed with all the above mentioned verses please be still and think for a while can they be god ? even if they want to…. absolutely not.

To those who thinks Jesus and YHWH ARE godS & trinity please explain the above verses

warmest regards
thanks for reading

"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)

[/quote][/quote]
Same tired song...
Fourth tired verse...

Haven't we suffered through this already? In trial law, there is an objection called "asked and answered." It means that "you aren't allowed to subject the witness to another round of the same question."

 

[sojourner]

Doing research can learn a lot more & sojourne you need to learn more .

He don't know me vewwy well, do he!

when you ask about the context so you do the research i think you should out grow my spoon feeding by now. child ?

Munchausen's Syndrome is a terrible affliction, Mommy Dearest...

for now i'm in a more crucial issues of other research so.....please do your part

Any decent researcher knows that when quotations are used, sources must be cited.
"My part" doesn't include helping you count your toes, Skeezix.

 

[abysslightdarkness]

hi readers

sojurney need to get hold of your child like ness

We understand God to be Trinity, not because "Jesus said so," not because "the Bible said so," not because "the Pope said so," not because "Constantine said so," but because that truth resonates with us. We can find all kinds of textual support for the presence of some kind of Trinitarian understanding in several texts -- whether it presents a fully-formulated doctrine, or not.

You're right. This is a process of community. Writers depend on readers depend on interpreters depend on theologians depend on scholars depend on texts depend on communal understanding.

Please readers ,this is an absolutely a cultish way of fanaticism ,in the case of the bible ,readers depends on the ancient Hebrew and Greeks words in the papyrus -its the actual meanings that depicts the concepts and teachings of YHWH & not the "christian community". sojourner ,a pure absolute rubbish. so "christian communities" if you need to resonate please at least do so to the actual meanings of the ancient Hebrew and Greeks words. if you still have any sense "truth" of your created " book.

sojourner a classic sense of Pure OBLIVIOUSNESS

And this, boys and girls, is the best example of why we don't allow people to smoke crack and operate heavy machinery...

Same tired song...
Fourth tired verse...

Haven't we suffered through this already? In trial law, there is an objection called "asked and answered." It means that "you aren't allowed to subject the witness to another round of the same question.

"

Notice all the verses are from the BIBLE ? thanks sojourner
I rest my case checkmate!!!! LOSER

NEXT PLEASE

yours sincerely

Athanasius : John 1:1 "in the beginning was the word" was Unambiguous. therefore the three parts of the trinity were eternally the same.
Now the verse John 1;1 is not original either they actually follow the text of the Essene called the 'Law'

John
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and theWordwas God.2 He was in the beginning with God.

Essene text 'the Law'
In the beginning was theLaw and theLaw was with God, and theLaw was God. He was in the beginning with God.

Only difference they changed the word 'Law' to 'Word'. How fake is this ? this is plagiarism.
However ,this verse had its history i will mention it in detail later[/COLOR]

this verse "word" /logos in greek concept had never been a part of the judaism this was very new notion to the Jews

however we can actually trace the verse that dates back to ancient Egyptian as early as in the third dynasty.

thanks for reading


"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521) this is the reference are you blind now NO wonder

 

[sojourner]

sojurney need to get hold of your child like ness

Abbie need to get hold of your sanity

Please readers ,this is an absolutely a cultish way of fanaticism ,in the case of the bible ,readers depends on the ancient Hebrew and Greeks words in the papyrus -its the actual meanings that depicts the concepts and teachings of YHWH & not the "christian community".

"Cultish fanaticism." OK, let's look at how meaning is derived from texts, shall we? Most Christians neither speak nor read either ancient Hebrew or ancient Greek. Therefore, we depend upon translators. As my NT prof. says, "If you're not reading the NT in Greek, you're not reading the NT." OK: Translators are not part of "cultic fanaticism."

Most Christians are not well-versed in either cultural anthropology or Biblical anthropology. Therefore, we depend upon exegetes who are well-versed in such disciplines in order to make sense out of the myriad colloquial terms in the texts, and the myriad colloquial assumptions. If we're reading the texts from a post-modern perspective, we're reading them wrong. OK. anthropologists are not "cultic fanaticists."

Most Christians know very little about textual criticism. Therefore, we depend upon such scholars to provide a solid basis for exegesis, so that we know a) what kinds of texts we're dealing with, and b) the nuances of meaning such exegesis can provide. OK. Bible scholars are not part of "cultic fanaticism."

Most Christians are uninformed about theology as a discipline. So we rely on theologians to help us make sense of the truths the texts transmit. OK. Theologians are not "cultic fanaticists."

So, we have this community of writers, editors, redactors, translators, anthropologists, exegetes, and theologians, none of which are "cultic fanaticists."

First accusation easily dispatched.

so "christian communities" if you need to resonate please at least do so to the actual meanings of the ancient Hebrew and Greeks words. if you still have any sense "truth" of your created " book.

And, pray tell, how do we do that responsibly without said community?

We can't! The "actual meanings" of ancient Greek and Hebrew are not black-and-white, and deserve research from the research ... community, nes pas?

Of course the texts are "created." What did you think? They fell out of the sky? Talk about your childish naivete!

Notice all the verses are from the BIBLE ?

Notice that this thread is posted in the Biblical debates section?

thanks sojourner

You're welcome.

I rest my case checkmate!!!!

When a case is rested, it doesn't result in a checkmate. It results in a verdict, or judgment.
Strictly speaking, a judgment denotes neither a "winner" or a "loser," but an application of justice.

The verdict here is that your references to a game of chess and the concept of losing are non sequitur, and, as such, are inadmissible in your pleading your case.

NEXT PLEASE

You go now! Buffet crose! You been here whole hour!

John
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and theWordwas God.2 He was in the beginning with God.

Essene text 'the Law'
In the beginning was theLaw and theLaw was with God, and theLaw was God. He was in the beginning with God.

Only difference they changed the word 'Law' to 'Word'. How fake is this ? this is plagiarism.
However ,this verse had its history i will mention it in detail later[/color]

this verse "word" /logos in greek concept had never been a part of the judaism this was very new notion to the Jews

however we can actually trace the verse that dates back to ancient Egyptian as early as in the third dynasty.

thanks for reading

Once again, since there was no law concerning copying of material, the material in question is not subject to plagiarism. And the early date of the concept only goes to prove my point. So what if the concept of logos was unfamiliar to Jews. It was not unfamiliar to Gentiles. Or are you trying to say that Xy can only legitimately come from Jewish sources? If so, you'd be patently wrong, since the Jewish church very early died out and it was the Gentile church that prevailed. Why do you think the NT was written in GREEK? Oh, that's right! You don't think! Never mind.

You can now go back to mouthing the words of your book, "My First Big Book of Exegesis." (You might want to concentrate [difficult, I know] on the pictures of the kitty-cat in the funny read-and-white-striped hat.)

"I would not read it in a class,
I would not read to save my a**,
I do not like scholarship, you see;
Please now, please now, let me be!"

Maybe the Ancient Hebrew Troll who lives under the bridge can help you with the big words.

 

[abysslightdarkness]

dear friends
Compliments of the day.

as we all can see what sojourner is only capable of ….. so lack of common sense or no sense.

Abbie need to get hold of your sanity

only because of my biblical references found in your bibles. the bible you read are utterly rubbish
just like i can sum up the whole of his last posts AS "toxic RUBBISH"

sorry guys sojourner is so lack of debating skill he still very "YOUNG" with too much FATs clouded in his brain cells see Lev 3:16 '… all fats is the YHWH's'. always

lets continue with my argumentative thesis

Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20

and the Testimonium Flavianum

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

will elaborate on that later see other readers are able to have any info over the forging materials in the bible passages ?

warmest regards
happy reading

"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)[/SIZE]

 

[sojourner]

as we all can see

Who's "we?" You got a mouse in your pocket?

sojourner is only capable of ….. so lack of common sense or no sense.

Yeeeah... Please take note: I'm not the one who cited translators, exegetes, anthropologists and scholars as "cultic fanaticists."

the bible you read are utterly rubbish

The Bible I read are only one singular things. If you am the linguist you professes to be, then all your post wouldn't be fraught with all this mistakes.

Let's see ... the Bible is rubbish, as proven by the best scholars over the course of centuries, who still seem to hod it in the highest literary regard.

sorry guys sojourner is so lack of debating skill he still very "YOUNG" with too much FATs clouded in his brain cells see Lev 3:16 '… all fats is the YHWH's'. always

were you a Thalidamide baby?

lets continue with my argumentative thesis

Translation:
"Let's continue with my 'Mystery Science Theater' rendition of the exegetical process."

Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

So?

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

Which council? What, precisely, were these "insertions" and "alterations?" Any reputable thesis should be specific and evidential, not overgeneralized intimation.

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20

And you know this because...?
What does that passage actually say? Can you enlighten us? What is the Greek there?

and the Testimonium Flavianum

Yes? [hear crickets chirping] What about it?

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

Your point would be...?

will elaborate on that later see other readers are able to have any info over the forging materials in the bible passages ?

The Bible is what it is -- not what you want it to be. Those of us who are not cultic fanaticists understand that. But the cultic fanaticists want to insist that the Bible dropped out of the sky one day, hermetically sealed in Saran Wrap, untouched by human hands.

...and I'm the one with too much fat in my head...

 

[abysslightdarkness]

dear friends
Compliments of the day.

Please dear readers please always remind yourself to rebut with full of references that are pertaining to the issues not the references from yourself please do not follow the example of sojourner this reader seems

Yes? [hear crickets chirping] What about it?

to suffer some form schizophrenia. a schizo level already No wonder all of his posts more than half of the references are from himself. Not from any historical ,archaeological or biblical related references. therefore his stand point is hence to a schizo level only. we can see from his post is full of personal emotions which not apt to be reply any of my posts at all. in fact he has no sense of logical capabilities. for example

M

ost Christians are not well-versed in either cultural anthropology or Biblical anthropology. Therefore, we depend upon exegetes who are well-versed in such disciplines in order to make sense out of the myriad colloquial terms in the texts, and the myriad colloquial assumptions. If we're reading the texts from a post-modern perspective, we're reading them wrong. OK. anthropologists are not "cultic fanaticists."

Needless to say if you are not well verse in that ,is only logical to learn right ? whats the pastors and theologians for ? they are the ones should be teaching you christians and be informed. if you are christian you should have the responsibility and obligation to learn them because is what you believed you are the representatives of your beliefs and if you don't know what you are believing its just pure obliviousness.or its that intentional ???


As you all can see this are the small issues like these can be resolved by merely logical common sense and sojourner is non-capable to even have this understanding needless to say we should not even border about his posts.
please other readers please don't follow sojourner thanks.

...and I'm the one with too much fat in my head...

he is most certainly carry too much fats all around him (see Lev 3:16 ,from this verse ,i hope you can give those fats back to YOUR YHWH now because they belong to YHWH and maybe you can get better)
thus became chemically imbalance on his dino brain therefore can't function like normal brains in addition of some bipolar disorder. i can understand. hope all other readers can ignore sojourner.

We have yet to see any source citations from you ...
Remember, I asked for three things:
the source of your Leo quotation, which council (with sources, please) and the Greek wording of Matt. 28. Provide those and perhaps we'll talk. Otherwise, your diatribe is nothing but so much balloon juice.

YaYA i,d understand that you are suffering from schizo. for you to react like that i understands ,i am not going to provide you any references for you just have to do it yourself schizo and a loser

perhaps we'll talk

who say i going talk to you ,schizo ? i don't talk to schizos sorry so waste of my time especially pertaining to this highly difficult subjects. while you having the schizo thing ,why don't try doing the research yourself

Woah there, Cochise! I believe it was you who said that historians, archaeologists and exegetes were "cultic fanaticists."

In your schizo dreams again. i understand you are forgiven. why don't just lose some of you fats. That will do your health some good. see Lev 3:16




warmest regards
happy reading

"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)[/SIZE]

 

[sojourner]

Please dear readers please always remind yourself to rebut with full of references that are pertaining to the issues not the references from yourself

We have yet to see any source citations from you ...
Remember, I asked for three things:
the source of your Leo quotation, which council (with sources, please) and the Greek wording of Matt. 28. Provide those and perhaps we'll talk. Otherwise, your diatribe is nothing but so much balloon juice.

No wonder all of his posts more than half of the references are from himself. Not from any historical ,archaeological or biblical related references.

Woah there, Cochise! I believe it was you who said that historians, archaeologists and exegetes were "cultic fanaticists."

we can see from his post is full of personal emotions which not apt to be reply any of my posts at all.

Remember, class, syntax is important.

Needless to say if you are not well verse in that ,is only logical to learn right ?

These people have learned the material -- and it is readily available to anyone in the form of commentaries, transliterations, etc. No one is going to take the time to learn ancient languages and the nuances of anthropology and theology unless they want to be a professional in those areas. Just because one is Xian does not mean that one must know all this stuff. That's why we have references available. But wait! All that stuff is, as you claim, "cultic fanaticism." So why bother?

whats the pastors and theologians for ? they are the ones should be teaching you christians and be informed.

And so we are. What's your problem?

if you are christian you should have the responsibility and obligation to learn them because is what you believed you are the representatives of your beliefs and if you don't know what you are believing its just pure obliviousness.or its that intentional ???

so ... here's a non-Xian telling Xians what we "should do as Xians." Don't think too highly of yourself, do you!

As you all can see this are the small issues like these can be resolved by merely logical common sense and sojourner is non-capable to even have this understanding needless to say we should not even border about his posts.

Maybe you could demonstrate some for us? You seem to be doing a very good job of bothering about my posts, yourself. So what is this? "Do as I say and not as I do?" What a wonderful teaching method you've discovered!

he is most certainly carry too much fats all around him (see Lev 3:16 ,from this verse ,i hope you can give those fats back to YOUR YHWH now because they belong to YHWH and maybe you can get better)
thus became chemically imbalance on his dino brain therefore can't function like normal brains in addition of some bipolar disorder. i can understand. hope all other readers can ignore sojourner.

Wow! A Biblical exegete and a psychiatrist! A true renaissance man! Now, if he could only type and think, he might be worth something here. (for want of a nail...)

 

[abysslightdarkness]

lets continue with my argumentative thesis

Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20
see below

לכן אתם לכו ולמדו כל הגוים
וטבלו אותם בשם האב והבן ורוח הקדש

The verse above is taken from the hebrew version of Matt 28:19 this show that the trinity formula of the greek Matt was an later addition. please do some research over the Hebrew words because the trinitarian formula was not there in the first place, its was a later and addition sometime after 325AD
please do use Hebrew dictionary to check the meaning thanks if you don't mind please post it.

Then later they forged more verse like *Mt 28:19 , if not ,they are too few "three in One" verses around in the bible. However ,in the papyrus manuscript of Mt 28:19 , it was found to be added by hand much later while under X-ray examination of the papyrus. They also found the whole piece of the papyrus was corrected 18 times.

Much later ,the church confessed

"Let us examine the facts of the case. The silence of the great and voluminous St Augustine, are admitted facts that militate against the canonicity of the Three Witness, St. Jerome does not seem to know the text. the disputed part does not fond in any manuscripts until 12th century. The Council of Trent is the first certain ecumenical decree, whereby the church established the Canon of Scripture. We cannot say that the Decree of Trent necessarily included the Three Witnesses. Neither condition has yet been verified with certainty;quite the contrary, textual criticism seems to indicate that the Comma Johanninum was not at all times and everywhere want to be read in the Catholic Church, and it is not contained in the Old Latin Vulgate." (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8 pg. 436)


"The baptismal Formula was changed from the name of Jesus christ to the words the father ,son, and holy spirit in the second century."
(see catholic encyclopedia Vol. 2 ,page 263 & youtube)

With all these 'drama' of the doctrine of trinity. we can absolutely see that this verse 1 Jhn 5:7-8 & Mt 28:19 is a pure insertion just to create the Trinity doctrine. NOT the WORDS of YHWH either.

Many theologians believed that Eusebius actually rewrote parts of Josephus work almost immediately after the Council of Nicaea. the passage is about the existence of JESUS and his resurrections stories.Eusebius himself personally argued that falsehood was needed for the benefit of the Church.

Origien himself also admitted to have had many insertions to many jewish historical work as well.
Both of the christian Bishops affirmed that Josephus ddi not acknowledge jesus christ at all. a jewish historian who wrote several books during jesus times or at least not long after the death of Jesus.


and the Testimonium Flavianum

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

will elaborate on that later see other readers are able to have any info over the forging materials in the bible passages ?

warmest regards
happy reading

"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)[/SIZE]

 

[sojourner]

i am not going to provide you any references for you just have to do it yourself schizo and a loser

It's not up to me to provide citations for your postings. However, by forum rules, it is your job to do so...

who say i going talk to you ,schizo ? i don't talk to schizos sorry so waste of my time especially pertaining to this highly difficult subjects. while you having the schizo thing ,why don't try doing the research yourself

You are talking to me. All I'm asking for is simple reference citations. You'd think I had asked for a dissertation on quantum physics! Unless, of course, you don't have any, because you're making it up off the top of your head ... or plagiarizing.

In your schizo dreams again.

As Indigo Montoya said, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
I said:

You're right. This is a process of community. Writers depend on readers depend on interpreters depend on theologians depend on scholars depend on texts depend on communal understanding.

You answered:

Please readers ,this is an absolutely a cultish way of fanaticism ,in the case of the bible ,readers depends on the ancient Hebrew and Greeks words in the papyrus -its the actual meanings that depicts the concepts and teachings of YHWH & not the "christian community".

Guess I'm not dreaming this up, after all...

 

[abysslightdarkness]

hi readers
Compliments of the day.

it's not up to me to provide citations for your postings. However, by forum rules, it is your job to do so...

it is by forums law that you do your own research and not let people spoon-feed you. i suppose your career is opening your mouth 24/7 hahhahhah

You are talking to me. All I'm asking for is simple reference citations. You'd think I had asked for a dissertation on quantum physics! Unless, of course, you don't have any, because you're making it up off the top of your head ... or plagiarizing.

schizo in progress

'this is an absolutely a cultish way of fanaticism' is referring to sojouner only &
the schizo sojouner still in progress

As Indigo Montoya said, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

As long as you understands i don't care ,oops ,you lack this capacity because the schizo sojouner still in progress sorry

warmest regards
happy reading
all readers please do not follow sojouner example thanks

 

[abysslightdarkness]

dear friends
Compliments of the day.

lets continue with my argumentative thesis

i will add on to this post of mine

i suspect there was double changes to the Matt 28:19 because i think there another version of this verse after the first change i think they change the word dipped or immerse to Baptized which is not suppose to be there in the version of the hebrew manuscript of Matthew. i think the changes was a very much in connection to Eusebius and Constantine.

Below the earliest hebrew script of Matt 28:19 is the first to change the words from 'jesus' to 'the father ,son and spirit'. then later they changed from 'dipped' to 'baptized'.


לכו אתם
ושמרו אותם לקיים כל הדברים אשר ציויתי אתכם עד עולם.


all in all ,the verse Matt 28:19 have never intended to address the trinitarian formula.

then later in the greek version with all the changed parts
may i stressed that the above verses are in hebrew of the earliest greek text of Matt which is lost or yet to be discovered. just like the septuagint bible written in greek form translated from the Hebrew which preserved many original Hebrew verses that was changed through the times. sometimes you need to work back wards for the more earlier text in case that is not available.
but they are still many references that refers to Gospel of Matthew was actually a renamed of the gospel of the Hebrew.


Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20
see below

לכן אתם לכו ולמדו כל הגוים
וטבלו אותם בשם האב והבן ורוח הקדש

The verse above is taken from the hebrew version of Matt 28:19 this show that the trinity formula of the greek Matt was an later addition. please do some research over the Hebrew words because the trinitarian formula was not there in the first place, its was a later and addition sometime after 325AD
please do use Hebrew dictionary to check the meaning thanks if you don't mind please post it.

Then later they forged more verse like *Mt 28:19 , if not ,they are too few "three in One" verses around in the bible. However ,in the papyrus manuscript of Mt 28:19 , it was found to be added by hand much later while under X-ray examination of the papyrus. They also found the whole piece of the papyrus was corrected 18 times.

Much later ,the church confessed

"Let us examine the facts of the case. The silence of the great and voluminous St Augustine, are admitted facts that militate against the canonicity of the Three Witness, St. Jerome does not seem to know the text. the disputed part does not fond in any manuscripts until 12th century. The Council of Trent is the first certain ecumenical decree, whereby the church established the Canon of Scripture. We cannot say that the Decree of Trent necessarily included the Three Witnesses. Neither condition has yet been verified with certainty;quite the contrary, textual criticism seems to indicate that the Comma Johanninum was not at all times and everywhere want to be read in the Catholic Church, and it is not contained in the Old Latin Vulgate." (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8 pg. 436)


"The baptismal Formula was changed from the name of Jesus christ to the words the father ,son, and holy spirit in the second century."
(see catholic encyclopedia Vol. 2 ,page 263 & youtube)

With all these 'drama' of the doctrine of trinity. we can absolutely see that this verse 1 Jhn 5:7-8 & Mt 28:19 is a pure insertion just to create the Trinity doctrine. NOT the WORDS of YHWH either.

Many theologians believed that Eusebius actually rewrote parts of Josephus work almost immediately after the Council of Nicaea. the passage is about the existence of JESUS and his resurrections stories.Eusebius himself personally argued that falsehood was needed for the benefit of the Church.

Origien himself also admitted to have had many insertions to many jewish historical work as well.
Both of the christian Bishops affirmed that Josephus ddi not acknowledge jesus christ at all. a jewish historian who wrote several books during jesus times or at least not long after the death of Jesus.


and the Testimonium Flavianum

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

will elaborate on that later see other readers are able to have any info over the forging materials in the bible passages ?

warmest regards
happy reading

"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)[/SIZE]

 

[sojourner]

lets continue with my argumentative thesis

And he uses the term loosely...

Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

Forged which ones? Charged by whom? Dates?

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

Once again, which council? You do realize that there were many church councils?

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20
see below

לכן אתם לכו ולמדו כל הגוים
וטבלו אותם בשם האב והבן ורוח הקדש

The verse above is taken from the hebrew version of Matt 28:19 this show that the trinity formula of the greek Matt was an later addition. please do some research over the Hebrew words because the trinitarian formula was not there in the first place, its was a later and addition sometime after 325AD
please do use Hebrew dictionary to check the meaning thanks if you don't mind please post it.

You do realize that Matthew was written in Greek? So was one of its source documents, Mark.
Any Hebrew version would have come about later. I have studied Matthew extensively with one of the preeminent NT scholars. No mention has ever been made of this alleged "later addition." Additionally, the text, as it stands, shows no difference in writing style and reveals no departure in theology between the bulk of the gospel and the passage in question. In fact, the ending encapsulates the theological thrust of the gospel quite nicely.

Further, there is no scholarly evidence to persuade us that any of Matthew was added post-325, and plenty to show that the passage in question is quite original. Perhaps a later, Hebrew translation was changed?

At any rate, your post does not prove your point. At all.

Much later ,the church confessed

"Let us examine the facts of the case. The silence of the great and voluminous St Augustine, are admitted facts that militate against the canonicity of the Three Witness, St. Jerome does not seem to know the text. the disputed part does not fond in any manuscripts until 12th century. The Council of Trent is the first certain ecumenical decree, whereby the church established the Canon of Scripture. We cannot say that the Decree of Trent necessarily included the Three Witnesses. Neither condition has yet been verified with certainty;quite the contrary, textual criticism seems to indicate that the Comma Johanninum was not at all times and everywhere want to be read in the Catholic Church, and it is not contained in the Old Latin Vulgate." (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8 pg. 436)

To what, specifically, is the church confessing? It certainly doesn't seem to be about the text in question.

"The baptismal Formula was changed from the name of Jesus christ to the words the father ,son, and holy spirit in the second century."
(see catholic encyclopedia Vol. 2 ,page 263 & youtube)

The encyclopedia was written in the early part of the 20th century. There has obviously been much scholarly work done since the writing that reveals information to which the encyclopedia authors were not privy.

Youtube is not a reliable source.

With all these 'drama' of the doctrine of trinity. we can absolutely see that this verse 1 Jhn 5:7-8 & Mt 28:19 is a pure insertion just to create the Trinity doctrine. NOT the WORDS of YHWH either.

Well, this is your first big mistake. The Bible was never considered to be God's words.

Many theologians believed that Eusebius actually rewrote parts of Josephus work almost immediately after the Council of Nicaea. the passage is about the existence of JESUS and his resurrections stories.Eusebius himself personally argued that falsehood was needed for the benefit of the Church.

So? Not compelling in this case.

Origien himself also admitted to have had many insertions to many jewish historical work as well.
Both of the christian Bishops affirmed that Josephus ddi not acknowledge jesus christ at all. a jewish historian who wrote several books during jesus times or at least not long after the death of Jesus.

Again, not compelling in this case.

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

See above.

the forging materials in the bible passages ?

You'd have a really difficult time proving forgery in any case.

 

[sojourner]

it is by forums law that you do your own research and not let people spoon-feed you.

Once again, Munchausen's is a terrible affliction. So... I'm asking you to do your own research, which includes sources.

i suppose your career is opening your mouth 24/7 hahhahhah

Quite oral-receptive, aren't we! "Spoon-feeding," "opening your mouth..." A Binky would be much better for that than what you're doing here.

schizo in progress

[Slogan pained on abbie's mother's pregnant belly, with arrow pointing down.]

'this is an absolutely a cultish way of fanaticism' is referring to sojouner only

Pray tell: What's either "cultish" or "fanatic" about recognizing the need for the scholastic community in the translation and exegetical process?

the schizo still in progress

[found painted crudely (and misspelled) on a piece of cardboard, hanging over abbie's computer station]

i don't care

That was made quite obvious in your first post...

 

[sojourner]

lets continue with my argumentative thesis

Dear God! The insanity continues! Even the Holocaust had an ending...

i suspect there was double changes to the Matt 28:19 because i think there another version of this verse after the first change i think they change the word dipped or immerse to Baptized which is not suppose to be there in the version of the hebrew manuscript of Matthew. i think the changes was a very much in connection to Eusebius and Constantine.

The word baptizo means "to immerse." There was no change. The Greek word was transliterated into the English.

Below the hebrew script of the verse Matt 28:19 is the first change of the words from 'jesus' to 'the father ,son and spirit'. then later they changed the dipped to baptized.

if you'll read more carefully, you'll find that both "Father" and "Son" are included in that Hebrew passage. Additionally, it's clear that you don't understand the full meaning of baptizo.

all in all ,the verse Matt 28:19 have never intended to address the trinitarian formula.

That's your "theory." Hitler had a "theory" too.
It didn't work, either...

Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20
see below

לכן אתם לכו ולמדו כל הגוים
וטבלו אותם בשם האב והבן ורוח הקדש

The verse above is taken from the hebrew version of Matt 28:19 this show that the trinity formula of the greek Matt was an later addition. please do some research over the Hebrew words because the trinitarian formula was not there in the first place, its was a later and addition sometime after 325AD
please do use Hebrew dictionary to check the meaning thanks if you don't mind please post it.

Then later they forged more verse like *Mt 28:19 , if not ,they are too few "three in One" verses around in the bible. However ,in the papyrus manuscript of Mt 28:19 , it was found to be added by hand much later while under X-ray examination of the papyrus. They also found the whole piece of the papyrus was corrected 18 times.

Much later ,the church confessed

"Let us examine the facts of the case. The silence of the great and voluminous St Augustine, are admitted facts that militate against the canonicity of the Three Witness, St. Jerome does not seem to know the text. the disputed part does not fond in any manuscripts until 12th century. The Council of Trent is the first certain ecumenical decree, whereby the church established the Canon of Scripture. We cannot say that the Decree of Trent necessarily included the Three Witnesses. Neither condition has yet been verified with certainty;quite the contrary, textual criticism seems to indicate that the Comma Johanninum was not at all times and everywhere want to be read in the Catholic Church, and it is not contained in the Old Latin Vulgate." (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8 pg. 436)


"The baptismal Formula was changed from the name of Jesus christ to the words the father ,son, and holy spirit in the second century."
(see catholic encyclopedia Vol. 2 ,page 263 & youtube)

With all these 'drama' of the doctrine of trinity. we can absolutely see that this verse 1 Jhn 5:7-8 & Mt 28:19 is a pure insertion just to create the Trinity doctrine. NOT the WORDS of YHWH either.

Many theologians believed that Eusebius actually rewrote parts of Josephus work almost immediately after the Council of Nicaea. the passage is about the existence of JESUS and his resurrections stories.Eusebius himself personally argued that falsehood was needed for the benefit of the Church.

Origien himself also admitted to have had many insertions to many jewish historical work as well.
Both of the christian Bishops affirmed that Josephus ddi not acknowledge jesus christ at all. a jewish historian who wrote several books during jesus times or at least not long after the death of Jesus.


and the Testimonium Flavianum

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

will elaborate on that later see other readers are able to have any info over the forging materials in the bible passages ?

warmest regards
happy reading

Somebody's record has a serious skip...

 

[abysslightdarkness]

you just need to do more research man sojouner happy research

& then you can fill some blanks ,schizo ,sojouner keep progressing

 

[abysslightdarkness]

As i was saying...... will be continue later

dear friends
Compliments of the day.

lets continue with my argumentative thesis

i will add on to this post of mine

i suspect there was double changes to the Matt 28:19 because i think there another version of this verse after the first change i think they change the word dipped or immerse to Baptized which is not suppose to be there in the version of the hebrew manuscript of Matthew. i think the changes was a very much in connection to Eusebius and Constantine.

Below the earliest hebrew script of Matt 28:19 is the first to change the words from 'jesus' to 'the father ,son and spirit'. then later they changed from 'dipped' to 'baptized'.


לכו אתם
ושמרו אותם לקיים כל הדברים אשר ציויתי אתכם עד עולם.


all in all ,the verse Matt 28:19 have never intended to address the trinitarian formula.

then later in the greek version with all the changed parts
may i stressed that the above verses are in hebrew of the earliest greek text of Matt which is now lost or yet to be discovered. just like the septuagint bible written in greek form translated from the early Hebrew text from the LXX which preserved many original Hebrew verses ,that was now changed ,through the times. sometimes you need to work back wards for the more earlier texts in case they are not available.
but they are still many references that refers to Gospel of Matthew was actually a renamed of the gospel of the Hebrew.


Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20
see below

לכן אתם לכו ולמדו כל הגוים
וטבלו אותם בשם האב והבן ורוח הקדש

The verse above is taken from the hebrew version of Matt 28:19 this show that the trinity formula of the greek Matt was an later addition. please do some research over the Hebrew words because the trinitarian formula was not there in the first place, its was a later and addition sometime after 325AD
please do use Hebrew dictionary to check the meaning thanks if you don't mind please post it.

Then later they forged more verse like *Mt 28:19 , if not ,they are too few "three in One" verses around in the bible. However ,in the papyrus manuscript of Mt 28:19 , it was found to be added by hand much later while under X-ray examination of the papyrus. They also found the whole piece of the papyrus was corrected 18 times.

Much later ,the church confessed

"Let us examine the facts of the case. The silence of the great and voluminous St Augustine, are admitted facts that militate against the canonicity of the Three Witness, St. Jerome does not seem to know the text. the disputed part does not fond in any manuscripts until 12th century. The Council of Trent is the first certain ecumenical decree, whereby the church established the Canon of Scripture. We cannot say that the Decree of Trent necessarily included the Three Witnesses. Neither condition has yet been verified with certainty;quite the contrary, textual criticism seems to indicate that the Comma Johanninum was not at all times and everywhere want to be read in the Catholic Church, and it is not contained in the Old Latin Vulgate." (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8 pg. 436)


"The baptismal Formula was changed from the name of Jesus christ to the words the father ,son, and holy spirit in the second century."
(see catholic encyclopedia Vol. 2 ,page 263 & youtube)

With all these 'drama' of the doctrine of trinity. we can absolutely see that this verse 1 Jhn 5:7-8 & Mt 28:19 is a pure insertion just to create the Trinity doctrine. NOT the WORDS of YHWH either.

Many theologians believed that Eusebius actually rewrote parts of Josephus work almost immediately after the Council of Nicaea. the passage is about the existence of JESUS and his resurrections stories.Eusebius himself personally argued that falsehood was needed for the benefit of the Church.

Origien himself also admitted to have had many insertions to many jewish historical work as well.
Both of the christian Bishops affirmed that Josephus ddi not acknowledge jesus christ at all. a jewish historian who wrote several books during jesus times or at least not long after the death of Jesus.


and the Testimonium Flavianum

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

will elaborate on that later see other readers are able to have any info over the forging materials in the bible passages ?

warmest regards
happy reading

"How well we know ,what profitable superstition this Fable of christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)[/SIZE]

 

[sojourner]

then later in the greek version with all the changed parts

If you're opining that there is some earlier, Hebrew version of Matt. from which the Greek version was extrapolated, you'd be wrong. There's no evidence to suggest such, and, in fact, evidence to the contrary.

then later in the greek version with all the changed parts
may i stressed that the above verses are in hebrew of the earliest greek text of Matt which is now lost or yet to be discovered. just like the septuagint bible written in greek form translated from the early Hebrew text from the LXX which preserved many original Hebrew verses ,that was now changed ,through the times. sometimes you need to work back wards for the more earlier texts in case they are not available.
but they are still many references that refers to Gospel of Matthew was actually a renamed of the gospel of the Hebrew.

I sure would be interested to know your sources. Otherwise, this looks like nothing more than fairy-tale.

Eusebius charged with forging the biblical verses and historical records

Immediately after the council they were many insertions and alterations of the historical and biblical materials.

one of them is the insertions of matt 28:19-20
see below

לכן אתם לכו ולמדו כל הגוים
וטבלו אותם בשם האב והבן ורוח הקדש

The verse above is taken from the hebrew version of Matt 28:19 this show that the trinity formula of the greek Matt was an later addition. please do some research over the Hebrew words because the trinitarian formula was not there in the first place, its was a later and addition sometime after 325AD
please do use Hebrew dictionary to check the meaning thanks if you don't mind please post it.

Then later they forged more verse like *Mt 28:19 , if not ,they are too few "three in One" verses around in the bible. However ,in the papyrus manuscript of Mt 28:19 , it was found to be added by hand much later while under X-ray examination of the papyrus. They also found the whole piece of the papyrus was corrected 18 times.

Much later ,the church confessed

"Let us examine the facts of the case. The silence of the great and voluminous St Augustine, are admitted facts that militate against the canonicity of the Three Witness, St. Jerome does not seem to know the text. the disputed part does not fond in any manuscripts until 12th century. The Council of Trent is the first certain ecumenical decree, whereby the church established the Canon of Scripture. We cannot say that the Decree of Trent necessarily included the Three Witnesses. Neither condition has yet been verified with certainty;quite the contrary, textual criticism seems to indicate that the Comma Johanninum was not at all times and everywhere want to be read in the Catholic Church, and it is not contained in the Old Latin Vulgate." (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 8 pg. 436)


"The baptismal Formula was changed from the name of Jesus christ to the words the father ,son, and holy spirit in the second century."
(see catholic encyclopedia Vol. 2 ,page 263 & youtube)

With all these 'drama' of the doctrine of trinity. we can absolutely see that this verse 1 Jhn 5:7-8 & Mt 28:19 is a pure insertion just to create the Trinity doctrine. NOT the WORDS of YHWH either.

Many theologians believed that Eusebius actually rewrote parts of Josephus work almost immediately after the Council of Nicaea. the passage is about the existence of JESUS and his resurrections stories.Eusebius himself personally argued that falsehood was needed for the benefit of the Church.

Origien himself also admitted to have had many insertions to many jewish historical work as well.
Both of the christian Bishops affirmed that Josephus ddi not acknowledge jesus christ at all. a jewish historian who wrote several books during jesus times or at least not long after the death of Jesus.


and the Testimonium Flavianum

Josephus was forced to add informations of Jesus' existence in his Jewish Antiquties.

will elaborate on that later see other readers are able to have any info over the forging materials in the bible passages ?

You've said all of this at least three times now. You have yet to back any of it up. [Hint: frequency of assertion does not = validity of what's being asserted]

The whole "God can't be a Trinity because God can be tempted" didn't work out for ya. Looks like this stab in the dark isn't working out too well, either. Just for funzies, why don't you try something new? At least we won't be bored...

 

[abysslightdarkness]

well

if you are still need spoon-feeding ,don't do your own research

you can keep getting FAT(see Lev 3:16) then , 'sojurner schizo' even this sounds so rhythmic.