I own a copy of Pope Benedict XVI's "Introduction to Christianity," and no such passage as appears in this video, appears on pages 50-53 of that book. On page 83 there is discussion about the Creed, NOT Matthew 28:19, which uses wording similar to that which appears in this video. The question now is if the author of this video was merely jumbled what the Pope said, merely lifted the quote from the internet without checking it for himself, or was trying to engage in deliberate deception.
The early church was not trinitarian. It took 200 tears or so to concieve of it by Tertullian. And another 125 years for it's adoption. Rome changed it's view. Zephyrinus, Bishop of Rome in 210 AD, said, "I know ONE GOD, Christ Jesus, beside Him I know no other." By 265 AD, the Bishop of Rome was Dionysius. He said some "divide and cut to pieces that most sacred doctrine of the Church of God, the Divine Monarchy, making it as if it were three powers and partitive substances and godheads three."
I carefully thought and pondered for a long time, and even did a little bit of research on this issue. In the end the conclusion I came to can be expressed by the words of the person who posted this video: "The Trinity is in reality AN INTERPRETATION and not a DOCTRINE that YESHUA or His apostles TAUGHT!". I can't find anywhere in the new testament where any apostle expressly taught the trinity as Trinitarian creeds and catechisms.
Genesis tells us that IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH. From the beginning of time GOD was always there so why would he create a son and tell HIM to die. God died for the world AKA Jesus Christ. Believing that God is one and not three is pretty self explanatory.
I always say...why would God need a son when HE is I AM and why in the world we he send someone else to die. If that's the case God seems very cruel to sacrifice his OWN son. But what I RUN INTO is people think WHAT LOVE that he would sacrifice his OWN son to die. Personally, God seems like a coward for not coming down himself IF.....Trinity were true.
One simple question - and I would like some answers. The Trinity is a way of declaring that Jesus is divine and part of the Godhead. JWs reject this. However, look at Heb 1:8 God is speaking:
"But about the Son he says,
Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; "
Why should God call his own Son God?
Here God refers to Christ, the Son as GOD and also states that he is the Son's God.
Those who deny the Trinity will have to first deny the whole of scripture,
I have read all the bogus evidence that trys very hard to show the existance of three persons, that are all God BUT ...distinct and seperate (therefore making 3 distinct and seperate GODS) [...cunning I must say!..] and all is a manipulated philosophilcal LIE !!! Jesus Yeshua is the Almighty God in Flesh. One God in One body One Name ...Jesus!
@neronei your premis is wrong.. there is only one God that reveals himself in three ways.. there is not 3 distinct and seperate Gods... NO one says that there is 3 seperate gods.. all different all doing their own thing...
islam and numerious other sects state that the trinity means there are 3 Gods instead of one... now thats just funny.. shows you arnt as smart as you think...
you should focus on just the nature, charactor of the holy ghost is purpose ect .. you might learn something
My dear brain washed absent minded pawn,it is not us that are stiupid,but it is the trinity that says there are 3 gods;we are just repeating what the thousands of definitions, from the NIcean Creed, Anatasian Creed...ect,have up untill now feverishly tried to define.In the Anastasian Creed for example it states that all the persons are DISTINCT AND SEPERATE being all 3 god. If you are redifining this further again then I will add you to the club proving the trinity is FALSE!!! Lets FOCUS....
God the father... You have Gods holy spirit... or Gods presence on earth.. the same holy spirit that came in the book of acts.. the same holy spirit.. that gives spiritual gifts.. the same holy spirit that dwells within us...
tell me who the holy ghost is... is it totally seperate from God.. ie another God or is it the same
wow, the muslim making this video must be about 4 ys old... these supposed great arguments are childish... i wish muslims were smart.. but they are not..firstly... this guy relies on the roman catholic church for his evidence.. LOL... Now that is funny...
this muslim obviously doesnt know that this church is false & that it has been corupted - its doctrines and theology is false... ERROR number 1.
muslims should lead hard topics alone because they dont understand
For a start my dear IGNORANT dumb friend intitled " LOUDMOUTH "...I AM NOT A MUSLIM !!!. In doing so you have revealed how intelligent and extremly childish you truly are, which is so shamefull and I feel sorry for you... I am realy forcing myself in answering you. The evidence that is given here is clear and obvious and shows that those that belive in the trinity have no ground to stand on biblicaly and so have manipulated the Word of God to sustain this false doctrine!!!
@neronei one has to be very narrowed minded indeed to reject how God chooses to reveal himself... firstly.. lets look at Jesus's baptism... God states this is my son, Gods holy spirit decends apon jesus... How do you intend to explain this.. or i bet you can...
secondly.. at the beginnig of creation God was present, His holy spirit hovered over the water... so hoe do you explain that... there is alot more evidence of course
You are very arogant to state to God how He must reveal Himself seeing that the trinty is an interpretation.God never stated any where in the Bible that He is 3 persons so how can you dictate to Him that He is 3.No where does it show that God is 3.
The baptisim of Jesus just shows the opposite because Jesus is the WORD of God made flesh! So this means He is the VOICE of God !Therefore how did the Father speak from heaven if His voice was in flesh in the water?
@neronei look oh clouded one.. arogant.. now thats funny..if you must know wasnt it the RCC that invented the label trinity... wether you like it or not..wont stop you from going to heaven.. but moving on..
wow you really are mixed up arnt you... 1) there is God the Father...2) there is the Holy ghost or Gods presence on earth... 3) there is Jesus - God come in the flesh..
@MrLoudmouthspeaker I mean this sincerely, I do not wish to argue. I personally do not believe the doctrine of the Trinity, I think it is very man made. I would like to ask you something, if God is love and He is giver of life, then why did he SEND His son to die on the cross. If we are speaking Trinity, then why did God send His most precious, loving, son to die for us! Sounds like a pretty mean and self centered Father. Couldn't he have sent himself!
@1089aef well you can believe right = the name trinity was made it was applied to the evidence given to us from the bible about how God reveals himself to us.. wether you like the name trinity or not doesnt change the fact about who:
1) Jesus is - 2) who Gods holy spirit is - 3) who God the Father is.. if you want dont use the word trinity BUT instead look at the evidence for your self
@1089aef to ask the questions shows me you dont truly understand the subject at hand.. you dont have all the information.. you are grasping at straws..
@MrLoudmouthspeaker You know why I don't understand Trinity, it's because it's not true! Do you know Trinity and the term PERSONS is not even in the Bible? God is one God with many titles that make up His name and that is Jesus Christ!
That is the problem with those who deny the Trinity. If Jesus is not divine, then God sacrificed someone else - a cowardly act of vengeance and akin to a god who is to be BUT , if Jesus IS God incarnate, then God sacrificed himself on the Cross for us - an act of supreme unconditional love - and more akin to the God of the Bible and of whom Jesus spoke about. And a theology which is in total keeping and agreement with the rest of scripture..
@1089aef That is the problem with those who deny the Trinity. If Jesus is not divine, then God sacrificed someone else - a cowardly act of vengeance and akin to a god who is to be appeased like the false gods of the Aztecs demanding human sacrifice BUT , if Jesus IS God incarnate, then God sacrificed himself on the Cross for us - an act of supreme unconditional love - and more akin to the God of whom Jesus spoke about. And a theology which is in total agreement with the rest of scripture..
@1089aef Can you argue that Jesus was the Son of God and the Son of man? And that man the "lamb" died? And as a man he suffered on the cross, "not my will, but thine." Be careful with what you believe or you will begin to think as the gnostics, who believed Jesus was a Spirit, and could not die on the cross. Jesus was both God and Man.
@neronei thirdly you can manipulate scriptures in the way you perfer.. in order to change scripture one then needs to go back to the very first ones and change and reinvent scripture world wide...
Sorry I did not see this one....how can I have manipulated scriptures seeing that I have not yet quoted anything, showing clearly your prejudice.To say that a so called plurality as "WE...US" in the old testament means 3 as a whole unit, and so forcing the scriptures to say that there are 3 Gods (oops PERSONS) in one subtance that is God; that is MANIPULATION. Furthermore asserting that THE TRINITY is the OUTRIGHT truth when really it is affirmed by saying it is just a great MISTERY....no way!
@neronei keep it simple... when a sinner receives God into their life .. they become a new creation in christ... the bible tells us that Gods spirit comes and dwells within them... 2 Tim 1:14 states = Through the power of the Holy Spirit who lives within us, carefully guard the precious truth that has been entrusted to you.
so WHO lives with in us.... - start with an easy question for you..
@LogosTheos - I'm now going to await your attempt to rebut my previous messages — all six of them — which you've conveniently ignored. Get to pecking, bud.
@WordofLifeMinistry I trusts God have preserve His word that I may know the truth, no matter the language. As far as God being Triunion, even in the O T the Trinity is revealed. Does not YHWH speak of His Spirit? Does not YHWH speak of his soul? Is not YHWH a Spirit; are these 3 not the same 1 True God? The information in this video is a weak argument against the truth of the Trinity. Tell me how is it "no man has seen, nor heard the Father at any time" Yet men have both seen and heard YHWH?
All Greek manuscripts include Matthew 28:19, you have no manuscript evidence of corruption, nothing substantiates your claim. You still have to deal with Jude 20-21 and 2 Cor 13:14. The Trinity relies more on a systematic approach to biblical evidence without being inconsistent are superimposing one text over another ex: Deut 6:4 over John 1:1 is dishonest.
@LogosTheos said: "...nothing substantiates your claim."
Eusebius quoted against the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 seventeen times prior to the Council of Nicea (325 AD). In every instance, Eusebius quotes the passage as follows: "Go and make disciples of all nations IN MY NAME." The oldest extant biblical manuscripts to preserve the passage in question, Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Vaticanus (B), are dated ca. 350 AD. Eusebius' numerous quotations preserve an older reading.
@HeroOfChristArchives, You are using a very vague argument with Eusebius, it is unknown rather or not Eusebius quoted that way because of inferior manuscripts, memory loss or he was less careful in accuracy because there was no conflict with Arianism prior. If he quoted the Trinitarian bap fomula after 325 Why didn't he ever mention it's corruption? Very vague argument.
@LogosTheos, So I basically just refuted your argument again. The fallacy of equivocation isn't going to save you here, you have no concrete evidence from existing manuscripts, your argument with Eusebius is too vague and uncertain to draw pure accurate conclusions and there is proof of current Trinitarian formula from early documents. The Didache is one of them.
"These things then ('How can we do this? How can we preach to the Romans, Greeks, Persians etc.?) the disciples of our Saviour would either have said or thought, so by a single addition of a word, He resolved the sum of those things of which they doubted, the sum of them He committed to them in that He ordered them simply and without discriminating, "to go and make disciples of all peoples," but with this important addition, that He said, "IN MY NAME."
@HeroOfChristArchives, First let me school you on textual criticism specifically coming about the dating of specific documents. The reason for me doing this is the fact that you are trying to use the date of the oldest MS copy of the Didache to refute an earlier date. It’s as fallacious as saying since the oldest MS of Eusebius H.E. “the Codex Syriac 1” dates to the middle of the 5th century then his attestation to events before that date are unreliable.
@LogosTheos, You have failed to disprove the authenticity of this document and even if the Didache was “corrupted” you would still have a text dating to the 2nd century with Matt 28:19. And keep in Mind I am using ONE AMONG MANY sources in the early Church that quote Matt 28:19.
"The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition."
@HeroOfChristArchives, I liked how you ignored the authority I quoted , Bruce Metzger. If you are familiar with textual criticism then you should know he is one of the highest authorities in this field. So let me abandon the Didache argument since it isn't shaking you. Look at Irenaus Against Heresies Book III Ch. XVII.
@LogosTheos said: "I liked how you ignored the authority I quoted, Bruce Metzger."
I didn't ignore your citation of Metzger. I ignored the reference itself because most scholars prior to Metzger had already firmly dated the Didache to the 2nd century.
@LogosTheos said: "Look at Irenaeus, 'Against Heresies', Book III, Ch. XVII"
No need for capitalization. The earliest MS containing this text of Irenaeus is written in Latin and dates rather late. As with Ignatius, Irenaeus' works were expanded.
@HeroOfChristArchives, Can you quote aleast three authorities that support a "mysterious" interpolation of Matthew 28:19 into Book III, Ch. XVII Against Heresies? Your at it again with the equivocation fallacy, these types of arguments are unscholary.
@HeroOfChristArchives, "And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God, He said to them, "Go and teach all nations, BAPTIZING THEM IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, AND OF THE SON, AND OF THE HOLY GHOST." For [God] promised, that in the last times He would pour Him [the Spirit] upon [His] servants and handmaids, that they might prophesy; wherefore He did also descend upon the Son of God, made the Son of man, becoming accustomed in fellowship with Him...............
@HeroOfChristArchives, Irenaus also quotes Acts 2:38 in Book III, Chapter XII, but as I said later will demonstate how his understanding of baptizing in Jesus name contradicts your Oneness understanding of it. You check as many translations as you want of Against Heresies Book III Ch.XVII. So there you go, another early attestation to the orginally Trinitarian reading of Matthew 28:19. I have much more quotes, and even Oneness apologist have abanoned your fallacious use of Eusebius.
@LogosTheos said: "Let me school you on textual criticism...."
School is now in session. The oldest extant manuscript containing the text of Didache 7:1-3 (wherein the trinitarian baptismal formula appears) postdates the autograph by several centuries. Importantly, it postdates the Christological controversies. The OLDER mode of baptism as recorded in the Book of Acts is baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus, correlating with Didache 9:5. Did the Athanasian redactors accidentally overlook 9:5?
@HeroOfChristArchives, Also I will like to add for you sake, Eusebius of Caesarea believed that Sabellianism was heretical. Of course you should know that if your an historian right?
@HeroOfChristArchives, If Eusebius is good enough to prove your point he's good enough to falsify it. If he condemned Sabellianism then their is no way he is quoting "In Jesus name" in support of the Oneness view.
@HeroOfChristArchives,Since your argument for Eusebius is an appeal to the fallacy of equivocation MANY conclusions can be drawn as to why Eusebius used “in Jesus name” for Matt 28:19. Because the Didache among other works mentions the TRINITARIAN formula before 325 and even before Eusebius himself YOUR CONCLUSION is canceled out and other must be drawn.
@LogosTheos said: "Your conclusion is canceled out...."
This isn't merely MY conclusion. Many authoritative sources acknowledge that the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 is an interpolation.
"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost by the Catholic Church in the second century."
(Britannica Encyclopedia, 11th Edition, Volume 3, pp. 365-366)
It's bracketed in Young's Literal Translation, challenging its authenticity.
@HeroOfChristArchives, "This isn't merely MY conclusion. Many authoritative sources acknowledge that the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 is an interpolation."
Not really, you seem to have gotten this collection of deceptive quotes from a Oneness article called " a collection of evidence against Matt 28:19". The author slams you with selective quotes to discourage you from looking at their context and what the scholars actually believed.
@HeroOfChristArchives, The “Teaching of the apostles” is mentioned by Eusebius with only skeptical feedback ( Historia Ecclesiastica III) he isn‘t giving his verdict. If you actually read it in it’s ENTIRE context (Koine Greek or translation) you will see the point of Eusebius was to point out MSS where the authorship and origin wasn’t clear and the fact that these were disputed among Christians which some rejected or accepted. Among them THE APOCALYSPE OF JOHN known today as REVELATION.
@LogosTheos said: "The Didache is mentioned by Eusebius... he isn't giving his verdict"
Εν τοις νοθοις κατατεταχθω και των Παυλου πραξεων η γραφη, ο τε λεγομενος ποιμην, και η αποκαλυψις Πετρου, και προς τουτοις η φερομενη Βαρναβα επιστολη, και των αποστολων αι λεγομεναι διδαχαι
"Among the BASTARDS, assign the writing 'Acts of Paul', also that called 'Shepherd', and the 'Apocalypse of Peter', and add to these the extant 'Epistle of Barnabas' and those called the 'Teachings of the Apostles'..."
@HeroOfChristArchives,Some wanted the Didache in the canon, for some it was unnecessary, Clement of Alexandria called it “scripture” since it was perfectly consistent with orthodox practice at his time (Strom I, 20, 100) and Athanasius recommended it for the use of catechists ( Festal Letter 39.) So if you are willing to deny the authenticity of the Didache solely on grounds that Eusebius mentioned it as spurious then you must be consistent and deny the authenticity of Revelation to be truthful
"For so great was the virtue attached to His appellation that the Apostle says, 'God bestowed on him the name above every name, that in the name of JESUS every knee shall bow of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth.' It was right therefore that he should emphasize the virtue of the power residing in HIS NAME but hidden from the many, and therefore say to his Apostles, 'Go ye and make disciples of all nations IN MY NAME.'"
—Eusebius of Caesarea, 'Demonstratio Evangelica', col. 240
@HeroOfChristArchives, These are the only theorectical conclusions you can possibly draw why? Because their is powerful evidence that Matthew 28:19 is authentic based on an very early Christian document called "The Didache" which is dated from 50-150 A.D. and many early Christian writers mention it's existence including Eusebius. It has the traditional Trinitarian formula in Matthew 28:19. Go to early Christians writings website, look up The Didache, and go to Chapter 7.
Matthew 28:19-20 is cited three times in the fifth book of the Theophania of Eusebius, published and translated by Dr. Samuel Lee in 1842-1843. The first citation is made as follows:
"He (the Saviour), in one single word and in one oracle, said to his disciples, 'Go ye and make disciples of all peoples in my name, and teach them every thing which I have commanded you.' And the deed he made to follow the word. And forthwith, disciples were made of the Greeks and the barbarians."
@HeroOfChristArchives, Since there are really no original ancient MSS textual critics look to internal and external evidence to try to figure out the original date that the document must have been composed from examining existing “copies of copies“. Most scholars date the Didache to THE FIRST HALF OF THE SECOND CENTURY. (Dr. Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, pg. 49-50
@LogosTheos - The internal biblical evidence STRONGLY suggests that baptism was performed in the name of the Lord Jesus [Christ] during the Apostolic Age.
"baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 2:38)
"baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 8:16)
"baptized in the name of Jesus Christ." (Acts 10:48)
"they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 19:5)
"...the Holy Spirit, the Father will send in my name" (John 14:26)
"do all in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Colossians 3:17)
@HeroOfChristArchives, Stop with the red herrings, concerning Acts, 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, and 19:5 Lord Jesus willing I will demonstrate how Oneness apologist like David Benard and others distort the true intended meaning regarding early Christian baptizing in Jesus name. And will also demonstrate how the Oneness interpretation contradicts the early Christian understanding of those passages. But the topic is DOES MATTHEW 28:19 appear before 325 Nicaea ( 325 Nicaea had nothing to with the Trinity)
@LogosTheos said: "Stop with the red herrings...."
I've presented no such thing. I've presented only the internal and external evidences that render the trinitarian baptismal formula as spurious.
@LogosTheos said: "The topic is, does Matthew 28:19 appear before 325 Nicaea?"
Since when did this become the topic of discussion? If you're going to neglect the internal and external evidences against the trinitarian baptismal formula in favor of regressing to trivial debating points, count me out.
@HeroOfChristArchives, You started this discussion with the logical fallacy of equivocation with Eusebius. So my motive was to disprove your interpolation argument regarding Matthew 28:19, this became the topic. Then you started quoting the Bible and switched the discussion from a historical to a biblical context. So I called red-herring.
@LogosTheos 1. You need to explain why the apostles baptized in the name of Christ. 2. The verse doesn't even prove a Trinity in its context. They can simply be titles for the same person.
@LogosTheos - The διδαχη κυριου δια των δωδεκα αποστολων τοις εθνεσιν, or simply 'Didache', was deemed BASTARD (Greek: νοθοις) by Eusebius and the Church. The oldest complete copy of the 'Didache', the Codex Hierosolymitanus (H), dates ca. 11th c. Scant fragments predating H exist, but preserve very little text, e.g. two tiny 4th c. Oxyrhynchus fragments preserving 1:3c-4a & 2:7b-3:2a, a 5th c. Coptic fragment preserving 10:2b-12a, and two 5th c. Ethiopic fragments preserving 8:1-2a & 11:3-13:7.
" Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD, YAHWEH of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: This is MY NAME FOREVER, and this is MY MEMORIAL unto All generations!"
Elohim is a plural word for authorities, as parliamentarians, mayors, governors ....., no matter the numbers. Can be 1, 2, 3, 4, 100, 1000,... Elohim in Genesis, in the context of deity is not three but one God. Why? thus, could be 4, 100, 1000 .... One example: God called the light Day, and the darkness, HE (not They) called Night.
Not plural, But singular.
8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the LORD GOD, “who is and who was and who is to come, the ALMIGHTY
One thing we have to learn how to separate: Christ in humanity, and Christ in spirit.
John 14:17 .. even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You KNOW him, for he DWELLS with you and WILL BE in you.
How do the disciples already Know the Holy Spirit and how he was already living with them, even if Christ had not risen?
The disciples SAW him and KNEW him, but still in the human body of Christ
I believe I should point out that 1John5.7 was not in existence when the concept of the trinity came about. It was added much much later. They came to this conclusion without this verse. I'm not arguing for or against the trinity. Also the idea of 1,2,3,7,13, or more Gods was also in debate at this time, and the two God theory did have a large following. And one last thing Jesus is not his name, a mistranslation into Greek and then another into English, NOT very many scribes were good!
Your right my friend, the trinity denies the saving power of Jesus, It claims Jesus never died on the cross! Trinity is false doctrine. My savior Jesus came, IN THE FLESH, and DIED to SAVE me from the bondage of sin! I love you Jesus!
@RudeAwakning If the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are a single Being (a single entity) how did—how could—one-third of one being die? Some have suggested, and this is really the only conclusion that the trinity permits, that there are two Christs. One has been called the “glorified psychic Christ,” what could be called a kind of divine carcass sent to earth for the purpose of dying on the stake—and the other the “infinite eternal Christ” who remained locked in the godhead (continue)
@RudeAwakning as part of the three-in-one god being. Two Christs means four beings in the godhead. Of course, all of this is ridiculous and we are only including it as part of a rhetorical discussion! But it must be understood that you have one of two problems with the trinity: (1) It requires two Christs, or (2) one-third of a single being had to find a way to die.
@RudeAwakning There is something much more sinister hidden within the overall problem of the trinity. If the only Jesus Christ that there is did not actually die, but remained alive as part of the trinity—then mankind has no savior!
you don't suppose to add things to the bible like churches did with 1 John 5:7 that was the only thing they could do to prove their doctrine because the other scriptures they use to prove the scripture really don't prove it
Its amazing to see all the flack against the Trinity. Seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. We're so close to the end. Thank God. Where is the Spirit that testifies of the truth? He's not found in those who deny that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit are God. Are you of His? Does the Spirit who leads to truth dwell in you? I'd be making sure that (Matt. 7:21-23) was not meant for me. He never knew them coz they were never "Born Again". They were just "Church Folks"
@DeeStinger1 NONSENSE! Even Jesus himself is against the Trinity! Let's see how much you adhere to the words spoken by Jesus himself At JOHN 5:37. YAHWEH is the FATHER! Period. So now you will Read it the accurate way. JESUS SAID:
37 "And the Father YAHWEH Himself, which hath SENT me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have NEITHER heard Yahweh's VOICE at any time, NOR SEEN Yahweh's shape!"
JESUS is against Satan's false Trinity and you don't believe JESUS himself at John 5:37?? Amazing!
@upNyaBizznizz The Spirit knows the trinity and accept. It's the world who doesn't. You are of the world and will never understand or accept the things of the Spirit. That also means your destination isn't the good one.
"Trinity" is Not found in Scripture. So? "Bible" isn't found either. We ourselves are a three in one. Even YOU are made up of a trinity. You have a Soul, (The real you) Body (the manifestation of the real you) and a Spirit (the part of the real you which connects with God). Why can't God be a trinity? Are you limiting The Almighty? Didn't He say "Lets make man in our image"? The Spirit totally comprehends Trinity even without these two passages. The world doesn't. It can't. The devil is a lie.
JOHN 1:1-26 shows/supports the trinity + these r Jesu's own words, unless u want 2 deny He said what is written? GENESIS 1:1 + JOHN 1:1-18 r talking about God the CREATOR.. Notice verse 15 in John. Jesus is eternal. Jesus IS God in the flesh.
jesus is not jehovah, jesus as the word of jehovah is not god, jehovah is uncreated,jusus as the word WAS CREATED,this was the very forst of gods creations thats why jesus is the ONLY BEGOTTEN in other words jesus before he came earth was a mighty spirit person but he is inferior to jehovah, as jehovah is the god of jesus christ, sorry the bible does not say jesus is god,the other point jesus said i and the father are one but that does not say jesus is god,man and wife are ONE are they the same
IN THE BEGINNING GOD GENESIS then in GENESIS 2:4 These are the histories of the heavens and the earth, when they were created, in the day that Jehovah Elohim made earth and heavens DARBY BIBLE
GOD is JEHOVAH the father of the word of god,jesus is not jehovah but was created by jehovah. jesus does not know what god knows, very strange that god does not know what he already knows, jesus said the father is greater than he was, strange that jesus does not know and you say he is god..
MARY MAGDALENE who is her GOD, did mary worship the god of the old testament or some other god? if you say mary worshipped the god of the OT then mary worshipped JEHOVAH GOD, jesus said to mary these words.JOHN 20 V 0:17 Jesus says to her, Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God,JESUS IS TELLING MARY THAT JEHOVAH IS JESUS'S GOD AND FATHER, JEHOVAH. jesus is not god
Jesus was saying to mary that her god JEHOVAH was also the god of jesus,then he said to mary your father JEHOVAH is also my father, jesus even said in JOHN 17 V 17:26 And I have made known to them thy name, and will make it known .WHAT NAME DID JESUS MAKE KNOWN? he did not tell everyone god was god or the lord,he said in MARK 20 V 29 and was quoting from DEUT 6 V 4 HE SAID Hear, Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah;
Jesus used the name jehovah WHO IS ONE JEHOVAH...NO TRINITY HERE
There are things god knows that jesus does not know because jesus is Not god, If jesus were god he would know what god knows but Jesus said in matthew 24:36 "But as to that day and the exact time no one knows--not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone..TRINITARIANS REMOVED the words NOR THE SON TO BACK UP THE TRINITY 24:36 But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of the heavens, but my Father alone DARBY bible. Jesus never ever said he was god
Jesus asked this question in MATTHEW 16v13 DOUAY "Whom do men say that the Son of man is? But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets. STRANGE NOBODY SAID GOD if it was a fact they would of all said YOU ARE GOD OR JEHOVAH.none did. but peter knew who jesus was MATTHEW 16v16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.JEREMIAH 10v10 But Jehovah Elohim is truth; he is the living God .SEE jesus is NOT god
First of all to your great dismay I AM NOT A MUSLIM !!! Second the video speaks clearly and shows that these 2 passages have been added on to help the doctrine of the trinity especialy 1Jn5:7 that is an historical fact admited by the author himself.!
I hope you realize that the so called evidence you base the proof of the trinity is ambiguous and does not state three persons at all.
These two verses, as the video and history has proved have been ADDED to corroborate, because without them there is no outright declaration of the trinity.
if anyone says that jesus is god is really insulting the creator by lowering the creator to the level as man, the bible shows god is unseen and could never come to earth as all would die at the sight,jesus is no part of any trinity of false babylonia god,jesus was created by jehovah god, jesus even called god HIS FATHER,you try telling your child that he is you,the child will say dont be stupid i am not you as you are my father,people who say god is a truine god are from false religions
@jefeisdguard. I would love to read the Bibleical scripture you say is PROOF of the trinity! I have scripture to prove you and your trinitarian belief dead wrong!!
Putting "allah" into any of these categories makes "allah" a liar. Allah is monotheistic. God is ELOHIM = plural for God. Does NOT mean respect of numbers b/c God has NO respect for man (Rom 2:11)
The trinity is not the God of the Bible the God of the bible is Yahweh the only God , let me get the scripture for you
I Corinthians 8:6 – Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be on his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Shalom. Of the increase of his government and of shalom there shall be no end, on the throne of David, and on his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts will perform this.
Prov 8:22 speaks of WISDOM.No Son existed until Jesus was physically born from His Mother Mary(Gal.4:4,Heb.2:14).When in the old testament we hear the Son speaking as in Isa 48:16, Ps 40:6,it is God that is speaking,as the future servant to be therefore prophesying.But He as a separate person did not exist before hand.He is the WORD of God made flesh Jn1:1+14,but the Word of God is not a separate person from God as our word is not separate from ourselves. It is just another form of ourselves.
@judgerutherford Sorry, but you really need to read more of the word of God and less of whatever else you are filling your mind with. Jesus is the incarnation of the only One true and living God. He is, "Emanuel" God with us. For more insight on your part read the Gospel of John. It contains enough truth to set your mind and heart free from the power of sin that ensnares you. Grace and Peace to you from Jesus, the God who will save you if you will look to Him in faith.
@judgerutherford - Is Jesus or God coming back? Here is the answer! Isaiah 9:6; John 8:58; 1 Thess. 3:11-13; Matt. 25:31-46; Titus 2:11-13; Zech. 14:4-5; 1 Thess. 4:13-18; Rev. 19:11, 16; Ps. 50:1-6
Who is our savior? Ps. 78:34-35; Is. 43:3-11; 44:6; 45:21; 47:4; 49:26; Ps. 106:21; Luke 1:46-47; 2:10-11; 24:21-29; 1 John 4:14; 1 Peter 1:10-11; 2:21-24; Acts 20:28; Gal. 3:13; John 4:40-41; Phil. 3:20; 1 Tim. 1:1-3; 4:10; Titus 1:1-4; and Jude 25
@judgerutherford - Is Jesus or God coming back? Here is the answer! Isaiah 9:6; John 8:58; 1 Thess. 3:11-13; Matt. 25:31-46; Titus 2:11-13; Zech. 14:4-5; 1 Thess. 4:13-18; Rev. 19:11, 16; Ps. 50:1-6
Who is our savior? Ps. 78:34-35; Is. 43:3-11; 44:6; 45:21; 47:4; 49:26; Ps. 106:21; Luke 1:46-47; 2:10-11; 24:21-29; 1 John 4:14; 1 Peter 1:10-11; 2:21-24; Acts 20:28; Gal. 3:13; John 4:40-41; Phil. 3:20; 1 Tim. 1:1-3; 4:10; Titus 1:1-4; and Jude 25. Write me is you like. sirhood2@yahoo.com
@judgerutherford 1 timothy 3:16 proves that Jesus, God and the Holy spirit are all one and the same person. Not 3 seperate beings or entities. The teaching of the trinity is a lie from hell, created to decieve.
@BreshiBaraElohim who is the LORD of hosts is it not yahweh, jesus is not yahweh but the SONof yahweh, jesus was sent by yahweh, you cannot be the sender and the sent at the same time, jesus said his father was greater than he was, if jesus were god he would of said he was yahweh but you will never, find jesus saying he was yahweh,but the son of yahweh, very simple to see a child could understand that jesus has a father has a son, two seprarate individuals. jesus said pray to the father YAHWEH
@BreshiBaraElohim WHO GAVE THE CHILD if jesus were god why did he ask "who do people say i am" did anyone say god,yahweh.jehovah or elohim?, none did which shows that none of them even thought jesus was god,if it was known that jesus were god its very strange that not person said you are god, no the bible is very clear that jesus is inferior to god because god is uncreated and jesus is not, he was the first of gods creation, this shows jesus has not always existed unlike god who always existed
@outandabout10: I am confused as to who you are arguing with? I simply posted Scripture. Are you arguing with Scripture? If so, then your argument is not with me, is it.
Yeshua answered them, "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken), Do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God?' If I don't do the works of my Father, don't believe me. But if I do them, though you don't believe me, believe the works; that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."
WE HAVE A (GRACE AND PEACE) FROM ALL 3 MEMBERS OF THE TRINITY IN 2 VERSES.
Revelation 1:4-5 (KJV)
4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come;(GOD THE FATHER) AND from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; (GOD THE HOLY GHOST)
5AND from Jesus Christ, (GOD THE SON) who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth.
I am not being argumentative, but what about : Zech 12:9 Isiah 9:6--- they looked upon ME whom they have pierced--- He is called mighty G-d-- everlasting Father.....Y'Shua says that he is the Alpha and the Omega... so does Father---Elohim is plural/singular like the word "deer"-- let us make man in OUR image--- Immanuel= G-d with us.....
"Say (O Muhammad ): O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allâh, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allâh. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. " [The Noble Qur'an 3:64]
I was confused by the Italian language that speaks of the Apostolic Symbol (SIMBOLO APOSTOLICO) which I did not realize was Italian translation for the Apostolic Creed. Therefore I admit my ERROR and INCOMPETENCE in this case and state that the text that cardinal Ratzinger refers to is the APOSTOLIC CREED and not the Mat 28:19.
May deep and sincere apoligies to all especialy to Joseph Ratzinger now head of the catholic church.
This being my confession to this error of which I am careless victim, this does not however change the subject and point of the video. The remaining testimonies of all the other learned and respected scholars does not change and proves that the Mat.28:19 passage is a later invention and insertion!!!
In what sense? Are you asking if I think this passage is corrupted or that I have information on it's corruption? As far as I know to my knowlege there is no contovesy over this passage! But this passage is not that hard to explain at all and does not prove the trinity or seperate persons of God.
Sorry about the delay.I was engaged in debate on another video.
What John 1:1 means is that:
The WORD that was with God,being also God,is just simply this.The Word of God is His SPOKEN and AUDIBLE Word.When God,whom is SPIRIT and INVISIBLE existed by Himself before all things were created,and there was no living being to speak to or order,His SPOKEN Word was STILL in his MIND and therefore was WITH HIMSELF,hence it was GOD....
But when GOD ardently desired to create a visible expression of His great love,He formulated all the laws of the physical and visible things and powers in His mind and so creating wisdom Pr.8:22.Then in One glorious,powerful command in SPOKEN and PRONOUNCED WORD,He generated His visible body,that is the exact expression of His essence;through which all things were commanded into being.Heb.11:3.
This physical body is God's Son,His exact IMAGE that is the Body generated and formed by GOD Col1:15.
And again, a corrupted quote of Ratzinger. Hello there!!!! Wake UP.
Don't just copy this nonsense from the web. Do your research, buy the book concerned, read it, and then you will know that this is nonsense. As simple as that.
RUBBISH! I have RATZINGER'S actual book in front of me, and not in internet, and in the 2nd paragraph of the 2nd chapter of the book he speaks of the "APOSTOLIC SYMBOL" and not of the APOSTLES CREED. The apostles creed has nothing to do with the BAPTISM formula!!!Again he refers to a text that was formulated in the 2nd and 3rd century whereas the apostles creed was from the 5th century, so he is referring to the baptism formula, formulated for liturgical purposes, therefore INVENTED!!!
Please tell we what book you have. I have the 1969 english translation of Introduction to Christianity. On page 50 and 51 Ratzinger writes about the Apostles' Creed. The text is indentical to the quoted text in this movie, EXCEPT for the added comments between brackets. These comments twist the meaning. I will quote the original text in the next post.
"The basic form of our profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text comes from the city of Rome; but its internal origin lies in worship; more precisely, in the conferring of baptism. This again was based on the words of the risen Christ recorded in Matthew 28:19: "
One more thing, to prove he is talking about the Aposteles' Creed you can look at contents of the book on Amazon. You can view the content on page 7 if you choose the option to look inside the book.
On page 7 you can see that the chapter called "Introductory remarks on the history and structure of the Apostles' Creed" and that it starts on page 50.
So, if you have another book that does clearly state you claims, I would really like to know. Please be so kind to send me the title, author, and year it was published, and in what language.
MY ITALIAN TRANSLATION READS "The basic form of our profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text comes from the city of Rome; but its internal origin lies in LITURGY; more precisely, in the ADMINISTRATION of baptism. This again was based on the words of the risen Christ recorded in Matthew 28:19: "
Can you please give me a quote from the exact text from your Italian version, the part where you claim it says that Matthew 28:19 is added to the bible.
Holy Ghost is not a name, is a title for someone is holy.
Jesus is holy, and now he is in spirit among us.
People in the early church were baptized only in the name of Jesus. Acts book. Matthews 28:19 is a later addition. As Eusebius of Caesarea had a collection more or less 16 copies, quoted in the name of Jesus. All burned during the war.
These may have been burned but the Spirit of Yeshua is bringing back the truth slowly but surely so those that followed otherwise may receive a great delusion.
I have videos on Matthew 28:19, 1 John 5:7, and 1 Timothy 3:16. Yes, I would strongly argue for the suspicion of Matthew 28:19 and it is not even debateable that 1 John 5:7 and 1 Timothy 3:16 are corrupted.
With regards to Matt 28:19 the confession of Joseph Ratzinger who is now pope puts to rest that case!
1John 5:7 is an historical fact knowing the author and motives for the corruption.
The 1Tim 3:16 I still have to investigate thoroughly for even if this passage omits the noun GOD the other passages confirm that Yeshua is God Almighty as in Rm 9:5; Jn 8:58, 20:28,Rev 1:8; 22:13
I own a copy of Pope Benedict XVI's "Introduction to Christianity," and no such passage as appears in this video, appears on pages 50-53 of that book. On page 83 there is discussion about the Creed, NOT Matthew 28:19, which uses wording similar to that which appears in this video. The question now is if the author of this video was merely jumbled what the Pope said, merely lifted the quote from the internet without checking it for himself, or was trying to engage in deliberate deception.
AbuKhamrAlMaseeHee 4 days ago
The early church was not trinitarian. It took 200 tears or so to concieve of it by Tertullian. And another 125 years for it's adoption. Rome changed it's view. Zephyrinus, Bishop of Rome in 210 AD, said, "I know ONE GOD, Christ Jesus, beside Him I know no other." By 265 AD, the Bishop of Rome was Dionysius. He said some "divide and cut to pieces that most sacred doctrine of the Church of God, the Divine Monarchy, making it as if it were three powers and partitive substances and godheads three."
acts2and38ministries 6 days ago
I carefully thought and pondered for a long time, and even did a little bit of research on this issue. In the end the conclusion I came to can be expressed by the words of the person who posted this video: "The Trinity is in reality AN INTERPRETATION and not a DOCTRINE that YESHUA or His apostles TAUGHT!". I can't find anywhere in the new testament where any apostle expressly taught the trinity as Trinitarian creeds and catechisms.
ltucker9 1 week ago
Genesis tells us that IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH. From the beginning of time GOD was always there so why would he create a son and tell HIM to die. God died for the world AKA Jesus Christ. Believing that God is one and not three is pretty self explanatory.
1089aef 2 weeks ago
I always say...why would God need a son when HE is I AM and why in the world we he send someone else to die. If that's the case God seems very cruel to sacrifice his OWN son. But what I RUN INTO is people think WHAT LOVE that he would sacrifice his OWN son to die. Personally, God seems like a coward for not coming down himself IF.....Trinity were true.
1089aef 2 weeks ago
One simple question - and I would like some answers. The Trinity is a way of declaring that Jesus is divine and part of the Godhead. JWs reject this. However, look at Heb 1:8 God is speaking:
"But about the Son he says,
Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; "
Why should God call his own Son God?
Here God refers to Christ, the Son as GOD and also states that he is the Son's God.
Those who deny the Trinity will have to first deny the whole of scripture,
MrJayguess 2 months ago
most people get caught up in the name trinity.. if people dont like it .. dont use it.. wether you like the word or not doesnt matter
People should look at the scriptural evidence
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
Wow is this your main argument.. - philosophy without any outright proof that showed these three PERSONS (and not GODS as they cunningly devised)..
one thinks you need to start again... firstly.. there is plenty of evidence for:
a) Who God the Father is..
b) Who jesus is..
c) who Gods Holy ghost is..
if you were to take the time to read ALL the evidence then you would clearly see and understand the truth behind the word trinity...
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
I have read all the bogus evidence that trys very hard to show the existance of three persons, that are all God BUT ...distinct and seperate (therefore making 3 distinct and seperate GODS) [...cunning I must say!..] and all is a manipulated philosophilcal LIE !!! Jesus Yeshua is the Almighty God in Flesh. One God in One body One Name ...Jesus!
neronei 4 months ago
@neronei your premis is wrong.. there is only one God that reveals himself in three ways.. there is not 3 distinct and seperate Gods... NO one says that there is 3 seperate gods.. all different all doing their own thing...
islam and numerious other sects state that the trinity means there are 3 Gods instead of one... now thats just funny.. shows you arnt as smart as you think...
you should focus on just the nature, charactor of the holy ghost is purpose ect .. you might learn something
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
My dear brain washed absent minded pawn,it is not us that are stiupid,but it is the trinity that says there are 3 gods;we are just repeating what the thousands of definitions, from the NIcean Creed, Anatasian Creed...ect,have up untill now feverishly tried to define.In the Anastasian Creed for example it states that all the persons are DISTINCT AND SEPERATE being all 3 god. If you are redifining this further again then I will add you to the club proving the trinity is FALSE!!! Lets FOCUS....
neronei 4 months ago
@neronei look at this way.. You have:
God the father... You have Gods holy spirit... or Gods presence on earth.. the same holy spirit that came in the book of acts.. the same holy spirit.. that gives spiritual gifts.. the same holy spirit that dwells within us...
tell me who the holy ghost is... is it totally seperate from God.. ie another God or is it the same
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
wow, the muslim making this video must be about 4 ys old... these supposed great arguments are childish... i wish muslims were smart.. but they are not..firstly... this guy relies on the roman catholic church for his evidence.. LOL... Now that is funny...
this muslim obviously doesnt know that this church is false & that it has been corupted - its doctrines and theology is false... ERROR number 1.
muslims should lead hard topics alone because they dont understand
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
For a start my dear IGNORANT dumb friend intitled " LOUDMOUTH "...I AM NOT A MUSLIM !!!. In doing so you have revealed how intelligent and extremly childish you truly are, which is so shamefull and I feel sorry for you... I am realy forcing myself in answering you. The evidence that is given here is clear and obvious and shows that those that belive in the trinity have no ground to stand on biblicaly and so have manipulated the Word of God to sustain this false doctrine!!!
neronei 4 months ago
@neronei one has to be very narrowed minded indeed to reject how God chooses to reveal himself... firstly.. lets look at Jesus's baptism... God states this is my son, Gods holy spirit decends apon jesus... How do you intend to explain this.. or i bet you can...
secondly.. at the beginnig of creation God was present, His holy spirit hovered over the water... so hoe do you explain that... there is alot more evidence of course
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
You are very arogant to state to God how He must reveal Himself seeing that the trinty is an interpretation.God never stated any where in the Bible that He is 3 persons so how can you dictate to Him that He is 3.No where does it show that God is 3.
The baptisim of Jesus just shows the opposite because Jesus is the WORD of God made flesh! So this means He is the VOICE of God !Therefore how did the Father speak from heaven if His voice was in flesh in the water?
neronei 4 months ago
@neronei look oh clouded one.. arogant.. now thats funny..if you must know wasnt it the RCC that invented the label trinity... wether you like it or not..wont stop you from going to heaven.. but moving on..
wow you really are mixed up arnt you... 1) there is God the Father...2) there is the Holy ghost or Gods presence on earth... 3) there is Jesus - God come in the flesh..
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
@MrLoudmouthspeaker I mean this sincerely, I do not wish to argue. I personally do not believe the doctrine of the Trinity, I think it is very man made. I would like to ask you something, if God is love and He is giver of life, then why did he SEND His son to die on the cross. If we are speaking Trinity, then why did God send His most precious, loving, son to die for us! Sounds like a pretty mean and self centered Father. Couldn't he have sent himself!
1089aef 4 months ago in playlist The False Trinity Doctrine
@1089aef well you can believe right = the name trinity was made it was applied to the evidence given to us from the bible about how God reveals himself to us.. wether you like the name trinity or not doesnt change the fact about who:
1) Jesus is - 2) who Gods holy spirit is - 3) who God the Father is.. if you want dont use the word trinity BUT instead look at the evidence for your self
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
@1089aef to ask the questions shows me you dont truly understand the subject at hand.. you dont have all the information.. you are grasping at straws..
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
@MrLoudmouthspeaker You know why I don't understand Trinity, it's because it's not true! Do you know Trinity and the term PERSONS is not even in the Bible? God is one God with many titles that make up His name and that is Jesus Christ!
1089aef 4 months ago
@1089aef Yes! Absolutely!!!
That is the problem with those who deny the Trinity. If Jesus is not divine, then God sacrificed someone else - a cowardly act of vengeance and akin to a god who is to be BUT , if Jesus IS God incarnate, then God sacrificed himself on the Cross for us - an act of supreme unconditional love - and more akin to the God of the Bible and of whom Jesus spoke about. And a theology which is in total keeping and agreement with the rest of scripture..
MrJayguess 2 months ago
@1089aef That is the problem with those who deny the Trinity. If Jesus is not divine, then God sacrificed someone else - a cowardly act of vengeance and akin to a god who is to be appeased like the false gods of the Aztecs demanding human sacrifice BUT , if Jesus IS God incarnate, then God sacrificed himself on the Cross for us - an act of supreme unconditional love - and more akin to the God of whom Jesus spoke about. And a theology which is in total agreement with the rest of scripture..
MrJayguess 2 months ago
@1089aef Can you argue that Jesus was the Son of God and the Son of man? And that man the "lamb" died? And as a man he suffered on the cross, "not my will, but thine." Be careful with what you believe or you will begin to think as the gnostics, who believed Jesus was a Spirit, and could not die on the cross. Jesus was both God and Man.
preparinganark 2 weeks ago
@neronei thirdly you can manipulate scriptures in the way you perfer.. in order to change scripture one then needs to go back to the very first ones and change and reinvent scripture world wide...
i would say good luck with that
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
Sorry I did not see this one....how can I have manipulated scriptures seeing that I have not yet quoted anything, showing clearly your prejudice.To say that a so called plurality as "WE...US" in the old testament means 3 as a whole unit, and so forcing the scriptures to say that there are 3 Gods (oops PERSONS) in one subtance that is God; that is MANIPULATION. Furthermore asserting that THE TRINITY is the OUTRIGHT truth when really it is affirmed by saying it is just a great MISTERY....no way!
neronei 4 months ago
@neronei keep it simple... when a sinner receives God into their life .. they become a new creation in christ... the bible tells us that Gods spirit comes and dwells within them... 2 Tim 1:14 states = Through the power of the Holy Spirit who lives within us, carefully guard the precious truth that has been entrusted to you.
so WHO lives with in us.... - start with an easy question for you..
MrLoudmouthspeaker 4 months ago
I have to go, leave your comments for me and Lord Jesus willing I will respond to them if the Lord allows me to live another day.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos - I'm now going to await your attempt to rebut my previous messages — all six of them — which you've conveniently ignored. Get to pecking, bud.
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
Looking forward to your dishonest reponse....
LogosTheos 9 months ago
jesus says if you do not believe that "I AM" THEN YOU WILL DIE IN YOUR SIN.
HE DID NOT ASK US TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT IS SO.HE JUST SAID "BELIEVE"
YeshuaISMessiah1 10 months ago
@WordofLifeMinistry I trusts God have preserve His word that I may know the truth, no matter the language. As far as God being Triunion, even in the O T the Trinity is revealed. Does not YHWH speak of His Spirit? Does not YHWH speak of his soul? Is not YHWH a Spirit; are these 3 not the same 1 True God? The information in this video is a weak argument against the truth of the Trinity. Tell me how is it "no man has seen, nor heard the Father at any time" Yet men have both seen and heard YHWH?
AchreousD 10 months ago
Comment removed
AchreousD 10 months ago
(Jesus is the Name of The Father, Son and Holy Spirit)
ACTS 2:38.8:16,10:48,19:5-6,22:16,ROM6:3,ETC....
7pentecostal7 11 months ago
Send your lies. Cry out loud! that is what your father told you to do so. Oh! Messenger of Darkness!
KolKoreBamidbar 1 year ago
All Greek manuscripts include Matthew 28:19, you have no manuscript evidence of corruption, nothing substantiates your claim. You still have to deal with Jude 20-21 and 2 Cor 13:14. The Trinity relies more on a systematic approach to biblical evidence without being inconsistent are superimposing one text over another ex: Deut 6:4 over John 1:1 is dishonest.
LogosTheos 1 year ago
@LogosTheos said: "...nothing substantiates your claim."
Eusebius quoted against the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 seventeen times prior to the Council of Nicea (325 AD). In every instance, Eusebius quotes the passage as follows: "Go and make disciples of all nations IN MY NAME." The oldest extant biblical manuscripts to preserve the passage in question, Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Vaticanus (B), are dated ca. 350 AD. Eusebius' numerous quotations preserve an older reading.
HeroOfChristArchives 10 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, You are using a very vague argument with Eusebius, it is unknown rather or not Eusebius quoted that way because of inferior manuscripts, memory loss or he was less careful in accuracy because there was no conflict with Arianism prior. If he quoted the Trinitarian bap fomula after 325 Why didn't he ever mention it's corruption? Very vague argument.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos, So I basically just refuted your argument again. The fallacy of equivocation isn't going to save you here, you have no concrete evidence from existing manuscripts, your argument with Eusebius is too vague and uncertain to draw pure accurate conclusions and there is proof of current Trinitarian formula from early documents. The Didache is one of them.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos
"These things then ('How can we do this? How can we preach to the Romans, Greeks, Persians etc.?) the disciples of our Saviour would either have said or thought, so by a single addition of a word, He resolved the sum of those things of which they doubted, the sum of them He committed to them in that He ordered them simply and without discriminating, "to go and make disciples of all peoples," but with this important addition, that He said, "IN MY NAME."
(Theophania of Eusebius)
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, First let me school you on textual criticism specifically coming about the dating of specific documents. The reason for me doing this is the fact that you are trying to use the date of the oldest MS copy of the Didache to refute an earlier date. It’s as fallacious as saying since the oldest MS of Eusebius H.E. “the Codex Syriac 1” dates to the middle of the 5th century then his attestation to events before that date are unreliable.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos, You have failed to disprove the authenticity of this document and even if the Didache was “corrupted” you would still have a text dating to the 2nd century with Matt 28:19. And keep in Mind I am using ONE AMONG MANY sources in the early Church that quote Matt 28:19.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos - Trinitarian baptism is foreign to the Apostolic Age.
"As many as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death"
(Romans 6:3)
"As many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ."
(Galatians 3:26-27)
"The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition."
(Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics)
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, I liked how you ignored the authority I quoted , Bruce Metzger. If you are familiar with textual criticism then you should know he is one of the highest authorities in this field. So let me abandon the Didache argument since it isn't shaking you. Look at Irenaus Against Heresies Book III Ch. XVII.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos said: "I liked how you ignored the authority I quoted, Bruce Metzger."
I didn't ignore your citation of Metzger. I ignored the reference itself because most scholars prior to Metzger had already firmly dated the Didache to the 2nd century.
@LogosTheos said: "Look at Irenaeus, 'Against Heresies', Book III, Ch. XVII"
No need for capitalization. The earliest MS containing this text of Irenaeus is written in Latin and dates rather late. As with Ignatius, Irenaeus' works were expanded.
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, Can you quote aleast three authorities that support a "mysterious" interpolation of Matthew 28:19 into Book III, Ch. XVII Against Heresies? Your at it again with the equivocation fallacy, these types of arguments are unscholary.
LogosTheos 8 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, "And again, giving to the disciples the power of regeneration into God, He said to them, "Go and teach all nations, BAPTIZING THEM IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, AND OF THE SON, AND OF THE HOLY GHOST." For [God] promised, that in the last times He would pour Him [the Spirit] upon [His] servants and handmaids, that they might prophesy; wherefore He did also descend upon the Son of God, made the Son of man, becoming accustomed in fellowship with Him...............
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, Irenaus also quotes Acts 2:38 in Book III, Chapter XII, but as I said later will demonstate how his understanding of baptizing in Jesus name contradicts your Oneness understanding of it. You check as many translations as you want of Against Heresies Book III Ch.XVII. So there you go, another early attestation to the orginally Trinitarian reading of Matthew 28:19. I have much more quotes, and even Oneness apologist have abanoned your fallacious use of Eusebius.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos said: "Let me school you on textual criticism...."
School is now in session. The oldest extant manuscript containing the text of Didache 7:1-3 (wherein the trinitarian baptismal formula appears) postdates the autograph by several centuries. Importantly, it postdates the Christological controversies. The OLDER mode of baptism as recorded in the Book of Acts is baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus, correlating with Didache 9:5. Did the Athanasian redactors accidentally overlook 9:5?
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, Also I will like to add for you sake, Eusebius of Caesarea believed that Sabellianism was heretical. Of course you should know that if your an historian right?
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos said: "Eusebius of Caesarea believes that Sabellianism was heretical."
Impertinent, and will be ignored.
@LogosTheos said: "....your an historian right?"
That would be "you're" not "your." Proofread your messages.
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, If Eusebius is good enough to prove your point he's good enough to falsify it. If he condemned Sabellianism then their is no way he is quoting "In Jesus name" in support of the Oneness view.
LogosTheos 8 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives,Since your argument for Eusebius is an appeal to the fallacy of equivocation MANY conclusions can be drawn as to why Eusebius used “in Jesus name” for Matt 28:19. Because the Didache among other works mentions the TRINITARIAN formula before 325 and even before Eusebius himself YOUR CONCLUSION is canceled out and other must be drawn.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos said: "Your conclusion is canceled out...."
This isn't merely MY conclusion. Many authoritative sources acknowledge that the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 is an interpolation.
"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost by the Catholic Church in the second century."
(Britannica Encyclopedia, 11th Edition, Volume 3, pp. 365-366)
It's bracketed in Young's Literal Translation, challenging its authenticity.
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, "This isn't merely MY conclusion. Many authoritative sources acknowledge that the trinitarian baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 is an interpolation."
Not really, you seem to have gotten this collection of deceptive quotes from a Oneness article called " a collection of evidence against Matt 28:19". The author slams you with selective quotes to discourage you from looking at their context and what the scholars actually believed.
LogosTheos 8 months ago
@LogosTheos - No extant manuscripts antedating 350 AD contain Matthew 28.
Eusebius quoted against the trinitarian reading of Matt. 28:19 seventeen times.
πορευθεντες μαθητυσατε παντα τα εθνη εν τω ονοματι μον,
διδαϲκοντεϲ αυτουϲ τηρειν παντα οϲα ενετειλαμην υμιν
"Go ye, disciple all nations in my name,
teaching them to keep all of which I commanded you."
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, The “Teaching of the apostles” is mentioned by Eusebius with only skeptical feedback ( Historia Ecclesiastica III) he isn‘t giving his verdict. If you actually read it in it’s ENTIRE context (Koine Greek or translation) you will see the point of Eusebius was to point out MSS where the authorship and origin wasn’t clear and the fact that these were disputed among Christians which some rejected or accepted. Among them THE APOCALYSPE OF JOHN known today as REVELATION.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos said: "The Didache is mentioned by Eusebius... he isn't giving his verdict"
Εν τοις νοθοις κατατεταχθω και των Παυλου πραξεων η γραφη, ο τε λεγομενος ποιμην, και η αποκαλυψις Πετρου, και προς τουτοις η φερομενη Βαρναβα επιστολη, και των αποστολων αι λεγομεναι διδαχαι
"Among the BASTARDS, assign the writing 'Acts of Paul', also that called 'Shepherd', and the 'Apocalypse of Peter', and add to these the extant 'Epistle of Barnabas' and those called the 'Teachings of the Apostles'..."
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives,Some wanted the Didache in the canon, for some it was unnecessary, Clement of Alexandria called it “scripture” since it was perfectly consistent with orthodox practice at his time (Strom I, 20, 100) and Athanasius recommended it for the use of catechists ( Festal Letter 39.) So if you are willing to deny the authenticity of the Didache solely on grounds that Eusebius mentioned it as spurious then you must be consistent and deny the authenticity of Revelation to be truthful
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos said: "Some wanted the Didache in the canon"
WHAT!? The Didache was NEVER considered for canonization.
@LogosTheos said: "If you are willing to deny the authenticity of the Didache... then you must be consistent and deny the authenticity of Revelation"
Eusebius unambiguously classified the Didache as BASTARD, but wavered on Revelation.
ην τινες ως εφην αθετουσιν ετεροι δε εγκρινουσι τοις ομολογουμενοις
"...which, as I was saying, some reject, but others assign to the permissible"
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
"For so great was the virtue attached to His appellation that the Apostle says, 'God bestowed on him the name above every name, that in the name of JESUS every knee shall bow of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth.' It was right therefore that he should emphasize the virtue of the power residing in HIS NAME but hidden from the many, and therefore say to his Apostles, 'Go ye and make disciples of all nations IN MY NAME.'"
—Eusebius of Caesarea, 'Demonstratio Evangelica', col. 240
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, These are the only theorectical conclusions you can possibly draw why? Because their is powerful evidence that Matthew 28:19 is authentic based on an very early Christian document called "The Didache" which is dated from 50-150 A.D. and many early Christian writers mention it's existence including Eusebius. It has the traditional Trinitarian formula in Matthew 28:19. Go to early Christians writings website, look up The Didache, and go to Chapter 7.
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos
Matthew 28:19-20 is cited three times in the fifth book of the Theophania of Eusebius, published and translated by Dr. Samuel Lee in 1842-1843. The first citation is made as follows:
"He (the Saviour), in one single word and in one oracle, said to his disciples, 'Go ye and make disciples of all peoples in my name, and teach them every thing which I have commanded you.' And the deed he made to follow the word. And forthwith, disciples were made of the Greeks and the barbarians."
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, Since there are really no original ancient MSS textual critics look to internal and external evidence to try to figure out the original date that the document must have been composed from examining existing “copies of copies“. Most scholars date the Didache to THE FIRST HALF OF THE SECOND CENTURY. (Dr. Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, pg. 49-50
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos - The internal biblical evidence STRONGLY suggests that baptism was performed in the name of the Lord Jesus [Christ] during the Apostolic Age.
"baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 2:38)
"baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 8:16)
"baptized in the name of Jesus Christ." (Acts 10:48)
"they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 19:5)
"...the Holy Spirit, the Father will send in my name" (John 14:26)
"do all in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Colossians 3:17)
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, Stop with the red herrings, concerning Acts, 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, and 19:5 Lord Jesus willing I will demonstrate how Oneness apologist like David Benard and others distort the true intended meaning regarding early Christian baptizing in Jesus name. And will also demonstrate how the Oneness interpretation contradicts the early Christian understanding of those passages. But the topic is DOES MATTHEW 28:19 appear before 325 Nicaea ( 325 Nicaea had nothing to with the Trinity)
LogosTheos 9 months ago
@LogosTheos said: "Stop with the red herrings...."
I've presented no such thing. I've presented only the internal and external evidences that render the trinitarian baptismal formula as spurious.
@LogosTheos said: "The topic is, does Matthew 28:19 appear before 325 Nicaea?"
Since when did this become the topic of discussion? If you're going to neglect the internal and external evidences against the trinitarian baptismal formula in favor of regressing to trivial debating points, count me out.
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, You started this discussion with the logical fallacy of equivocation with Eusebius. So my motive was to disprove your interpolation argument regarding Matthew 28:19, this became the topic. Then you started quoting the Bible and switched the discussion from a historical to a biblical context. So I called red-herring.
LogosTheos 8 months ago
@HeroOfChristArchives, " (Britannica Encyclopedia, 11th Edition, Volume 3, pp. 365-366)"
Encyclopedia?? Are you serious
LogosTheos 8 months ago
@LogosTheos 1. You need to explain why the apostles baptized in the name of Christ. 2. The verse doesn't even prove a Trinity in its context. They can simply be titles for the same person.
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@LogosTheos - The διδαχη κυριου δια των δωδεκα αποστολων τοις εθνεσιν, or simply 'Didache', was deemed BASTARD (Greek: νοθοις) by Eusebius and the Church. The oldest complete copy of the 'Didache', the Codex Hierosolymitanus (H), dates ca. 11th c. Scant fragments predating H exist, but preserve very little text, e.g. two tiny 4th c. Oxyrhynchus fragments preserving 1:3c-4a & 2:7b-3:2a, a 5th c. Coptic fragment preserving 10:2b-12a, and two 5th c. Ethiopic fragments preserving 8:1-2a & 11:3-13:7.
HeroOfChristArchives 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JESUS said, "AND I will write upon him MY NEW NAME."
Jesus is speaking of himself and the other children of YAHWEH that will receive their new names in the white stone.
EXODUS 3:15
And YAHWEH said moreover unto Moses,
" Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD, YAHWEH of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: This is MY NAME FOREVER, and this is MY MEMORIAL unto All generations!"
Amazing! PROOF Jesus is not [God]
upNyaBizznizz 1 year ago
Elohim is a plural word for authorities, as parliamentarians, mayors, governors ....., no matter the numbers. Can be 1, 2, 3, 4, 100, 1000,... Elohim in Genesis, in the context of deity is not three but one God. Why? thus, could be 4, 100, 1000 .... One example: God called the light Day, and the darkness, HE (not They) called Night.
Not plural, But singular.
8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the LORD GOD, “who is and who was and who is to come, the ALMIGHTY
TheEl7ohim 1 year ago
One thing we have to learn how to separate: Christ in humanity, and Christ in spirit.
John 14:17 .. even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You KNOW him, for he DWELLS with you and WILL BE in you.
How do the disciples already Know the Holy Spirit and how he was already living with them, even if Christ had not risen?
The disciples SAW him and KNEW him, but still in the human body of Christ
Now, Jesus is in Spirit,
TheEl7ohim 1 year ago
Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into CHRIST have put on Christ.
1 John 5:7 was an addition about 1600 A.D.
Even the Catholic Bible no longer carries this addition.
As Christ was torn in his death, so the veil of the temple was.
All you could see inside the temple, you could see inside Christ.
One body, one God, one Spirit.
Have a look on the arrangement of objects in the temple courtyard is like a person with open arms:
No other God.
Jesus love you so much
TheEl7ohim 1 year ago
I believe I should point out that 1John5.7 was not in existence when the concept of the trinity came about. It was added much much later. They came to this conclusion without this verse. I'm not arguing for or against the trinity. Also the idea of 1,2,3,7,13, or more Gods was also in debate at this time, and the two God theory did have a large following. And one last thing Jesus is not his name, a mistranslation into Greek and then another into English, NOT very many scribes were good!
onemarktwoyou 1 year ago
Your right my friend, the trinity denies the saving power of Jesus, It claims Jesus never died on the cross! Trinity is false doctrine. My savior Jesus came, IN THE FLESH, and DIED to SAVE me from the bondage of sin! I love you Jesus!
RudeAwakning 1 year ago
@RudeAwakning If the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are a single Being (a single entity) how did—how could—one-third of one being die? Some have suggested, and this is really the only conclusion that the trinity permits, that there are two Christs. One has been called the “glorified psychic Christ,” what could be called a kind of divine carcass sent to earth for the purpose of dying on the stake—and the other the “infinite eternal Christ” who remained locked in the godhead (continue)
RudeAwakning 1 year ago
@RudeAwakning as part of the three-in-one god being. Two Christs means four beings in the godhead. Of course, all of this is ridiculous and we are only including it as part of a rhetorical discussion! But it must be understood that you have one of two problems with the trinity: (1) It requires two Christs, or (2) one-third of a single being had to find a way to die.
(contintue)
RudeAwakning 1 year ago
@RudeAwakning There is something much more sinister hidden within the overall problem of the trinity. If the only Jesus Christ that there is did not actually die, but remained alive as part of the trinity—then mankind has no savior!
RudeAwakning 1 year ago
you don't suppose to add things to the bible like churches did with 1 John 5:7 that was the only thing they could do to prove their doctrine because the other scriptures they use to prove the scripture really don't prove it
clevelandshero23 1 year ago
Its amazing to see all the flack against the Trinity. Seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. We're so close to the end. Thank God. Where is the Spirit that testifies of the truth? He's not found in those who deny that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit are God. Are you of His? Does the Spirit who leads to truth dwell in you? I'd be making sure that (Matt. 7:21-23) was not meant for me. He never knew them coz they were never "Born Again". They were just "Church Folks"
DeeStinger1 1 year ago
@DeeStinger1 NONSENSE! Even Jesus himself is against the Trinity! Let's see how much you adhere to the words spoken by Jesus himself At JOHN 5:37. YAHWEH is the FATHER! Period. So now you will Read it the accurate way. JESUS SAID:
37 "And the Father YAHWEH Himself, which hath SENT me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have NEITHER heard Yahweh's VOICE at any time, NOR SEEN Yahweh's shape!"
JESUS is against Satan's false Trinity and you don't believe JESUS himself at John 5:37?? Amazing!
Liars!
upNyaBizznizz 1 year ago
@upNyaBizznizz The Spirit knows the trinity and accept. It's the world who doesn't. You are of the world and will never understand or accept the things of the Spirit. That also means your destination isn't the good one.
DeeStinger1 1 year ago
"Trinity" is Not found in Scripture. So? "Bible" isn't found either. We ourselves are a three in one. Even YOU are made up of a trinity. You have a Soul, (The real you) Body (the manifestation of the real you) and a Spirit (the part of the real you which connects with God). Why can't God be a trinity? Are you limiting The Almighty? Didn't He say "Lets make man in our image"? The Spirit totally comprehends Trinity even without these two passages. The world doesn't. It can't. The devil is a lie.
DeeStinger1 1 year ago
As for this video, you lose all credibility when you hold up the Pope of Rome as some athority of what is true Christianity.
fredrockt47 1 year ago
JOHN 1:1-26 shows/supports the trinity + these r Jesu's own words, unless u want 2 deny He said what is written? GENESIS 1:1 + JOHN 1:1-18 r talking about God the CREATOR.. Notice verse 15 in John. Jesus is eternal. Jesus IS God in the flesh.
The3in1trinity 1 year ago
jesus is not jehovah, jesus as the word of jehovah is not god, jehovah is uncreated,jusus as the word WAS CREATED,this was the very forst of gods creations thats why jesus is the ONLY BEGOTTEN in other words jesus before he came earth was a mighty spirit person but he is inferior to jehovah, as jehovah is the god of jesus christ, sorry the bible does not say jesus is god,the other point jesus said i and the father are one but that does not say jesus is god,man and wife are ONE are they the same
judgerutherford 1 year ago
IN THE BEGINNING GOD GENESIS then in GENESIS 2:4 These are the histories of the heavens and the earth, when they were created, in the day that Jehovah Elohim made earth and heavens DARBY BIBLE
GOD is JEHOVAH the father of the word of god,jesus is not jehovah but was created by jehovah. jesus does not know what god knows, very strange that god does not know what he already knows, jesus said the father is greater than he was, strange that jesus does not know and you say he is god..
judgerutherford 1 year ago
MARY MAGDALENE who is her GOD, did mary worship the god of the old testament or some other god? if you say mary worshipped the god of the OT then mary worshipped JEHOVAH GOD, jesus said to mary these words.JOHN 20 V 0:17 Jesus says to her, Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God,JESUS IS TELLING MARY THAT JEHOVAH IS JESUS'S GOD AND FATHER, JEHOVAH. jesus is not god
judgerutherford 1 year ago
Jesus was saying to mary that her god JEHOVAH was also the god of jesus,then he said to mary your father JEHOVAH is also my father, jesus even said in JOHN 17 V 17:26 And I have made known to them thy name, and will make it known .WHAT NAME DID JESUS MAKE KNOWN? he did not tell everyone god was god or the lord,he said in MARK 20 V 29 and was quoting from DEUT 6 V 4 HE SAID Hear, Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah;
Jesus used the name jehovah WHO IS ONE JEHOVAH...NO TRINITY HERE
judgerutherford 1 year ago
There are things god knows that jesus does not know because jesus is Not god, If jesus were god he would know what god knows but Jesus said in matthew 24:36 "But as to that day and the exact time no one knows--not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone..TRINITARIANS REMOVED the words NOR THE SON TO BACK UP THE TRINITY 24:36 But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of the heavens, but my Father alone DARBY bible. Jesus never ever said he was god
judgerutherford 1 year ago
Jesus asked this question in MATTHEW 16v13 DOUAY "Whom do men say that the Son of man is? But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets. STRANGE NOBODY SAID GOD if it was a fact they would of all said YOU ARE GOD OR JEHOVAH.none did. but peter knew who jesus was MATTHEW 16v16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.JEREMIAH 10v10 But Jehovah Elohim is truth; he is the living God .SEE jesus is NOT god
judgerutherford 1 year ago
everything you said in the video was 100% correct keep up the good work of exposing these falsehoods of false religion
judgerutherford 1 year ago
@judgerutherford JOHN 14:1-26...
The3in1trinity 1 year ago
You have stated in this video that the bible;"Manipulated & misinterpretated the word of God to sustain a lie?"
My God man, what do YOU think Islam has done for 1,400 years?
Islam has called Jesus a LIAR & has CREATED a NEW Jesus! Their OWN Jesus!
Islam has CREATED quranic verses that call Jesus a LIAR!
Proof?
Surah 4:157
Jesus says in Matthe 26:2 & Matthew 20:19 he will be CRUCIFIED & rise again in 3 days!
Surah 4:157 states the OPPOSITE! You have called ur prophet(Surah 19:30) & ours a LIAR!
jefeisdguard 1 year ago
I am not a muslim !!!
neronei 1 year ago
It is encumbent by all muslims to try & taint the message of God.
Matthew 28:19 & 1 John 5:7 are absolutely TRUE.
Jesus has devoted many OTHER verses corroborating the existence of His FATHER & the Holy Spirit.
Muslims canNOT perceive or understand there are THREE!
1.) One God we can see = Jesus
2.) one God we canNOT see = Father
3.) one God if blasphemed is an unforgivable sin = Holy Spirit
Jesus was sent by His father in
Ex 3:14-15, John John 3:17, 7:16, 8:16, 8:18, 8:26, 8:29, 8:42, 6:38
jefeisdguard 1 year ago
First of all to your great dismay I AM NOT A MUSLIM !!! Second the video speaks clearly and shows that these 2 passages have been added on to help the doctrine of the trinity especialy 1Jn5:7 that is an historical fact admited by the author himself.!
May Yeshua bles you.
neronei 1 year ago
@neronei
I hope you realize the bible has COUNTLESS biblical proofs the Trinity is in fact REAL!
The two verses indicated in this video simply corroborate the existence of this fact!
jefeisdguard 1 year ago
I hope you realize that the so called evidence you base the proof of the trinity is ambiguous and does not state three persons at all.
These two verses, as the video and history has proved have been ADDED to corroborate, because without them there is no outright declaration of the trinity.
Yeshua bless you
neronei 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@neronei
re: hope u realize that the so called evidence u base the proof of the trinity is ambiguous & does not state three persons at all.
Really? Ok, then please advice who is the GOD that was described as:
1.) The God we can NOT; else we'd DIE if we had seen His face in Ex 33:20 & corroborated in John 1:18
2.) The God we CAN see as did Jacob in Gen 32:30
God does NOT lie. John 1:18 states NO man hath seen God
3.) The God, man will NOT be 4given if we blaspheme His name Matt 12:32-33
jefeisdguard 1 year ago
if anyone says that jesus is god is really insulting the creator by lowering the creator to the level as man, the bible shows god is unseen and could never come to earth as all would die at the sight,jesus is no part of any trinity of false babylonia god,jesus was created by jehovah god, jesus even called god HIS FATHER,you try telling your child that he is you,the child will say dont be stupid i am not you as you are my father,people who say god is a truine god are from false religions
outandabout10 1 year ago
@jefeisdguard. I would love to read the Bibleical scripture you say is PROOF of the trinity! I have scripture to prove you and your trinitarian belief dead wrong!!
sirhood2 1 year ago
@sirhood2
The trinity in the bible.
There are 3 possible answers, which are:
Father, Son & Holy Ghost
Which one of the above fits the description in:
1) Matt 4:7, 10 & Luke 4:8, 12, Gen 32:30
2) John 14:26 & Matt 12:31-32
3) John 1:18, Exodus 33:20
Putting "allah" into any of these categories makes "allah" a liar. Allah is monotheistic. God is ELOHIM = plural for God. Does NOT mean respect of numbers b/c God has NO respect for man (Rom 2:11)
God of the bible is NOT the god of Islam
jefeisdguard 1 year ago
@jefeisdguard
The trinity is not the God of the Bible the God of the bible is Yahweh the only God , let me get the scripture for you
I Corinthians 8:6 – Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
SupernaturalGifts777 1 year ago
@SupernaturalGifts777
The word TRINITY is simply just that a word that describes the three distinct personalities in the bible, the TRIUNE dieties.
Yahweh is God as is ELOHIM = Plural for numbers of God
Matthew 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
God the Father is our God & the God of Jesus
But it is ONLY thru Jesus that we all must go thru to SEE the Father
Thanks 4 ur reply
jefeisdguard 1 year ago
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be on his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Shalom. Of the increase of his government and of shalom there shall be no end, on the throne of David, and on his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts will perform this.
(Isaiah 9:6)
BreshiBaraElohim 1 year ago
Amen! Yeshua bless you greatly!
neronei 1 year ago
are you saying jesus is now god after all the evidence prove he is the son of jehovah elohim
judgerutherford 1 year ago
The bible proves that He is that One and Only God in flesh.
The Name of Yeshua means " Y H W H Saves". That is God in person that is saving- Emanuelle " God with us ".
Yeshua bless you.
neronei 1 year ago
the bible says jesus was the first of jehovah gods creation, jesus is not the creator jehovah but is the son, proverbs 8v22
judgerutherford 1 year ago
Prov 8:22 speaks of WISDOM.No Son existed until Jesus was physically born from His Mother Mary(Gal.4:4,Heb.2:14).When in the old testament we hear the Son speaking as in Isa 48:16, Ps 40:6,it is God that is speaking,as the future servant to be therefore prophesying.But He as a separate person did not exist before hand.He is the WORD of God made flesh Jn1:1+14,but the Word of God is not a separate person from God as our word is not separate from ourselves. It is just another form of ourselves.
neronei 1 year ago
@judgerutherford JOHN1:1-18.
The3in1trinity 1 year ago
@judgerutherford Sorry, but you really need to read more of the word of God and less of whatever else you are filling your mind with. Jesus is the incarnation of the only One true and living God. He is, "Emanuel" God with us. For more insight on your part read the Gospel of John. It contains enough truth to set your mind and heart free from the power of sin that ensnares you. Grace and Peace to you from Jesus, the God who will save you if you will look to Him in faith.
fredrockt47 1 year ago
@judgerutherford - Is Jesus or God coming back? Here is the answer! Isaiah 9:6; John 8:58; 1 Thess. 3:11-13; Matt. 25:31-46; Titus 2:11-13; Zech. 14:4-5; 1 Thess. 4:13-18; Rev. 19:11, 16; Ps. 50:1-6
Who is our savior? Ps. 78:34-35; Is. 43:3-11; 44:6; 45:21; 47:4; 49:26; Ps. 106:21; Luke 1:46-47; 2:10-11; 24:21-29; 1 John 4:14; 1 Peter 1:10-11; 2:21-24; Acts 20:28; Gal. 3:13; John 4:40-41; Phil. 3:20; 1 Tim. 1:1-3; 4:10; Titus 1:1-4; and Jude 25
sirhood2 1 year ago
@judgerutherford - Is Jesus or God coming back? Here is the answer! Isaiah 9:6; John 8:58; 1 Thess. 3:11-13; Matt. 25:31-46; Titus 2:11-13; Zech. 14:4-5; 1 Thess. 4:13-18; Rev. 19:11, 16; Ps. 50:1-6
Who is our savior? Ps. 78:34-35; Is. 43:3-11; 44:6; 45:21; 47:4; 49:26; Ps. 106:21; Luke 1:46-47; 2:10-11; 24:21-29; 1 John 4:14; 1 Peter 1:10-11; 2:21-24; Acts 20:28; Gal. 3:13; John 4:40-41; Phil. 3:20; 1 Tim. 1:1-3; 4:10; Titus 1:1-4; and Jude 25. Write me is you like. sirhood2@yahoo.com
sirhood2 1 year ago
@judgerutherford: Are you saying that is what the SCRIPTURE I have posted states?
BreshiBaraElohim 1 year ago
@judgerutherford Jesus is the Son of God as JOHN 20:28 SHOWS. Jesus doesn't rebuke Thomas. JOHN14:1-26 show show Trinity.
The3in1trinity 1 year ago
@judgerutherford 1 timothy 3:16 proves that Jesus, God and the Holy spirit are all one and the same person. Not 3 seperate beings or entities. The teaching of the trinity is a lie from hell, created to decieve.
sirhood2 1 year ago
@BreshiBaraElohim who is the LORD of hosts is it not yahweh, jesus is not yahweh but the SONof yahweh, jesus was sent by yahweh, you cannot be the sender and the sent at the same time, jesus said his father was greater than he was, if jesus were god he would of said he was yahweh but you will never, find jesus saying he was yahweh,but the son of yahweh, very simple to see a child could understand that jesus has a father has a son, two seprarate individuals. jesus said pray to the father YAHWEH
outandabout10 1 year ago
@BreshiBaraElohim WHO GAVE THE CHILD if jesus were god why did he ask "who do people say i am" did anyone say god,yahweh.jehovah or elohim?, none did which shows that none of them even thought jesus was god,if it was known that jesus were god its very strange that not person said you are god, no the bible is very clear that jesus is inferior to god because god is uncreated and jesus is not, he was the first of gods creation, this shows jesus has not always existed unlike god who always existed
outandabout10 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@outandabout10
You sound like a sagacious person … tell me then: If Jesus is NOT God, is He GOOD? John 8:46
What exactly is the SIN of Jesus.
What did Jesus mean to say in Matt 4:7,10 & Luke 4:8,12?
What did Jesus mean to imply in John 8:23? John 17:5? John 3:31?
Which one is the GOD that if ONE looked at their face one would die? Ex 33:20?
Who is the GOD if one blasphemed this GOD their sin is unforgivable? Matt 12:31-32
What does John 1:18 mean in conjunction w/Genesis 32:30?
jefeisdguard 1 year ago
@outandabout10: I am confused as to who you are arguing with? I simply posted Scripture. Are you arguing with Scripture? If so, then your argument is not with me, is it.
BreshiBaraElohim 1 year ago
Yeshua answered them, "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken), Do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God?' If I don't do the works of my Father, don't believe me. But if I do them, though you don't believe me, believe the works; that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."
Jhn10
BreshiBaraElohim 1 year ago
Amen ! It is as plain as that ! Yeshua bless you.
neronei 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WE HAVE A (GRACE AND PEACE) FROM ALL 3 MEMBERS OF THE TRINITY IN 2 VERSES.
Revelation 1:4-5 (KJV)
4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come;(GOD THE FATHER) AND from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; (GOD THE HOLY GHOST)
5AND from Jesus Christ, (GOD THE SON) who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth.
HARLANGENEPARROTT 1 year ago
Comment removed
HARLANGENEPARROTT 1 year ago
Comment removed
HARLANGENEPARROTT 1 year ago
Comment removed
HARLANGENEPARROTT 1 year ago
I am not being argumentative, but what about : Zech 12:9 Isiah 9:6--- they looked upon ME whom they have pierced--- He is called mighty G-d-- everlasting Father.....Y'Shua says that he is the Alpha and the Omega... so does Father---Elohim is plural/singular like the word "deer"-- let us make man in OUR image--- Immanuel= G-d with us.....
bridgerbergman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Say (O Muhammad ): O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allâh, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allâh. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. " [The Noble Qur'an 3:64]
2009abuabdullah 2 years ago
rechtvaardig7 was right all along.
I was confused by the Italian language that speaks of the Apostolic Symbol (SIMBOLO APOSTOLICO) which I did not realize was Italian translation for the Apostolic Creed. Therefore I admit my ERROR and INCOMPETENCE in this case and state that the text that cardinal Ratzinger refers to is the APOSTOLIC CREED and not the Mat 28:19.
May deep and sincere apoligies to all especialy to Joseph Ratzinger now head of the catholic church.
neronei 2 years ago
This being my confession to this error of which I am careless victim, this does not however change the subject and point of the video. The remaining testimonies of all the other learned and respected scholars does not change and proves that the Mat.28:19 passage is a later invention and insertion!!!
neronei 2 years ago
@neronei what about john 1:1 ?
billoodean 2 years ago
In what sense? Are you asking if I think this passage is corrupted or that I have information on it's corruption? As far as I know to my knowlege there is no contovesy over this passage! But this passage is not that hard to explain at all and does not prove the trinity or seperate persons of God.
neronei 2 years ago
it says in the beginning was the word the word was with god the word was god ..
what does that mean ?
I AM NOT A TRINITARIAN and i do know what it means i just wanted to know from you :-)
billoodean 2 years ago
Sorry about the delay.I was engaged in debate on another video.
What John 1:1 means is that:
The WORD that was with God,being also God,is just simply this.The Word of God is His SPOKEN and AUDIBLE Word.When God,whom is SPIRIT and INVISIBLE existed by Himself before all things were created,and there was no living being to speak to or order,His SPOKEN Word was STILL in his MIND and therefore was WITH HIMSELF,hence it was GOD....
neronei 2 years ago
But when GOD ardently desired to create a visible expression of His great love,He formulated all the laws of the physical and visible things and powers in His mind and so creating wisdom Pr.8:22.Then in One glorious,powerful command in SPOKEN and PRONOUNCED WORD,He generated His visible body,that is the exact expression of His essence;through which all things were commanded into being.Heb.11:3.
This physical body is God's Son,His exact IMAGE that is the Body generated and formed by GOD Col1:15.
neronei 2 years ago
And again, a corrupted quote of Ratzinger. Hello there!!!! Wake UP.
Don't just copy this nonsense from the web. Do your research, buy the book concerned, read it, and then you will know that this is nonsense. As simple as that.
rechtvaardig7 2 years ago
RUBBISH! I have RATZINGER'S actual book in front of me, and not in internet, and in the 2nd paragraph of the 2nd chapter of the book he speaks of the "APOSTOLIC SYMBOL" and not of the APOSTLES CREED. The apostles creed has nothing to do with the BAPTISM formula!!!Again he refers to a text that was formulated in the 2nd and 3rd century whereas the apostles creed was from the 5th century, so he is referring to the baptism formula, formulated for liturgical purposes, therefore INVENTED!!!
neronei 2 years ago
Please tell we what book you have. I have the 1969 english translation of Introduction to Christianity. On page 50 and 51 Ratzinger writes about the Apostles' Creed. The text is indentical to the quoted text in this movie, EXCEPT for the added comments between brackets. These comments twist the meaning. I will quote the original text in the next post.
rechtvaardig7 2 years ago
"The basic form of our profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text comes from the city of Rome; but its internal origin lies in worship; more precisely, in the conferring of baptism. This again was based on the words of the risen Christ recorded in Matthew 28:19: "
rechtvaardig7 2 years ago
To conclude: the word "text' does NOT refer to Matthew 28:19. This can clearly be proven by the words "This again was based..." etc.
The word "text" in this case refers text of the Apostles' Creed, which he talks about on these pages.
Your turn.
rechtvaardig7 2 years ago
One more thing, to prove he is talking about the Aposteles' Creed you can look at contents of the book on Amazon. You can view the content on page 7 if you choose the option to look inside the book.
On page 7 you can see that the chapter called "Introductory remarks on the history and structure of the Apostles' Creed" and that it starts on page 50.
rechtvaardig7 2 years ago
So, if you have another book that does clearly state you claims, I would really like to know. Please be so kind to send me the title, author, and year it was published, and in what language.
rechtvaardig7 2 years ago
MY ITALIAN TRANSLATION READS "The basic form of our profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text comes from the city of Rome; but its internal origin lies in LITURGY; more precisely, in the ADMINISTRATION of baptism. This again was based on the words of the risen Christ recorded in Matthew 28:19: "
neronei 2 years ago
Can you please give me a quote from the exact text from your Italian version, the part where you claim it says that Matthew 28:19 is added to the bible.
rechtvaardig7 2 years ago
Holy Ghost is not a name, is a title for someone is holy.
Jesus is holy, and now he is in spirit among us.
People in the early church were baptized only in the name of Jesus. Acts book. Matthews 28:19 is a later addition. As Eusebius of Caesarea had a collection more or less 16 copies, quoted in the name of Jesus. All burned during the war.
TheEl7ohim 2 years ago
These may have been burned but the Spirit of Yeshua is bringing back the truth slowly but surely so those that followed otherwise may receive a great delusion.
Yeshua bless you
neronei 2 years ago
I have videos on Matthew 28:19, 1 John 5:7, and 1 Timothy 3:16. Yes, I would strongly argue for the suspicion of Matthew 28:19 and it is not even debateable that 1 John 5:7 and 1 Timothy 3:16 are corrupted.
Yuratchka 2 years ago
With regards to Matt 28:19 the confession of Joseph Ratzinger who is now pope puts to rest that case!
1John 5:7 is an historical fact knowing the author and motives for the corruption.
The 1Tim 3:16 I still have to investigate thoroughly for even if this passage omits the noun GOD the other passages confirm that Yeshua is God Almighty as in Rm 9:5; Jn 8:58, 20:28,Rev 1:8; 22:13
Yeshua bless you.
neronei 2 years ago
I would have to disagree, none of those passages say that Jesus is the Almighty God and I do have videos on all those passages.
Yuratchka 2 years ago
These passages and the bible contradicts you thoroughly.
neronei 2 years ago
Ummm no, but I understand why you think they do.
Yuratchka 2 years ago
Dude you need to read the gospel in Greek. The translation is correct.
Eusebian Form of the Text from 1901 is false and has no support.
You need to study blasphemy, because what you are doing here is blaspemy of the Holy Spirit and there is no forgiveness for this.
You should study carefully before confessing blasphemy.
Stewarts16 2 years ago