Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

God is opinion and doesn't care if it's name is Capitalized... or does She?


rvmydinar
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, keylime said:

Is the word Rapture in the Bible? No but we understand the concept of the "snatching away" or Harpazo.

Is the word Bible in the Bible? No but we understand it to be  what is called the Holy Scriptures.

Is the word Demon in the Bible? No but the spirits of the dead Nephlim we know are the demons that possess people and Jesus cast out.

Is the word Trinity in the Bible? Of course not, it wasn't used back then. But the concept of three in one is revealed from Genesis to Revelation. 

You're dismissed. Class is over.

Come back when you truly have something to add to the conversation instead of your house of cards that gets blown away by true revelation knowledge of the Word. Which will be never since you will "never come to know the truth" because you are already rejecting it.

Rapture isnt in the Bible.  It is a madeup word by phony christians.

Bible is the collection of writings.  It doesnt need to be in there.

Is Demon in the Bible?  Ahem...Mark 5:15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid.

New Living Translation
A crowd soon gathered around Jesus, and they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons. He was sitting there fully clothed and perfectly sane, and they were all afraid.

English Standard Version
And they came to Jesus and saw the demon-possessed man, the one who had had the legion, sitting there, clothed and in his right mind, and they were afraid.

Berean Study Bible
When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons sitting there, clothed and in his right mind; and they were afraid.

 

Keylime, do you even know the bible?  I dont think ya do.  Dont tell me...me proving you wrong on this one is because....Heck I dont know what excuse you will come up with now...

 

SHOW me the concept of the trinity used Throughout Gen through REV!  Please.  ONE verse where it states god is three in one.  I am BEGGING you.  10  bucks says ya dont provide the proof.  Would love to see ONE verse in EACH of the 66 books of the Bible.  Hey YOU said it was from gen to rev right?  Show me 

 

Edited by PrehistoricMan
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PrehistoricMan said:

Rapture isnt in the Bible.  It is a madeup word by phony christians.

Bible is the collection of writings.  It doesnt need to be in there.

Is Demon in the Bible?  Ahem...Mark 5:15 When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid.

New Living Translation
A crowd soon gathered around Jesus, and they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons. He was sitting there fully clothed and perfectly sane, and they were all afraid.

English Standard Version
And they came to Jesus and saw the demon-possessed man, the one who had had the legion, sitting there, clothed and in his right mind, and they were afraid.

Berean Study Bible
When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons sitting there, clothed and in his right mind; and they were afraid.

 

Keylime, do you even know the bible?  I dont think ya do.  Dont tell me...me proving you wrong on this one is because....Heck I dont know what excuse you will come up with now...

 

SHOW me the concept of the trinity used Throughout Gen through REV!  Please.  ONE verse where it states god is three in one.  I am BEGGING you.  10  bucks says ya dont provide the proof.  Would love to see ONE verse in EACH of the 66 books of the Bible.  Hey YOU said it was from gen to rev right?  Show me 

 

You are wrong again. I notice you didn't quote the original King James version which is considered THE officially canonized Word and Holy Scriptures.

 

Do you know the concept of "In the Beginning...?" "1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness...."

Okay. That verse refers to God. Yes? In the beginning. Yes? "And God SAID..." You know...SAID....to speak....? So we see God "Said" all of this in existence...."The SPIRIT of God moved upon the face of the waters." Oh oh....We now have the "SPIRIT" of God. HIS SPIRIT....Hmmm...that's Two. God who SAID, and God His SPIRIT moving....This is getting good...VERSE  26 "

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Ahhhh...."And God SAID..." There's that SAID again....but wait it continues...."Let US make man in OUR image." Oh my goodness. So now you have GOD in the Beginning who SAID things in existence while HIS SPIRIT moved over the waters making man in "OUR image." And He SAID "Let US" US. Who is US? I see it is GOD. I see it is HOLY SPIRIT. But who is there three? Hmmm...

Let me go to John. You know the Gospel of John that is also in the Bible. And just so happens to be the FIRST BOOK of the New Testament like Genesis is the FIRST BOOK of the Old Testament. And what is the first verse or verses of John. Fascinatingly similar to those of Genesis.

"1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

I believe we have a BINGO!

The SAID of Genesis is the exact same WORD in John. Because you know, when you say something, that is known as words you speak. So allow me to break this down for you. 

"In the Beginning..." There's it is. There's that "Beginning" again. That gives us our timeline, the exact one that begins Genesis. So now we know when we are at. Now let's see who we are dealing with. 

"In the beginning was the Word. And the WORD was WITH God." Ahhh...looky looky. That SAID, which was the WORD which was IN THE BEGINNING, was WITH God. So that is who God was talking to when HE SAID let US...and in OUR....But wait...there's more...You're going to love this. Or maybe not since everything I am showing you you already know but somehow, ignorantly and stubbornly reject even though it is in black and white. But I will continue because the next part of this verse says it all. A nice wrap up like a bow on a present which I am giving you. And I quote from the KVJ Bible which no where has the word Demon in it....but I digress...

Here we go...."And the WORD WAS GOD." What?! Let me write that again....Not only was the WORD WITH GOD....meaning separate...BUT the WORD WAS GOD!!!

I know you can't wrap your incredible intellect around it, but it really is not that hard to swallow. So Genesis tells us God made everything. And John tells us without the WORD nothing would have been made. The same WORD that was WITH and WAS God. Hmmmm.....We move on...

Verse 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Another BINGO! WOW! So that same WORD that is WITH and WAS God, was made FLESH. And DWELT among us. Well that could only be JESUS! Why my goodness. So JESUS, also given names in the Old Testament by the Prophets, one being Isaiah. Surely, you've heard this since you are such a Bible scholar, which the word Bible is not in the Bible you remember. But that is what it is called. 

Isaiah 9:6 "King James Bible
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."

So now you have Genesis, three in one. God, Holy Spirit, and the Word(SAID) with US and OUR image. Then you have in Isaiah in another part of the Old Testament, calling JESUS The MIGHTY GOD and EVERLASTING FATHER, and THE PRINCE OF PEACE....Then in John he tells us this very same JESUS was WITH GOD and WAS GOD!

How can this be? I don't know. I just believe what God tells me about HIMSELF. and finally in Revelation I cut and paste this neat little list because I don't have time to type it myself. But I leave this right here. Genesis through Revelation in a quick cursory study of the Trinity which is not in the King James Version but obviously is there in concept, description, and verses. Much like if I tell you picture this animal. It is grey. It has enormous ears. It has a long trunk and tusks. It is over 2000 pounds...You have an ....you can say it...yes an elephant. Wow! You knew what I was refering to without saying the name.....You really are brilliant.

 

Names or Titles of Jesus in the Book of Revelation

  1. Jesus Christ …. Revelation1:1
  2. Faithful Witness ….. Revelation 1:5
  3. First Begotten of the Dead ….. Revelation 1:5
  4. Prince of the Kings of the Earth ….. Revelation 1:5
  5. Alpha and Omega ….. Revelation 1:8-13
  6. First and Last ….. Revelation 1:8, 11, 13
  7. Son of Man ….. Revelation 1;13
  8. He that liveth and was dead ….. Revelation 1:13, 18
  9. He that holdeth the seven stars ….. Revelation 2:1
  10. He who walketh midst the golden candlesticks ….. Revelation 2:1
  11. He who hath the sharp sword with two edges ….. Revelation 2:12
  12. Son of God ….. Revelation 2:18
  13. He which searches the reins and hearts ….. Revelation 2:23
  14. He that hath the seven Spirits of God ….. Revelation 3: 1
  15. He that hath the seven stars ….. Revelation 3:1
  16. He that is holy and true ….. Revelation 3:7
  17. He that hath the key of David ….. Revelation 3:7
  18. He that openeth and no man shutteth ….. Revelation 3:7
  19. He that shutteth and no man openeth ….. Revelation 3:7
  20. The Amen ….. Revelation 3:14
  21. The faithful and true witness ….. Revelation 3:14
  22. The beginning of the creation of God ….. Revelation 3:14
  23. Lord ….. Revelation 4:11
  24. Lion of the tribe of Judah ….. Revelation 5:5,9
  25. The root of David ….. Revelation 5: 5,9
  26. A lamb as it had been slain ….. 5: 6,7
  27. The Lamb ….. Revelation 5: 8,9
  28. Lord of Lords ….. Revelation 17:14
  29. King of Kings …… Revelation 17:14
  30. Faithful and true ….. 19:11
  31. Rider of the white horse ….. 19:11
  32. The Word of God ….. Revelation 19: 13-16
  33. Christ ….. Revelation 20: 4
  34. The Lord God of the Holy Prophets ….. Revelation 22:6
  35. Beginning and the end ….. Revelation 22:13
  36. The bright and morning star ….. Revelation 22: 16
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PrehistoricMan said:

Again  I havent quoted the NWT this entire topic.  Ole Markinsa is OBSESSED with it.  He keeps talking about it.  LOL.  

 

Yeah you believe everything is literal.  Floating Gold in heaven anyone?

 

You are a LIAR, prove me wrong.  Provide the links I requested above.  You can't. :lol:  

 

[Jhn 8:44 NASB20] 44 "You are of [your] father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he tells a lie, he speaks from his own [nature,] because he is a liar and the father of lies.

 

.

  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Markinsa said:

 

Funny how you keep missing that Word.  Who's he talking too, HIS NOT literal Holy Spirit and Son? :lol:  Liar.

Not sure what you are saying. HE is talking to His Spirit who moved over the waters. And the WORD which had not been made Flesh yet on earth (Jesus) but is The WORD that was WITH God and WAS God. 

I mean it's right there in black and white. Or am I lying that that is what I quoted? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, keylime said:

Not sure what you are saying. HE is talking to His Spirit who moved over the waters. And the WORD which had not been made Flesh yet on earth (Jesus) but is The WORD that was WITH God and WAS God. 

I mean it's right there in black and white. Or am I lying that that is what I quoted? 

 

OH No, Keylime, you're spot on. :twothumbs:

 

@PrehistoricMan thinks, I believe everything in the Bible is Literal, thus I added the "NOT LIteral" phrase as a Jab.  Plus he's trying to insinuate that I've said things I have not.  He cannot dispute the Word of God, so he tries to intimidate me. :lol:

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, PrehistoricMan said:

I knew you wouldnt believe what the Bible says.  It says ONE GOD THE FATHER.  Period.  

 

Wait...Now you believe that those that do not believe as you do will inherit egypts plagues?  It is not a mythical hellfire for you anymore?  IT is now the plagues?  HAHA.  You guys are so mixed up you dont know what you believe in.  ONE GOD THE FATHER.  Dontcha think it would have said ANOTHER GOD JESUS?  But no it doesnt.  And Markinsa is so braindead he thinks LORD means God.  If Jesus were God it would have said it at that verse.  It doesnt.  But hey Markinsa is a guy that believes everything LITERALLY in the Bible.

 

Notice Proverbs 7:6 which states God looks out his window on his lattice to see man down below.  I know I know...Markinsa believes LITERALLY that god has a window.  LOL.

Thank you for that piece of undeniable PROOF that you are not a Christian ! That at best you are a agnostic in Christian clothing. All Christians believe the Bible from the first page to the last page. Where there seems to be a incongruency is the Holy Spirit highlighting a area God wants you to study more on. But with you and your omnipotence , you are more logical than God's omnipotence so you pick and choose . Thus, the satanic lie that cause lucifer and 1/3 of the angels of Heaven to be cast out of Heaven. 

Say, you are in a hospitals ER. Your chest feels as if an elephant is dancing on it.  You’re gasping for air.  Sweat is glistening on your face.  You are in the emergency room of a hospital.  Nurses are hooking wires all over your chest.  Another nurse is searching for a vein to start an I.V.  Another nurse is putting a small pill under your tongue.  After looking at the monitor and the EKG tape, the doctor informs you that you are having a heart attack.  It’s a frightening scene.  Other tests prove that there is a blockage in your heart.  The doctor tells you what has happened to your heart and then proceeds to explain what needs to be done to repair your heart so that you can continue to live.

    Are you going to believe everything he says? Or are you going to pick and choose what you want to believe and disregard the rest, which could cost you your life?  Your life depends on believing everything the doctor tells you. There are people who believe the whole of the Bible.

   There are people like you, who don’t believe anything in the Bible. When you don't believe one thing about the bible you do not believe it all.  But how can a person believe just some of the Bible?  How does a person pick and choose what parts of the Bible are true and what parts are not true?  How can a person believe that Jesus died on the cross to take the sins of the world away and yet not believe that Jesus rose from the dead?  How can a person believe that Jesus did miracles, but that Jonah could not have spent three days in the belly of a great fish?

   What is true and what is not true?  The Bible is God’s Word.  Not believing some of the Bible will lead to doubting all the Bible.  The Bible is not a collection of human ideas and thoughts.  The Bible is God’s Word, given word for word by the Holy Spirit to human writers.  If any part of the Bible is merely human thoughts, and not God’s Word, then all of God’s Word can’t be trusted.  If it is God’s Word, then all of it is true and is to be believed.

True Christians believe the entire Bible is God’s Word and it is true.  Our belief is not founded on shaky ground, as is your pseudo faith.  First, there is more evidence for the documents of the Bible than for any other ancient book.  Second, all the writers of the New Testament wrote within the first century of Christ’s birth.  They all knew Jesus.  Third, even historical facts cited by the writers have been proven to be true.  Fourth, God promised that the writers would tell the truth.  The Holy Spirit guided them so that they did just that.

Christians believe all of the Bible because in it God tells us that he loves us sinful human beings so very much that he sent His Son Jesus to live, suffer, die and rise for us so that we could be with him in heaven.  That is why God tells us that his words “are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31).

   God’s Word is all true. You can trust every word of it from beginning to end. As it is written . 

  • Thanks 1
  • Pow! 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, new york kevin said:

Thank you for that piece of undeniable PROOF that you are not a Christian ! That at best you are a agnostic in Christian clothing. All Christians believe the Bible from the first page to the last page. Where there seems to be a incongruency is the Holy Spirit highlighting a area God wants you to study more on. But with you and your omnipotence , you are more logical than God's omnipotence so you pick and choose . Thus, the satanic lie that cause lucifer and 1/3 of the angels of Heaven to be cast out of Heaven. 

Say, you are in a hospitals ER. Your chest feels as if an elephant is dancing on it.  You’re gasping for air.  Sweat is glistening on your face.  You are in the emergency room of a hospital.  Nurses are hooking wires all over your chest.  Another nurse is searching for a vein to start an I.V.  Another nurse is putting a small pill under your tongue.  After looking at the monitor and the EKG tape, the doctor informs you that you are having a heart attack.  It’s a frightening scene.  Other tests prove that there is a blockage in your heart.  The doctor tells you what has happened to your heart and then proceeds to explain what needs to be done to repair your heart so that you can continue to live.

    Are you going to believe everything he says? Or are you going to pick and choose what you want to believe and disregard the rest, which could cost you your life?  Your life depends on believing everything the doctor tells you. There are people who believe the whole of the Bible.

   There are people like you, who don’t believe anything in the Bible. When you don't believe one thing about the bible you do not believe it all.  But how can a person believe just some of the Bible?  How does a person pick and choose what parts of the Bible are true and what parts are not true?  How can a person believe that Jesus died on the cross to take the sins of the world away and yet not believe that Jesus rose from the dead?  How can a person believe that Jesus did miracles, but that Jonah could not have spent three days in the belly of a great fish?

   What is true and what is not true?  The Bible is God’s Word.  Not believing some of the Bible will lead to doubting all the Bible.  The Bible is not a collection of human ideas and thoughts.  The Bible is God’s Word, given word for word by the Holy Spirit to human writers.  If any part of the Bible is merely human thoughts, and not God’s Word, then all of God’s Word can’t be trusted.  If it is God’s Word, then all of it is true and is to be believed.

True Christians believe the entire Bible is God’s Word and it is true.  Our belief is not founded on shaky ground, as is your pseudo faith.  First, there is more evidence for the documents of the Bible than for any other ancient book.  Second, all the writers of the New Testament wrote within the first century of Christ’s birth.  They all knew Jesus.  Third, even historical facts cited by the writers have been proven to be true.  Fourth, God promised that the writers would tell the truth.  The Holy Spirit guided them so that they did just that.

Christians believe all of the Bible because in it God tells us that he loves us sinful human beings so very much that he sent His Son Jesus to live, suffer, die and rise for us so that we could be with him in heaven.  That is why God tells us that his words “are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31).

   God’s Word is all true. You can trust every word of it from beginning to end. As it is written . 

Amen and Amen! 

Jesus is the Word. Jesus is perfect. Jesus is The Truth. Not some of the truth. Thus, God's Word is perfect and True.

Very simple a child can understand and believe. But not so much a person who fancies themselves so learned but never knows the truth.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Pow! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, new york kevin said:

If any part of the Bible is merely human thoughts, and not God’s Word, then all of God’s Word can’t be trusted.

 

Comic+Book+Style+Peel+and+Stick+Pow+Capt 

@PrehistoricMan

 

[Jhn 5:39-40 NASB20] 39 "You examine the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is those [very Scriptures] that testify about Me; 40 and [yet] you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

 

 

  • Pow! 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/2/2021 at 5:58 AM, keylime said:

You are wrong again. I notice you didn't quote the original King James version which is considered THE officially canonized Word and Holy Scriptures.

 

Do you know the concept of "In the Beginning...?" "1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness...."

Okay. That verse refers to God. Yes? In the beginning. Yes? "And God SAID..." You know...SAID....to speak....? So we see God "Said" all of this in existence...."The SPIRIT of God moved upon the face of the waters." Oh oh....We now have the "SPIRIT" of God. HIS SPIRIT....Hmmm...that's Two. God who SAID, and God His SPIRIT moving....This is getting good...VERSE  26 "

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Ahhhh...."And God SAID..." There's that SAID again....but wait it continues...."Let US make man in OUR image." Oh my goodness. So now you have GOD in the Beginning who SAID things in existence while HIS SPIRIT moved over the waters making man in "OUR image." And He SAID "Let US" US. Who is US? I see it is GOD. I see it is HOLY SPIRIT. But who is there three? Hmmm...

Let me go to John. You know the Gospel of John that is also in the Bible. And just so happens to be the FIRST BOOK of the New Testament like Genesis is the FIRST BOOK of the Old Testament. And what is the first verse or verses of John. Fascinatingly similar to those of Genesis.

"1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

I believe we have a BINGO!

The SAID of Genesis is the exact same WORD in John. Because you know, when you say something, that is known as words you speak. So allow me to break this down for you. 

"In the Beginning..." There's it is. There's that "Beginning" again. That gives us our timeline, the exact one that begins Genesis. So now we know when we are at. Now let's see who we are dealing with. 

"In the beginning was the Word. And the WORD was WITH God." Ahhh...looky looky. That SAID, which was the WORD which was IN THE BEGINNING, was WITH God. So that is who God was talking to when HE SAID let US...and in OUR....But wait...there's more...You're going to love this. Or maybe not since everything I am showing you you already know but somehow, ignorantly and stubbornly reject even though it is in black and white. But I will continue because the next part of this verse says it all. A nice wrap up like a bow on a present which I am giving you. And I quote from the KVJ Bible which no where has the word Demon in it....but I digress...

Here we go...."And the WORD WAS GOD." What?! Let me write that again....Not only was the WORD WITH GOD....meaning separate...BUT the WORD WAS GOD!!!

I know you can't wrap your incredible intellect around it, but it really is not that hard to swallow. So Genesis tells us God made everything. And John tells us without the WORD nothing would have been made. The same WORD that was WITH and WAS God. Hmmmm.....We move on...

Verse 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Another BINGO! WOW! So that same WORD that is WITH and WAS God, was made FLESH. And DWELT among us. Well that could only be JESUS! Why my goodness. So JESUS, also given names in the Old Testament by the Prophets, one being Isaiah. Surely, you've heard this since you are such a Bible scholar, which the word Bible is not in the Bible you remember. But that is what it is called. 

Isaiah 9:6 "King James Bible
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."

So now you have Genesis, three in one. God, Holy Spirit, and the Word(SAID) with US and OUR image. Then you have in Isaiah in another part of the Old Testament, calling JESUS The MIGHTY GOD and EVERLASTING FATHER, and THE PRINCE OF PEACE....Then in John he tells us this very same JESUS was WITH GOD and WAS GOD!

How can this be? I don't know. I just believe what God tells me about HIMSELF. and finally in Revelation I cut and paste this neat little list because I don't have time to type it myself. But I leave this right here. Genesis through Revelation in a quick cursory study of the Trinity which is not in the King James Version but obviously is there in concept, description, and verses. Much like if I tell you picture this animal. It is grey. It has enormous ears. It has a long trunk and tusks. It is over 2000 pounds...You have an ....you can say it...yes an elephant. Wow! You knew what I was refering to without saying the name.....You really are brilliant.

 

Names or Titles of Jesus in the Book of Revelation

  1. Jesus Christ …. Revelation1:1
  2. Faithful Witness ….. Revelation 1:5
  3. First Begotten of the Dead ….. Revelation 1:5
  4. Prince of the Kings of the Earth ….. Revelation 1:5
  5. Alpha and Omega ….. Revelation 1:8-13
  6. First and Last ….. Revelation 1:8, 11, 13
  7. Son of Man ….. Revelation 1;13
  8. He that liveth and was dead ….. Revelation 1:13, 18
  9. He that holdeth the seven stars ….. Revelation 2:1
  10. He who walketh midst the golden candlesticks ….. Revelation 2:1
  11. He who hath the sharp sword with two edges ….. Revelation 2:12
  12. Son of God ….. Revelation 2:18
  13. He which searches the reins and hearts ….. Revelation 2:23
  14. He that hath the seven Spirits of God ….. Revelation 3: 1
  15. He that hath the seven stars ….. Revelation 3:1
  16. He that is holy and true ….. Revelation 3:7
  17. He that hath the key of David ….. Revelation 3:7
  18. He that openeth and no man shutteth ….. Revelation 3:7
  19. He that shutteth and no man openeth ….. Revelation 3:7
  20. The Amen ….. Revelation 3:14
  21. The faithful and true witness ….. Revelation 3:14
  22. The beginning of the creation of God ….. Revelation 3:14
  23. Lord ….. Revelation 4:11
  24. Lion of the tribe of Judah ….. Revelation 5:5,9
  25. The root of David ….. Revelation 5: 5,9
  26. A lamb as it had been slain ….. 5: 6,7
  27. The Lamb ….. Revelation 5: 8,9
  28. Lord of Lords ….. Revelation 17:14
  29. King of Kings …… Revelation 17:14
  30. Faithful and true ….. 19:11
  31. Rider of the white horse ….. 19:11
  32. The Word of God ….. Revelation 19: 13-16
  33. Christ ….. Revelation 20: 4
  34. The Lord God of the Holy Prophets ….. Revelation 22:6
  35. Beginning and the end ….. Revelation 22:13
  36. The bright and morning star ….. Revelation 22: 16

I asked a simple request and got garbage.  You said genesis through revelation it talks about a trinity.  I asked you to show me in EACH book that.  You didnt.  Instead you went on a tangent about genesis 1:26..

 

Sorry, but OUR does not indicate a number.  So it is you that is the liar.  There is no three in our.  It could be three, it could be eight, it could be millions.  No number is mentioned there.  Nice try to lie and state a number is there when it isnt.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2021 at 6:30 AM, Markinsa said:

 

You are a LIAR, prove me wrong.  Provide the links I requested above.  You can't. :lol:  

 

[Jhn 8:44 NASB20] 44 "You are of [your] father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he tells a lie, he speaks from his own [nature,] because he is a liar and the father of lies.

 

.

Show me where I quoted the nwt.  If you cannot then you are the liar.  I dont care if you quote 8:44  It means nothing to me.  Show me the proof where I quote nwt in my writings.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2021 at 6:51 AM, keylime said:

Not sure what you are saying. HE is talking to His Spirit who moved over the waters. And the WORD which had not been made Flesh yet on earth (Jesus) but is The WORD that was WITH God and WAS God. 

I mean it's right there in black and white. Or am I lying that that is what I quoted? 

You are lying.  It doesnt say who he is speaking to.  You are assuming because you want to believe in a trinity that he is speaking to the son and a holy spirit.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2021 at 10:12 AM, Markinsa said:

 

OH No, Keylime, you're spot on. :twothumbs:

 

@PrehistoricMan thinks, I believe everything in the Bible is Literal, thus I added the "NOT LIteral" phrase as a Jab.  Plus he's trying to insinuate that I've said things I have not.  He cannot dispute the Word of God, so he tries to intimidate me. :lol:

 

 

You believe in floating gold.  Therefore you believe everything is literal.  Heck you think a spirit creature has a back.  You have already been defeated multiple times here.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2021 at 10:39 AM, new york kevin said:

Thank you for that piece of undeniable PROOF that you are not a Christian ! That at best you are a agnostic in Christian clothing. All Christians believe the Bible from the first page to the last page. Where there seems to be a incongruency is the Holy Spirit highlighting a area God wants you to study more on. But with you and your omnipotence , you are more logical than God's omnipotence so you pick and choose . Thus, the satanic lie that cause lucifer and 1/3 of the angels of Heaven to be cast out of Heaven. 

Say, you are in a hospitals ER. Your chest feels as if an elephant is dancing on it.  You’re gasping for air.  Sweat is glistening on your face.  You are in the emergency room of a hospital.  Nurses are hooking wires all over your chest.  Another nurse is searching for a vein to start an I.V.  Another nurse is putting a small pill under your tongue.  After looking at the monitor and the EKG tape, the doctor informs you that you are having a heart attack.  It’s a frightening scene.  Other tests prove that there is a blockage in your heart.  The doctor tells you what has happened to your heart and then proceeds to explain what needs to be done to repair your heart so that you can continue to live.

    Are you going to believe everything he says? Or are you going to pick and choose what you want to believe and disregard the rest, which could cost you your life?  Your life depends on believing everything the doctor tells you. There are people who believe the whole of the Bible.

   There are people like you, who don’t believe anything in the Bible. When you don't believe one thing about the bible you do not believe it all.  But how can a person believe just some of the Bible?  How does a person pick and choose what parts of the Bible are true and what parts are not true?  How can a person believe that Jesus died on the cross to take the sins of the world away and yet not believe that Jesus rose from the dead?  How can a person believe that Jesus did miracles, but that Jonah could not have spent three days in the belly of a great fish?

   What is true and what is not true?  The Bible is God’s Word.  Not believing some of the Bible will lead to doubting all the Bible.  The Bible is not a collection of human ideas and thoughts.  The Bible is God’s Word, given word for word by the Holy Spirit to human writers.  If any part of the Bible is merely human thoughts, and not God’s Word, then all of God’s Word can’t be trusted.  If it is God’s Word, then all of it is true and is to be believed.

True Christians believe the entire Bible is God’s Word and it is true.  Our belief is not founded on shaky ground, as is your pseudo faith.  First, there is more evidence for the documents of the Bible than for any other ancient book.  Second, all the writers of the New Testament wrote within the first century of Christ’s birth.  They all knew Jesus.  Third, even historical facts cited by the writers have been proven to be true.  Fourth, God promised that the writers would tell the truth.  The Holy Spirit guided them so that they did just that.

Christians believe all of the Bible because in it God tells us that he loves us sinful human beings so very much that he sent His Son Jesus to live, suffer, die and rise for us so that we could be with him in heaven.  That is why God tells us that his words “are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31).

   God’s Word is all true. You can trust every word of it from beginning to end. As it is written . 

Nah, it is you that doesnt believe in the Bible.  John 17:3 New International Version
Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

New Living Translation
And this is the way to have eternal life—to know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, the one you sent to earth.

English Standard Version
And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

 

Jesus here calls the father the ONLY true God.  Jesus doesnt say I also am the true God does he?  If the father is the only true God, then Jesus cannot be it.

 

I am not going to heaven.  OF course you have no idea what the Bible says.  How about Psalms 37:29?  Phony christians ignore that one.

 

Does Almighty God worship other Gods?  John 20:17  New International Version
Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

New Living Translation
“Don’t cling to me,” Jesus said, “for I haven’t yet ascended to the Father. But go find my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

 

Um, how can Jesus HAVE a God?  IF he is supposed to BE  God?  

 

Your entire belief system fails.

  • Sad 1
  • Downvote 2
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2021 at 11:25 AM, keylime said:

Amen and Amen! 

Jesus is the Word. Jesus is perfect. Jesus is The Truth. Not some of the truth. Thus, God's Word is perfect and True.

Very simple a child can understand and believe. But not so much a person who fancies themselves so learned but never knows the truth.

 

Yup a simple child can understand it.  Hebrews 5:8  New International Version
Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered

New Living Translation
Even though Jesus was God’s Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered.

 

Jesus is supposed to be ALMIGHTY ALL KNOWING God,  aaanndddd yet he is so dumb he has to LEARN.  Wait...doesnt God know eveyrthing?

 

Again your entire belief system falls apart.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2021 at 11:49 AM, Markinsa said:

 

Comic+Book+Style+Peel+and+Stick+Pow+Capt 

@PrehistoricMan

 

[Jhn 5:39-40 NASB20] 39 "You examine the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is those [very Scriptures] that testify about Me; 40 and [yet] you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

 

 

AGain for the uneducated....The bible is written so MAN can understand it.  It is NOT Gods thoughts to say streets of gold.  IT is an earthly term to describe heaven to a man.  But again, you think everything is literal and all are gods thoughts.  How about Judas turning against JEsus?  Did God um, think that up?  Or did it really happen?

 

AGain for the third time, please markinsa put ALL your thoughts into one post.  That way I dont have to respond 8 frickin times.  But this is what I am against folks.  Fighting with 4 people here.  THEY dont have the courage to go one on one against me.  They love to dogpile.

Edited by PrehistoricMan
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PrehistoricMan said:

I asked a simple request and got garbage.  You said genesis through revelation it talks about a trinity.  I asked you to show me in EACH book that.  You didnt.  Instead you went on a tangent about genesis 1:26..

 

Sorry, but OUR does not indicate a number.  So it is you that is the liar.  There is no three in our.  It could be three, it could be eight, it could be millions.  No number is mentioned there.  Nice try to lie and state a number is there when it isnt.

God head son , God head. In case you didn't hear me God head. God, 3 in 1 thats in  the Bible . In midevil times,  Catholics took the same concept and brought in the term trinity to describe the same thing . Read back about 5000 entries previously on this thread ,where you asked the same valiant question, and I responded just like this , then . You are like the Iraqi News Agency, no new news to speak of , just recycle the same old stuff, rearrange some words, and throw in some new punctuation for giggles . 

Edited by new york kevin
  • Pow! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PrehistoricMan said:

AGain for the uneducated....The bible is written so MAN can understand it.  It is NOT Gods thoughts to say streets of gold.  IT is an earthly term to describe heaven to a man.  But again, you think everything is literal and all are gods thoughts.  How about Judas turning against JEsus?  Did God um, think that up?  Or did it really happen?

 

AGain for the third time, please markinsa put ALL your thoughts into one post.  That way I dont have to respond 8 frickin times.  But this is what I am against folks.  Fighting with 4 people here.  THEY dont have the courage to go one on one against me.  They love to dogpile.

Don't answer if you don't want a response. You're stupid if you think someone doesn't have the courage to go one on one against you. Ha! It doesn't take courage to get behind a keyboard and talk crap like you have been doing. Sorry. You are not a threat except in your own feeble mind That may be your most ignorant comment. And every one of your comments are ignorant.

And that last one just revealed what a waste of time going back and forth with you has been. You really are full of yourself and full of pride.

Have a nice eternity wherever you end up. Pitiful.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
  • Pow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.gcu.edu/blog/theology-ministry/theology-thursday-gods-right-hand

Theology Thursday: At God's Right Hand

By Amanda Jenkins
July 02, 2020 in [ Theology & Ministry ]

 

Praying hands are accompanied by a cross and Bible

Jesus Christ is the eternally begotten (not made) son of God the Father. We believe that he has been God for all of eternity, but at a particular time, and in a particular place – namely the time of the four gospel accounts – he became a human. God taking the form of humanity is what we call the incarnation. Jesus’s life, death and resurrection are all done while he is God incarnate – God in human form – and after the resurrection we see that Jesus ascends to heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father, also incarnate. Jesus Christ goes back to heaven after his life on earth and reigns there.

Jesus and the Father

The line from the Apostles' Creed “He sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty” has both theological and practical implications. The “right hand” is seen as a place of honor and status throughout the biblical text. When the Bible makes statements that Jesus Christ sits at the right hand of the Father, it is affirming that he has equal status to the Father within the Godhead (Hebrews 1:3, 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22; Acts 7:55-56).

An example of this can be seen in 1 Peter 3:22,

“(Jesus) Who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities and powers having been subjected to him" – ESV 

All things in creation are under the power of the throne of God. Jesus Christ is forever reigning at the right hand of God the Father.

Jesus and the Holy Spirit

Acts 2:33 shows how the Father, the Son and the Spirit are all working together to allow humanity to know God. It states,

All things in creation are under the power of the throne of God. Jesus Christ is forever reigning at the right hand of God the Father.

Jesus and the Holy Spirit

Acts 2:33 shows how the Father, the Son and the Spirit are all working together to allow humanity to know God. It states,

Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven”

As our great High Priest, Jesus Christ eternally bridges the gap between the perfection and holiness of God, and the sinfulness of humanity. Jesus’s placement at the right hand of the Father makes him our eternal mediator.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the incarnation Jesus accomplishes all that is necessary for salvation. When Jesus ascends to heaven the Holy Spirit descends. The Holy Spirit has been active since the creation of the world, but since the descending of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost he is actively moving to apply the hope and benefits of salvation. Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father, but the Spirit is given to humanity in order to continue to reveal the Triune God. It is through the interworking of the Trinity that Christians draw their faith and confidence.

Jesus and Humanity

At times in the biblical text we see that Jesus’s placement at the right hand allows him to intercede for humanity, namely believers (Roman 8:34). Jesus’s uniqueness of being fully God and fully man allows him to be the human at the right hand of God. As an eternal human, Jesus’s placement at the right hand of the Father should instill comfort and hope for all humans who believe in him.

Furthermore Hebrews 8:1 states,

“Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven”

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are the ones who are to be pitied.  You will find out that you entire belief system was wrong.  My hands are free from your blood.  

 

I have courage.  The mob doesnt.  We cannot even have a conversation without you bullies giving me reds.  Notice I havent given any of you reds.  

 

Because you are ignorant bullies.  You know nothing of the Bible and refuse to even consider you might be wrong.  My verses destroyed your points.  Did you even consider them?  No.  Because you live in an echo chamber.  

 

IF I continue here with people that do not want to reason, you will just gang up on me bullying me with reds.  That is not cool and you are not real christians by your actions.

 

But again these writings are not for you.  IT is for others that might read this.  JWs do not go door to door anymore.  The latest info is we will not be offering bible studies anymore.  You people have had enough time.  The next time we go door to door will be just to tell the people they will die.  That will be a sad yet exciting time.

 

Trinity — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY (jw.org)

Trinity

Definition: The central doctrine of religions of Christendom. According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God. Other statements of the dogma emphasize that these three “Persons” are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists. Thus some Trinitarians emphasize their belief that Jesus Christ is God, or that Jesus and the Holy Ghost are Jehovah. Not a Bible teaching.

What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?

The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.

In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: “Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.”—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.

John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians.”—(New York, 1965), p. 899.

Even though, as Trinitarians acknowledge, neither the word “Trinity” nor a statement of the Trinitarian dogma is found in the Bible, are the concepts that are embodied in that dogma found there?

Does the Bible teach that the “Holy Spirit” is a person?

Some individual texts that refer to the holy spirit (“Holy Ghost,” KJ) might seem to indicate personality. For example, the holy spirit is referred to as a helper (Greek, pa·raʹkle·tos; “Comforter,” KJ; “Advocate,” JB, NE) that ‘teaches,’ ‘bears witness,’ ‘speaks’ and ‘hears.’ (John 14:16, 17, 26; 15:26; 16:13) But other texts say that people were “filled” with holy spirit, that some were ‘baptized’ with it or “anointed” with it. (Luke 1:41; Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:38) These latter references to holy spirit definitely do not fit a person. To understand what the Bible as a whole teaches, all these texts must be considered. What is the reasonable conclusion? That the first texts cited here employ a figure of speech personifying God’s holy spirit, his active force, as the Bible also personifies wisdom, sin, death, water, and blood. (See also pages 380, 381, under the heading “Spirit.”)

The Holy Scriptures tell us the personal name of the Father—Jehovah. They inform us that the Son is Jesus Christ. But nowhere in the Scriptures is a personal name applied to the holy spirit.

Acts 7:55, 56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw “Jesus standing at God’s right hand.” But he made no mention of seeing the holy spirit. (See also Revelation 7:10; 22:1, 3.)

The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “The majority of N[ew] T[estament] texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God.” (1967, Vol. XIII, p. 575) It also reports: “The Apologists [Greek Christian writers of the second century] spoke too haltingly of the Spirit; with a measure of anticipation, one might say too impersonally.”—Vol. XIV, p. 296.

Does the Bible agree with those who teach that the Father and the Son are not separate and distinct individuals?

Matt. 26:39, RS: “Going a little farther he [Jesus Christ] fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.’” (If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father’s will.)

John 8:17, 18, RS: “[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:] In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me.” (So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father.)

See also pages 197, 198, under “Jehovah.”

Does the Bible teach that all who are said to be part of the Trinity are eternal, none having a beginning?

Col. 1:15, 16, RS: “He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth.” In what sense is Jesus Christ “the first-born of all creation”? (1) Trinitarians say that “first-born” here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; thus Christ would be understood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is so, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But the Bible applies this expression only to the Son. According to the customary meaning of “firstborn,” it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah’s family of sons. (2) Before Colossians 1:15, the expression “the firstborn of” occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies—the firstborn is part of the group. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals. What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15? Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof? (3) Does Colossians 1:16, 17 (RS) exclude Jesus from having been created, when it says “in him all things were created . . . all things were created through him and for him”? The Greek word here rendered “all things” is panʹta, an inflected form of pas. At Luke 13:2, RS renders this “all . . . other”; JB reads “any other”; NE says “anyone else.” (See also Luke 21:29 in NE and Philippians 2:21 in JB.) In harmony with everything else that the Bible says regarding the Son, NW assigns the same meaning to panʹta at Colossians 1:16, 17 so that it reads, in part, “by means of him all other things were created . . . All other things have been created through him and for him.” Thus he is shown to be a created being, part of the creation produced by God.

Rev. 1:1; 3:14, RS: “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him . . . ‘And to the angel of the church in La-odicea write: “The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning [Greek, ar·kheʹ] of God’s creation.”’” (KJ, Dy, CC, and NW, as well as others, read similarly.) Is that rendering correct? Some take the view that what is meant is that the Son was ‘the beginner of God’s creation,’ that he was its ‘ultimate source.’ But Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon lists “beginning” as its first meaning of ar·kheʹ. (Oxford, 1968, p. 252) The logical conclusion is that the one being quoted at Revelation 3:14 is a creation, the first of God’s creations, that he had a beginning. Compare Proverbs 8:22, where, as many Bible commentators agree, the Son is referred to as wisdom personified. According to RS, NE, and JB, the one there speaking is said to be “created.”)

Prophetically, with reference to the Messiah, Micah 5:2 (KJ) says his “goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” Dy reads: “his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity.” Does that make him the same as God? It is noteworthy that, instead of saying “days of eternity,” RS renders the Hebrew as “ancient days”; JB, “days of old”; NW, “days of time indefinite.” Viewed in the light of Revelation 3:14, discussed above, Micah 5:2 does not prove that Jesus was without a beginning.

Does the Bible teach that none of those who are said to be included in the Trinity is greater or less than another, that all are equal, that all are almighty?

Mark 13:32, RS: “Of that day or that hour no ones knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Of course, that would not be the case if Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were coequal, comprising one Godhead. And if, as some suggest, the Son was limited by his human nature from knowing, the question remains, Why did the Holy Spirit not know?)

Matt. 20:20-23, RS: “The mother of the sons of Zebedee . . . said to him [Jesus], ‘Command that these two sons of mine may sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.’ But Jesus answered, . . . ‘You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.’” (How strange, if, as claimed, Jesus is God! Was Jesus here merely answering according to his “human nature”? If, as Trinitarians say, Jesus was truly “God-man”—both God and man, not one or the other—would it truly be consistent to resort to such an explanation? Does not Matthew 20:23 rather show that the Son is not equal to the Father, that the Father has reserved some prerogatives for himself?)

Matt. 12:31, 32, RS: “Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.” (If the Holy Spirit were a person and were God, this text would flatly contradict the Trinity doctrine, because it would mean that in some way the Holy Spirit was greater than the Son. Instead, what Jesus said shows that the Father, to whom the “Spirit” belonged, is greater than Jesus, the Son of man.)

John 14:28, RS: “[Jesus said:] If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.”

1 Cor. 11:3, RS: “I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” (Clearly, then, Christ is not God, and God is of superior rank to Christ. It should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.)

1 Cor. 15:27, 28 RS: “‘God has put all things in subjection under his [Jesus’] feet.’ But when it says, ‘All things are put in subjection under him,’ it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one.”

The Hebrew word Shad·daiʹ and the Greek word Pan·to·kraʹtor are both translated “Almighty.” Both original-language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Ex. 6:3; Rev. 19:6) Neither expression is ever applied to either the Son or the holy spirit.

Does the Bible teach that each of those said to be part of the Trinity is God?

Jesus said in prayer: “Father, . . . this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:1-3, RS; italics added.) (Most translations here use the expression “the only true God” with reference to the Father. NE reads “who alone art truly God.” He cannot be “the only true God,” the one “who alone [is] truly God,” if there are two others who are God to the same degree as he is, can he? Any others referred to as “gods” must be either false or merely a reflection of the true God.)

1 Cor. 8:5, 6, RS: “Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” (This presents the Father as the “one God” of Christians and as being in a class distinct from Jesus Christ.)

1 Pet. 1:3, RS: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” (Repeatedly, even following Jesus’ ascension to heaven, the Scriptures refer to the Father as “the God” of Jesus Christ. At John 20:17, following Jesus’ resurrection, he himself spoke of the Father as “my God.” Later, when in heaven, as recorded at Revelation 3:12, he again used the same expression. But never in the Bible is the Father reported to refer to the Son as “my God,” nor does either the Father or the Son refer to the holy spirit as “my God.”)

For comments on scriptures used by some in an effort to prove that Christ is God, see pages 212-216, under the heading “Jesus Christ.”

In Theological Investigations, Karl Rahner, S.J., admits: “Θεός [God] is still never used of the Spirit,” and: “ὁ θεός [literally, the God] is never used in the New Testament to speak of the πνεῦμα ἅγιον [holy spirit].”—(Baltimore, Md.; 1961), translated from German, Vol. I, pp. 138, 143.

Do any of the scriptures that are used by Trinitarians to support their belief provide a solid basis for that dogma?

A person who is really seeking to know the truth about God is not going to search the Bible hoping to find a text that he can construe as fitting what he already believes. He wants to know what God’s Word itself says. He may find some texts that he feels can be read in more than one way, but when these are compared with other Biblical statements on the same subject their meaning will become clear. It should be noted at the outset that most of the texts used as “proof” of the Trinity actually mention only two persons, not three; so even if the Trinitarian explanation of the texts were correct, these would not prove that the Bible teaches the Trinity. Consider the following:

(Unless otherwise indicated, all the texts quoted in the following section are from RS.)

Texts in which a title that belongs to Jehovah is applied to Jesus Christ or is claimed to apply to Jesus

Alpha and Omega: To whom does this title properly belong? (1) At Revelation 1:8, its owner is said to be God, the Almighty. In verse 11 according to KJ, that title is applied to one whose description thereafter shows him to be Jesus Christ. But scholars recognize the reference to Alpha and Omega in verse 11 to be spurious, and so it does not appear in RS, NE, JB, NAB, Dy. (2) Many translations of Revelation into Hebrew recognize that the one described in verse 8 is Jehovah, and so they restore the personal name of God there. See NW, 1984 Reference edition. (3) Revelation 21:6, 7 indicates that Christians who are spiritual conquerors are to be ‘sons’ of the one known as the Alpha and the Omega. That is never said of the relationship of spirit-anointed Christians to Jesus Christ. Jesus spoke of them as his ‘brothers.’ (Heb. 2:11; Matt. 12:50; 25:40) But those ‘brothers’ of Jesus are referred to as “sons of God.” (Gal. 3:26; 4:6) (4) At Revelation 22:12, TEV inserts the name Jesus, so the reference to Alpha and Omega in verse 13 is made to appear to apply to him. But the name Jesus does not appear there in Greek, and other translations do not include it. (5) At Revelation 22:13, the Alpha and Omega is also said to be “the first and the last,” which expression is applied to Jesus at Revelation 1:17, 18. Similarly, the expression “apostle” is applied both to Jesus Christ and to certain ones of his followers. But that does not prove that they are the same person or are of equal rank, does it? (Heb. 3:1) So the evidence points to the conclusion that the title “Alpha and Omega” applies to Almighty God, the Father, not to the Son.

Savior: Repeatedly the Scriptures refer to God as Savior. At Isaiah 43:11 God even says: “Besides me there is no savior.” Since Jesus is also referred to as Savior, are God and Jesus the same? Not at all. Titus 1:3, 4 speaks of “God our Savior,” and then of both “God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.” So, both persons are saviors. Jude 25 shows the relationship, saying: “God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Italics added.) (See also Acts 13:23.) At Judges 3:9, the same Hebrew word (moh·shiʹa‛, rendered “savior” or “deliverer”) that is used at Isaiah 43:11 is applied to Othniel, a judge in Israel, but that certainly did not make Othniel Jehovah, did it? A reading of Isaiah 43:1-12 shows that verse 11 means that Jehovah alone was the One who provided salvation, or deliverance, for Israel; that salvation did not come from any of the gods of the surrounding nations.

God: At Isaiah 43:10 Jehovah says: “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” Does this mean that, because Jesus Christ is prophetically called “Mighty God” at Isaiah 9:6, Jesus must be Jehovah? Again, the context answers, No! None of the idolatrous Gentile nations formed a god before Jehovah, because no one existed before Jehovah. Nor would they at a future time form any real, live god that was able to prophesy. (Isa. 46:9, 10) But that does not mean that Jehovah never caused to exist anyone who is properly referred to as a god. (Ps. 82:1, 6; John 1:1, NW) At Isaiah 10:21 Jehovah is referred to as “mighty God,” just as Jesus is in Isaiah 9:6; but only Jehovah is ever called “God Almighty.”Gen. 17:1.

If a certain title or descriptive phrase is found in more than one location in the Scriptures, it should never hastily be concluded that it must always refer to the same person. Such reasoning would lead to the conclusion that Nebuchadnezzar was Jesus Christ, because both were called “king of kings” (Dan. 2:37; Rev. 17:14); and that Jesus’ disciples were actually Jesus Christ, because both were called “the light of the world.” (Matt. 5:14; John 8:12) We should always consider the context and any other instances in the Bible where the same expression occurs.

Application to Jesus Christ by inspired Bible writers of passages from the Hebrew Scriptures that clearly apply to Jehovah

Why does John 1:23 quote Isaiah 40:3 and apply it to what John the Baptizer did in preparing the way for Jesus Christ, when Isaiah 40:3 is clearly discussing preparing the way before Jehovah? Because Jesus represented his Father. He came in his Father’s name and had the assurance that his Father was always with him because he did the things pleasing to his Father.—John 5:43; 8:29.

Why does Hebrews 1:10-12 quote Psalm 102:25-27 and apply it to the Son, when the psalm says that it is addressed to God? Because the Son is the one through whom God performed the creative works there described by the psalmist. (See Colossians 1:15, 16; Proverbs 8:22, 27-30.) It should be observed in Hebrews 1:5b that a quotation is made from 2 Samuel 7:14 and applied to the Son of God. Although that text had its first application to Solomon, the later application of it to Jesus Christ does not mean that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is “greater than Solomon” and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon.—Luke 11:31.

Scriptures that mention together the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit

Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are instances of this. Neither of these texts says that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are coequal or coeternal or that all are God. The Scriptural evidence already presented on pages 408-412 argues against reading such thoughts into the texts.

McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, though advocating the Trinity doctrine, acknowledges regarding Matthew 28:18-20: “This text, however, taken by itself, would not prove decisively either the personality of the three subjects mentioned, or their equality or divinity.” (1981 reprint, Vol. X, p. 552) Regarding other texts that also mention the three together, this Cyclopedia admits that, taken by themselves, they are “insufficient” to prove the Trinity. (Compare 1 Timothy 5:21, where God and Christ and the angels are mentioned together.)

Texts in which the plural form of nouns is applied to God in the Hebrew Scriptures

At Genesis 1:1 the title “God” is translated from ’Elo·himʹ, which is plural in Hebrew. Trinitarians construe this to be an indication of the Trinity. They also explain Deuteronomy 6:4 to imply the unity of members of the Trinity when it says, “The LORD our God [from ’Elo·himʹ] is one LORD.”

The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence. (See NAB, St. Joseph Edition, Bible Dictionary, p. 330; also, New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. V, p. 287.) It conveys no thought of plurality of persons within a godhead. In similar fashion, at Judges 16:23 when reference is made to the false god Dagon, a form of the title ’elo·himʹ is used; the accompanying verb is singular, showing that reference is to just the one god. At Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the “lord” (’adho·nehʹ, the plural of excellence) of Egypt.

The Greek language does not have a ‘plural of majesty or excellence.’ So, at Genesis 1:1 the translators of LXX used ho The·osʹ (God, singular) as the equivalent of ’Elo·himʹ. At Mark 12:29, where a reply of Jesus is reproduced in which he quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, the Greek singular ho The·osʹ is similarly used.

At Deuteronomy 6:4, the Hebrew text contains the Tetragrammaton twice, and so should more properly read: “Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.” (NW) The nation of Israel, to whom that was stated, did not believe in the Trinity. The Babylonians and the Egyptians worshiped triads of gods, but it was made clear to Israel that Jehovah is different.

Texts from which a person might draw more than one conclusion, depending on the Bible translation used

If a passage can grammatically be translated in more than one way, what is the correct rendering? One that is in agreement with the rest of the Bible. If a person ignores other portions of the Bible and builds his belief around a favorite rendering of a particular verse, then what he believes really reflects, not the Word of God, but his own ideas and perhaps those of another imperfect human.

John 1:1, 2:

RS reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.” (KJ, Dy, JB, NAB use similar wording.) However, NW reads: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in the beginning with God.”

Which translation of John 1:1, 2 agrees with the context? John 1:18 says: “No one has ever seen God.” Verse 14 clearly says that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . . . we have beheld his glory.” Also, verses 1, 2 say that in the beginning he was “with God.” Can one be with someone and at the same time be that person? At John 17:3, Jesus addresses the Father as “the only true God”; so, Jesus as “a god” merely reflects his Father’s divine qualities.—Heb. 1:3.

Is the rendering “a god” consistent with the rules of Greek grammar? Some reference books argue strongly that the Greek text must be translated, “The Word was God.” But not all agree. In his article “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1,” Philip B. Harner said that such clauses as the one in John 1:1, “with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning. They indicate that the logos has the nature of theos.” He suggests: “Perhaps the clause could be translated, ‘the Word had the same nature as God.’” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87) Thus, in this text, the fact that the word the·osʹ in its second occurrence is without the definite article (ho) and is placed before the verb in the sentence in Greek is significant. Interestingly, translators that insist on rendering John 1:1, “The Word was God,” do not hesitate to use the indefinite article (a, an) in their rendering of other passages where a singular anarthrous predicate noun occurs before the verb. Thus at John 6:70, JB and KJ both refer to Judas Iscariot as “a devil,” and at John 9:17 they describe Jesus as “a prophet.”

John J. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated ‘the word was with the God [= the Father], and the word was a divine being.’”—(Brackets are his. Published with nihil obstat and imprimatur.) (New York, 1965), p. 317.

In harmony with the above, AT reads: “the Word was divine”; Mo, “the Logos was divine”; NTIV, “the word was a god.” In his German translation Ludwig Thimme expresses it in this way: “God of a sort the Word was.” Referring to the Word (who became Jesus Christ) as “a god” is consistent with the use of that term in the rest of the Scriptures. For example, at Psalm 82:1-6 human judges in Israel were referred to as “gods” (Hebrew, ’elo·himʹ; Greek, the·oiʹ, at John 10:34) because they were representatives of Jehovah and were to speak his law.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, p. 1579.

John 8:58:

RS reads: “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am [Greek, e·goʹ ei·miʹ].’” (NE, KJ, TEV, JB, NAB all read “I am,” some even using capital letters to convey the idea of a title. Thus they endeavor to connect the expression with Exodus 3:14, where, according to their rendering, God refers to himself by the title “I Am.”) However, in NW the latter part of John 8:58 reads: “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” (The same idea is conveyed by the wording in AT, Mo, CBW, and SE.)

Which rendering agrees with the context? The question of the Jews (verse 57) to which Jesus was replying had to do with age, not identity. Jesus’ reply logically dealt with his age, the length of his existence. Interestingly, no effort is ever made to apply e·goʹ ei·miʹ as a title to the holy spirit.

Says A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, by A. T. Robertson: “The verb [ei·miʹ] . . . Sometimes it does express existence as a predicate like any other verb, as in [e·goʹ ei·miʹ] (Jo. 8:58).”—Nashville, Tenn.; 1934, p. 394.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, pp. 1582, 1583.

Acts 20:28:

JB reads: “Be on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you the overseers, to feed the Church of God which he bought with his own blood.” (KJ, Dy, NAB use similar wording.) However, in NW the latter part of the verse reads: “the blood of his own [Son].” (TEV reads similarly. Although the 1953 printing of RS reads “with his own blood,” the 1971 edition reads “with the blood of his own Son.” Ro and Da simply read “the blood of his own.”)

Which rendering(s) agree with 1 John 1:7, which says: “The blood of Jesus his [God’s] Son cleanses us from all sin”? (See also Revelation 1:4-6.) As stated in John 3:16, did God send his only-begotten Son, or did he himself come as a man, so that we might have life? It was the blood, not of God, but of his Son that was poured out.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, p. 1580.

Romans 9:5:

JB reads: “They are descended from the patriarchs and from their flesh and blood came Christ who is above all, God for ever blessed! Amen.” (KJ, Dy read similarly.) However, in NW the latter part of the verse reads: “from whom the Christ sprang according to the flesh: God, who is over all, be blessed forever. Amen.” (RS, NE, TEV, NAB, Mo all use wording similar to NW.)

Is this verse saying that Christ is “over all” and that he is therefore God? Or does it refer to God and Christ as distinct individuals and say that God is “over all”? Which rendering of Romans 9:5 agrees with Romans 15:5, 6, which first distinguishes God from Christ Jesus and then urges the reader to “glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ”? (See also 2 Corinthians 1:3 and Ephesians 1:3.) Consider what follows in Romans chapter 9. Verses 6-13 show that the outworking of God’s purpose depends not on inheritance according to the flesh but on the will of God. Verses 14-18 refer to God’s message to Pharaoh, as recorded at Exodus 9:16, to highlight the fact that God is over all. In verses 19-24 God’s superiority is further illustrated by an analogy with a potter and the clay vessels that he makes. How appropriate, then, in verse 5, the expression: “God, who is over all, be blessed forever. Amen”!—NW.

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology states: “Rom. 9:5 is disputed. . . . It would be easy, and linguistically perfectly possible to refer the expression to Christ. The verse would then read, ‘Christ who is God over all, blessed for ever. Amen.’ Even so, Christ would not be equated absolutely with God, but only described as a being of divine nature, for the word theos has no article. . . . The much more probable explanation is that the statement is a doxology directed to God.”—(Grand Rapids, Mich.; 1976), translated from German, Vol. 2, p. 80.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, pp. 1580, 1581.

Philippians 2:5, 6:

KJ reads: “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” (Dy has the same wording. JB reads: “he did not cling to his equality with God.”) However, in NW the latter portion of that passage reads: “who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure [Greek, har·pag·monʹ], namely, that he should be equal to God.” (RS, NE, TEV, NAB convey the same thought.)

Which thought agrees with the context? Verse 5 counsels Christians to imitate Christ in the matter here being discussed. Could they be urged to consider it “not robbery,” but their right, “to be equal with God”? Surely not! However, they can imitate one who “gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.” (NW) (Compare Genesis 3:5.) Such a translation also agrees with Jesus Christ himself, who said: “The Father is greater than I.”—John 14:28.

The Expositor’s Greek Testament says: “We cannot find any passage where [har·paʹzo] or any of its derivatives [including har·pag·monʹ] has the sense of ‘holding in possession,’ ‘retaining’. It seems invariably to mean ‘seize,’ ‘****** violently’. Thus it is not permissible to glide from the true sense ‘grasp at’ into one which is totally different, ‘hold fast.’”—(Grand Rapids, Mich.; 1967), edited by W. Robertson Nicoll, Vol. III, pp. 436, 437.

Colossians 2:9:

KJ reads: “In him [Christ] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead [Greek, the·oʹte·tos] bodily.” (A similar thought is conveyed by the renderings in NE, RS, JB, NAB, Dy.) However, NW reads: “It is in him that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily.” (AT, We, and CKW read “God’s nature,” instead of “Godhead.” Compare 2 Peter 1:4.)

Admittedly, not everyone offers the same interpretation of Colossians 2:9. But what is in agreement with the rest of the inspired letter to the Colossians? Did Christ have in himself something that is his because he is God, part of a Trinity? Or is “the fullness” that dwells in him something that became his because of the decision of someone else? Colossians 1:19 (KJ, Dy) says that all fullness dwelt in Christ because it “pleased the Father” for this to be the case. NE says it was “by God’s own choice.”

Consider the immediate context of Colossians 2:9: In verse 8, readers are warned against being misled by those who advocate philosophy and human traditions. They are also told that in Christ “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” and are urged to “live in him” and to be “rooted and built up in him and established in the faith.” (Verses 3, 6, 7) It is in him, and not in the originators or the teachers of human philosophy, that a certain precious “fulness” dwells. Was the apostle Paul there saying that the “fulness” that was in Christ made Christ God himself? Not according to Colossians 3:1, where Christ is said to be “seated at the right hand of God.”—See KJ, Dy, TEV, NAB.

According to Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, the·oʹtes (the nominative form, from which the·oʹte·tos is derived) means “divinity, divine nature.” (Oxford, 1968, p. 792) Being truly “divinity,” or of “divine nature,” does not make Jesus as the Son of God coequal and coeternal with the Father, any more than the fact that all humans share “humanity” or “human nature” makes them coequal or all the same age.

Titus 2:13:

RS reads: “Awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.” (Similar wording is found in NE, TEV, JB.) However, NW reads: “while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of the Savior of us, Christ Jesus.” (NAB has a similar rendering.)

Which translation agrees with Titus 1:4, which refers to “God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior”? Although the Scriptures also refer to God as being a Savior, this text clearly differentiates between him and Christ Jesus, the one through whom God provides salvation.

Some argue that Titus 2:13 indicates that Christ is both God and Savior. Interestingly, RS, NE, TEV, JB render Titus 2:13 in a way that might be construed as allowing for that view, but they do not follow the same rule in their translation of 2 Thessalonians 1:12. Henry Alford, in The Greek Testament, states: “I would submit that [a rendering that clearly differentiates God and Christ, at Titus 2:13] satisfies all the grammatical requirements of the sentence: that it is both structurally and contextually more probable, and more agreeable to the Apostle’s way of writing.”—(Boston, 1877), Vol. III, p. 421.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, pp. 1581, 1582.

Hebrews 1:8:

RS reads: “Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.) However, NW reads: “But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’” (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.)

Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression “God, thy God,” showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in RS, reads “Your divine throne.” (NE says, “Your throne is like God’s throne.” JP [verse 7]: “Thy throne given of God.”) Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit “upon Jehovah’s throne.” (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the “throne,” or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him.

Hebrews 1:8, 9 quotes from Psalm 45:6, 7, concerning which the Bible scholar B. F. Westcott states: “The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the·osʹ] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the·osʹ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo·himʹ] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the·osʹ] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’”—The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26.

1 John 5:7, 8:

KJ reads: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” (Dy also includes this Trinitarian passage.) However, NW does not include the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth.” (RS, NE, TEV, JB, NAB also leave out the Trinitarian passage.)

Regarding this Trinitarian passage, textual critic F. H. A. Scrivener wrote: “We need not hesitate to declare our conviction that the disputed words were not written by St. John: that they were originally brought into Latin copies in Africa from the margin, where they had been placed as a pious and orthodox gloss on ver. 8: that from the Latin they crept into two or three late Greek codices, and thence into the printed Greek text, a place to which they had no rightful claim.”—A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (Cambridge, 1883, third ed.), p. 654.

See also footnote on these verses in JB, and NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, p. 1580.

Other scriptures that are said by Trinitarians to express elements of their dogma

Notice that the first of these texts refers to only the Son; the other refers to both Father and Son; neither refers to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and says that they comprise one God.

John 2:19-22:

By what he here said, did Jesus mean that he would resurrect himself from the dead? Does that mean that Jesus is God, because Acts 2:32 says, “This Jesus God raised up”? Not at all. Such a view would conflict with Galatians 1:1, which ascribes the resurrection of Jesus to the Father, not to the Son. Using a similar mode of expression, at Luke 8:48 Jesus is quoted as saying to a woman: “Your faith has made you well.” Did she heal herself? No; it was power from God through Christ that healed her because she had faith. (Luke 8:46; Acts 10:38) Likewise, by his perfect obedience as a human, Jesus provided the moral basis for the Father to raise him from the dead, thus acknowledging Jesus as God’s Son. Because of Jesus’ faithful course of life, it could properly be said that Jesus himself was responsible for his resurrection.

Says A. T. Robertson in Word Pictures in the New Testament: “Recall [John] 2:19 where Jesus said: ‘And in three days I will raise it up.’ He did not mean that he will raise himself from the dead independently of the Father as the active agent (Rom. 8:11).”—(New York, 1932), Vol. V, p. 183.

John 10:30:

When saying, “I and the Father are one,” did Jesus mean that they were equal? Some Trinitarians say that he did. But at John 17:21, 22, Jesus prayed regarding his followers: “That they may all be one,” and he added, “that they may be one even as we are one.” He used the same Greek word (hen) for “one” in all these instances. Obviously, Jesus’ disciples do not all become part of the Trinity. But they do come to share a oneness of purpose with the Father and the Son, the same sort of oneness that unites God and Christ.

In what position does belief in the Trinity put those who cling to it?

It puts them in a very dangerous position. The evidence is indisputable that the dogma of the Trinity is not found in the Bible, nor is it in harmony with what the Bible teaches. (See the preceding pages.) It grossly misrepresents the true God. Yet, Jesus Christ said: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:23, 24, RS) Thus Jesus made it clear that those whose worship is not ‘in truth,’ not in harmony with the truth set out in God’s own Word, are not “true worshipers.” To Jewish religious leaders of the first century, Jesus said: “For the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’” (Matt. 15:6-9, RS) That applies with equal force to those in Christendom today who advocate human traditions in preference to the clear truths of the Bible.

Regarding the Trinity, the Athanasian Creed (in English) says that its members are “incomprehensible.” Teachers of the doctrine often state that it is a “mystery.” Obviously such a Trinitarian God is not the one that Jesus had in mind when he said: “We worship what we know.” (John 4:22, RS) Do you really know the God you worship?

Serious questions confront each one of us: Do we sincerely love the truth? Do we really want an approved relationship with God? Not everyone genuinely loves the truth. Many have put having the approval of their relatives and associates above love of the truth and of God. (2 Thess. 2:9-12; John 5:39-44) But, as Jesus said in earnest prayer to his heavenly Father: “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3, NW) And Psalm 144:15 truthfully states: “Happy is the people whose God is Jehovah!”—NW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PrehistoricMan said:

But again these writings are not for you.  IT is for others that might read this.  JWs do not go door to door anymore.  The latest info is we will not be offering bible studies anymore.  You people have had enough time.  The next time we go door to door will be just to tell the people they will die.  That will be a sad yet exciting time.

 

Trinity — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY (jw.org)

So after all the denying you are not a JW, you now say you are.  

That doesn't instill a lot of desire to believe anything you say.

Yout life. Live it as you like. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Pow! 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, PrehistoricMan said:

You guys are the ones who are to be pitied.  You will find out that you entire belief system was wrong.  My hands are free from your blood.  

 

I have courage.  The mob doesnt.  We cannot even have a conversation without you bullies giving me reds.  Notice I havent given any of you reds.  

 

Because you are ignorant bullies.  You know nothing of the Bible and refuse to even consider you might be wrong.  My verses destroyed your points.  Did you even consider them?  No.  Because you live in an echo chamber.  

 

IF I continue here with people that do not want to reason, you will just gang up on me bullying me with reds.  That is not cool and you are not real christians by your actions.

 

But again these writings are not for you.  IT is for others that might read this.  JWs do not go door to door anymore.  The latest info is we will not be offering bible studies anymore.  You people have had enough time.  The next time we go door to door will be just to tell the people they will die.  That will be a sad yet exciting time.

 

Trinity — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY (jw.org)

Trinity

Definition: The central doctrine of religions of Christendom. According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God. Other statements of the dogma emphasize that these three “Persons” are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists. Thus some Trinitarians emphasize their belief that Jesus Christ is God, or that Jesus and the Holy Ghost are Jehovah. Not a Bible teaching.

What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?

The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.

In The Encyclopedia Americana we read: “Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”—(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.”—(Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.

John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are G[ree]k philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians.”—(New York, 1965), p. 899.

Even though, as Trinitarians acknowledge, neither the word “Trinity” nor a statement of the Trinitarian dogma is found in the Bible, are the concepts that are embodied in that dogma found there?

Does the Bible teach that the “Holy Spirit” is a person?

Some individual texts that refer to the holy spirit (“Holy Ghost,” KJ) might seem to indicate personality. For example, the holy spirit is referred to as a helper (Greek, pa·raʹkle·tos; “Comforter,” KJ; “Advocate,” JB, NE) that ‘teaches,’ ‘bears witness,’ ‘speaks’ and ‘hears.’ (John 14:16, 17, 26; 15:26; 16:13) But other texts say that people were “filled” with holy spirit, that some were ‘baptized’ with it or “anointed” with it. (Luke 1:41; Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:38) These latter references to holy spirit definitely do not fit a person. To understand what the Bible as a whole teaches, all these texts must be considered. What is the reasonable conclusion? That the first texts cited here employ a figure of speech personifying God’s holy spirit, his active force, as the Bible also personifies wisdom, sin, death, water, and blood. (See also pages 380, 381, under the heading “Spirit.”)

The Holy Scriptures tell us the personal name of the Father—Jehovah. They inform us that the Son is Jesus Christ. But nowhere in the Scriptures is a personal name applied to the holy spirit.

Acts 7:55, 56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw “Jesus standing at God’s right hand.” But he made no mention of seeing the holy spirit. (See also Revelation 7:10; 22:1, 3.)

The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “The majority of N[ew] T[estament] texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God.” (1967, Vol. XIII, p. 575) It also reports: “The Apologists [Greek Christian writers of the second century] spoke too haltingly of the Spirit; with a measure of anticipation, one might say too impersonally.”—Vol. XIV, p. 296.

Does the Bible agree with those who teach that the Father and the Son are not separate and distinct individuals?

Matt. 26:39, RS: “Going a little farther he [Jesus Christ] fell on his face and prayed, ‘My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.’” (If the Father and the Son were not distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. Jesus would have been praying to himself, and his will would of necessity have been the Father’s will.)

John 8:17, 18, RS: “[Jesus answered the Jewish Pharisees:] In your law it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I bear witness to myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness to me.” (So, Jesus definitely spoke of himself as being an individual separate and distinct from the Father.)

See also pages 197, 198, under “Jehovah.”

Does the Bible teach that all who are said to be part of the Trinity are eternal, none having a beginning?

Col. 1:15, 16, RS: “He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth.” In what sense is Jesus Christ “the first-born of all creation”? (1) Trinitarians say that “first-born” here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; thus Christ would be understood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is so, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But the Bible applies this expression only to the Son. According to the customary meaning of “firstborn,” it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah’s family of sons. (2) Before Colossians 1:15, the expression “the firstborn of” occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies—the firstborn is part of the group. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals. What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15? Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof? (3) Does Colossians 1:16, 17 (RS) exclude Jesus from having been created, when it says “in him all things were created . . . all things were created through him and for him”? The Greek word here rendered “all things” is panʹta, an inflected form of pas. At Luke 13:2, RS renders this “all . . . other”; JB reads “any other”; NE says “anyone else.” (See also Luke 21:29 in NE and Philippians 2:21 in JB.) In harmony with everything else that the Bible says regarding the Son, NW assigns the same meaning to panʹta at Colossians 1:16, 17 so that it reads, in part, “by means of him all other things were created . . . All other things have been created through him and for him.” Thus he is shown to be a created being, part of the creation produced by God.

Rev. 1:1; 3:14, RS: “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him . . . ‘And to the angel of the church in La-odicea write: “The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning [Greek, ar·kheʹ] of God’s creation.”’” (KJ, Dy, CC, and NW, as well as others, read similarly.) Is that rendering correct? Some take the view that what is meant is that the Son was ‘the beginner of God’s creation,’ that he was its ‘ultimate source.’ But Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon lists “beginning” as its first meaning of ar·kheʹ. (Oxford, 1968, p. 252) The logical conclusion is that the one being quoted at Revelation 3:14 is a creation, the first of God’s creations, that he had a beginning. Compare Proverbs 8:22, where, as many Bible commentators agree, the Son is referred to as wisdom personified. According to RS, NE, and JB, the one there speaking is said to be “created.”)

Prophetically, with reference to the Messiah, Micah 5:2 (KJ) says his “goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” Dy reads: “his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity.” Does that make him the same as God? It is noteworthy that, instead of saying “days of eternity,” RS renders the Hebrew as “ancient days”; JB, “days of old”; NW, “days of time indefinite.” Viewed in the light of Revelation 3:14, discussed above, Micah 5:2 does not prove that Jesus was without a beginning.

Does the Bible teach that none of those who are said to be included in the Trinity is greater or less than another, that all are equal, that all are almighty?

Mark 13:32, RS: “Of that day or that hour no ones knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Of course, that would not be the case if Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were coequal, comprising one Godhead. And if, as some suggest, the Son was limited by his human nature from knowing, the question remains, Why did the Holy Spirit not know?)

Matt. 20:20-23, RS: “The mother of the sons of Zebedee . . . said to him [Jesus], ‘Command that these two sons of mine may sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.’ But Jesus answered, . . . ‘You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.’” (How strange, if, as claimed, Jesus is God! Was Jesus here merely answering according to his “human nature”? If, as Trinitarians say, Jesus was truly “God-man”—both God and man, not one or the other—would it truly be consistent to resort to such an explanation? Does not Matthew 20:23 rather show that the Son is not equal to the Father, that the Father has reserved some prerogatives for himself?)

Matt. 12:31, 32, RS: “Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.” (If the Holy Spirit were a person and were God, this text would flatly contradict the Trinity doctrine, because it would mean that in some way the Holy Spirit was greater than the Son. Instead, what Jesus said shows that the Father, to whom the “Spirit” belonged, is greater than Jesus, the Son of man.)

John 14:28, RS: “[Jesus said:] If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.”

1 Cor. 11:3, RS: “I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” (Clearly, then, Christ is not God, and God is of superior rank to Christ. It should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.)

1 Cor. 15:27, 28 RS: “‘God has put all things in subjection under his [Jesus’] feet.’ But when it says, ‘All things are put in subjection under him,’ it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one.”

The Hebrew word Shad·daiʹ and the Greek word Pan·to·kraʹtor are both translated “Almighty.” Both original-language words are repeatedly applied to Jehovah, the Father. (Ex. 6:3; Rev. 19:6) Neither expression is ever applied to either the Son or the holy spirit.

Does the Bible teach that each of those said to be part of the Trinity is God?

Jesus said in prayer: “Father, . . . this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:1-3, RS; italics added.) (Most translations here use the expression “the only true God” with reference to the Father. NE reads “who alone art truly God.” He cannot be “the only true God,” the one “who alone [is] truly God,” if there are two others who are God to the same degree as he is, can he? Any others referred to as “gods” must be either false or merely a reflection of the true God.)

1 Cor. 8:5, 6, RS: “Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” (This presents the Father as the “one God” of Christians and as being in a class distinct from Jesus Christ.)

1 Pet. 1:3, RS: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!” (Repeatedly, even following Jesus’ ascension to heaven, the Scriptures refer to the Father as “the God” of Jesus Christ. At John 20:17, following Jesus’ resurrection, he himself spoke of the Father as “my God.” Later, when in heaven, as recorded at Revelation 3:12, he again used the same expression. But never in the Bible is the Father reported to refer to the Son as “my God,” nor does either the Father or the Son refer to the holy spirit as “my God.”)

For comments on scriptures used by some in an effort to prove that Christ is God, see pages 212-216, under the heading “Jesus Christ.”

In Theological Investigations, Karl Rahner, S.J., admits: “Θεός [God] is still never used of the Spirit,” and: “ὁ θεός [literally, the God] is never used in the New Testament to speak of the πνεῦμα ἅγιον [holy spirit].”—(Baltimore, Md.; 1961), translated from German, Vol. I, pp. 138, 143.

Do any of the scriptures that are used by Trinitarians to support system">support their belief provide a solid basis for that dogma?

A person who is really seeking to know the truth about God is not going to search the Bible hoping to find a text that he can construe as fitting what he already believes. He wants to know what God’s Word itself says. He may find some texts that he feels can be read in more than one way, but when these are compared with other Biblical statements on the same subject their meaning will become clear. It should be noted at the outset that most of the texts used as “proof” of the Trinity actually mention only two persons, not three; so even if the Trinitarian explanation of the texts were correct, these would not prove that the Bible teaches the Trinity. Consider the following:

(Unless otherwise indicated, all the texts quoted in the following section are from RS.)

Texts in which a title that belongs to Jehovah is applied to Jesus Christ or is claimed to apply to Jesus

Alpha and Omega: To whom does this title properly belong? (1) At Revelation 1:8, its owner is said to be God, the Almighty. In verse 11 according to KJ, that title is applied to one whose description thereafter shows him to be Jesus Christ. But scholars recognize the reference to Alpha and Omega in verse 11 to be spurious, and so it does not appear in RS, NE, JB, NAB, Dy. (2) Many translations of Revelation into Hebrew recognize that the one described in verse 8 is Jehovah, and so they restore the personal name of God there. See NW, 1984 Reference edition. (3) Revelation 21:6, 7 indicates that Christians who are spiritual conquerors are to be ‘sons’ of the one known as the Alpha and the Omega. That is never said of the relationship of spirit-anointed Christians to Jesus Christ. Jesus spoke of them as his ‘brothers.’ (Heb. 2:11; Matt. 12:50; 25:40) But those ‘brothers’ of Jesus are referred to as “sons of God.” (Gal. 3:26; 4:6) (4) At Revelation 22:12, TEV inserts the name Jesus, so the reference to Alpha and Omega in verse 13 is made to appear to apply to him. But the name Jesus does not appear there in Greek, and other translations do not include it. (5) At Revelation 22:13, the Alpha and Omega is also said to be “the first and the last,” which expression is applied to Jesus at Revelation 1:17, 18. Similarly, the expression “apostle” is applied both to Jesus Christ and to certain ones of his followers. But that does not prove that they are the same person or are of equal rank, does it? (Heb. 3:1) So the evidence points to the conclusion that the title “Alpha and Omega” applies to Almighty God, the Father, not to the Son.

Savior: Repeatedly the Scriptures refer to God as Savior. At Isaiah 43:11 God even says: “Besides me there is no savior.” Since Jesus is also referred to as Savior, are God and Jesus the same? Not at all. Titus 1:3, 4 speaks of “God our Savior,” and then of both “God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.” So, both persons are saviors. Jude 25 shows the relationship, saying: “God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Italics added.) (See also Acts 13:23.) At Judges 3:9, the same Hebrew word (moh·shiʹa‛, rendered “savior” or “deliverer”) that is used at Isaiah 43:11 is applied to Othniel, a judge in Israel, but that certainly did not make Othniel Jehovah, did it? A reading of Isaiah 43:1-12 shows that verse 11 means that Jehovah alone was the One who provided salvation, or deliverance, for Israel; that salvation did not come from any of the gods of the surrounding nations.

God: At Isaiah 43:10 Jehovah says: “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” Does this mean that, because Jesus Christ is prophetically called “Mighty God” at Isaiah 9:6, Jesus must be Jehovah? Again, the context answers, No! None of the idolatrous Gentile nations formed a god before Jehovah, because no one existed before Jehovah. Nor would they at a future time form any real, live god that was able to prophesy. (Isa. 46:9, 10) But that does not mean that Jehovah never caused to exist anyone who is properly referred to as a god. (Ps. 82:1, 6; John 1:1, NW) At Isaiah 10:21 Jehovah is referred to as “mighty God,” just as Jesus is in Isaiah 9:6; but only Jehovah is ever called “God Almighty.”Gen. 17:1.

If a certain title or descriptive phrase is found in more than one location in the Scriptures, it should never hastily be concluded that it must always refer to the same person. Such reasoning would lead to the conclusion that Nebuchadnezzar was Jesus Christ, because both were called “king of kings” (Dan. 2:37; Rev. 17:14); and that Jesus’ disciples were actually Jesus Christ, because both were called “the light of the world.” (Matt. 5:14; John 8:12) We should always consider the context and any other instances in the Bible where the same expression occurs.

Application to Jesus Christ by inspired Bible writers of passages from the Hebrew Scriptures that clearly apply to Jehovah

Why does John 1:23 quote Isaiah 40:3 and apply it to what John the Baptizer did in preparing the way for Jesus Christ, when Isaiah 40:3 is clearly discussing preparing the way before Jehovah? Because Jesus represented his Father. He came in his Father’s name and had the assurance that his Father was always with him because he did the things pleasing to his Father.—John 5:43; 8:29.

Why does Hebrews 1:10-12 quote Psalm 102:25-27 and apply it to the Son, when the psalm says that it is addressed to God? Because the Son is the one through whom God performed the creative works there described by the psalmist. (See Colossians 1:15, 16; Proverbs 8:22, 27-30.) It should be observed in Hebrews 1:5b that a quotation is made from 2 Samuel 7:14 and applied to the Son of God. Although that text had its first application to Solomon, the later application of it to Jesus Christ does not mean that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is “greater than Solomon” and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon.—Luke 11:31.

Scriptures that mention together the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit

Matthew 28:19 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 are instances of this. Neither of these texts says that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are coequal or coeternal or that all are God. The Scriptural evidence already presented on pages 408-412 argues against reading such thoughts into the texts.

McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, though advocating the Trinity doctrine, acknowledges regarding Matthew 28:18-20: “This text, however, taken by itself, would not prove decisively either the personality of the three subjects mentioned, or their equality or divinity.” (1981 reprint, Vol. X, p. 552) Regarding other texts that also mention the three together, this Cyclopedia admits that, taken by themselves, they are “insufficient” to prove the Trinity. (Compare 1 Timothy 5:21, where God and Christ and the angels are mentioned together.)

Texts in which the plural form of nouns is applied to God in the Hebrew Scriptures

At Genesis 1:1 the title “God” is translated from ’Elo·himʹ, which is plural in Hebrew. Trinitarians construe this to be an indication of the Trinity. They also explain Deuteronomy 6:4 to imply the unity of members of the Trinity when it says, “The LORD our God [from ’Elo·himʹ] is one LORD.”

The plural form of the noun here in Hebrew is the plural of majesty or excellence. (See NAB, St. Joseph Edition, Bible Dictionary, p. 330; also, New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. V, p. 287.) It conveys no thought of plurality of persons within a godhead. In similar fashion, at Judges 16:23 when reference is made to the false god Dagon, a form of the title ’elo·himʹ is used; the accompanying verb is singular, showing that reference is to just the one god. At Genesis 42:30, Joseph is spoken of as the “lord” (’adho·nehʹ, the plural of excellence) of Egypt.

The Greek language does not have a ‘plural of majesty or excellence.’ So, at Genesis 1:1 the translators of LXX used ho The·osʹ (God, singular) as the equivalent of ’Elo·himʹ. At Mark 12:29, where a reply of Jesus is reproduced in which he quoted Deuteronomy 6:4, the Greek singular ho The·osʹ is similarly used.

At Deuteronomy 6:4, the Hebrew text contains the Tetragrammaton twice, and so should more properly read: “Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.” (NW) The nation of Israel, to whom that was stated, did not believe in the Trinity. The Babylonians and the Egyptians worshiped triads of gods, but it was made clear to Israel that Jehovah is different.

Texts from which a person might draw more than one conclusion, depending on the Bible translation used

If a passage can grammatically be translated in more than one way, what is the correct rendering? One that is in agreement with the rest of the Bible. If a person ignores other portions of the Bible and builds his belief around a favorite rendering of a particular verse, then what he believes really reflects, not the Word of God, but his own ideas and perhaps those of another imperfect human.

John 1:1, 2:

RS reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.” (KJ, Dy, JB, NAB use similar wording.) However, NW reads: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in the beginning with God.”

Which translation of John 1:1, 2 agrees with the context? John 1:18 says: “No one has ever seen God.” Verse 14 clearly says that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . . . we have beheld his glory.” Also, verses 1, 2 say that in the beginning he was “with God.” Can one be with someone and at the same time be that person? At John 17:3, Jesus addresses the Father as “the only true God”; so, Jesus as “a god” merely reflects his Father’s divine qualities.—Heb. 1:3.

Is the rendering “a god” consistent with the rules of Greek grammar? Some reference books argue strongly that the Greek text must be translated, “The Word was God.” But not all agree. In his article “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1,” Philip B. Harner said that such clauses as the one in John 1:1, “with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning. They indicate that the logos has the nature of theos.” He suggests: “Perhaps the clause could be translated, ‘the Word had the same nature as God.’” (Journal of Biblical Literature, 1973, pp. 85, 87) Thus, in this text, the fact that the word the·osʹ in its second occurrence is without the definite article (ho) and is placed before the verb in the sentence in Greek is significant. Interestingly, translators that insist on rendering John 1:1, “The Word was God,” do not hesitate to use the indefinite article (a, an) in their rendering of other passages where a singular anarthrous predicate noun occurs before the verb. Thus at John 6:70, JB and KJ both refer to Judas Iscariot as “a devil,” and at John 9:17 they describe Jesus as “a prophet.”

John J. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated ‘the word was with the God [= the Father], and the word was a divine being.’”—(Brackets are his. Published with nihil obstat and imprimatur.) (New York, 1965), p. 317.

In harmony with the above, AT reads: “the Word was divine”; Mo, “the Logos was divine”; NTIV, “the word was a god.” In his German translation Ludwig Thimme expresses it in this way: “God of a sort the Word was.” Referring to the Word (who became Jesus Christ) as “a god” is consistent with the use of that term in the rest of the Scriptures. For example, at Psalm 82:1-6 human judges in Israel were referred to as “gods” (Hebrew, ’elo·himʹ; Greek, the·oiʹ, at John 10:34) because they were representatives of Jehovah and were to speak his law.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, p. 1579.

John 8:58:

RS reads: “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am [Greek, e·goʹ ei·miʹ].’” (NE, KJ, TEV, JB, NAB all read “I am,” some even using capital letters to convey the idea of a title. Thus they endeavor to connect the expression with Exodus 3:14, where, according to their rendering, God refers to himself by the title “I Am.”) However, in NW the latter part of John 8:58 reads: “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” (The same idea is conveyed by the wording in AT, Mo, CBW, and SE.)

Which rendering agrees with the context? The question of the Jews (verse 57) to which Jesus was replying had to do with age, not identity. Jesus’ reply logically dealt with his age, the length of his existence. Interestingly, no effort is ever made to apply e·goʹ ei·miʹ as a title to the holy spirit.

Says A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, by A. T. Robertson: “The verb [ei·miʹ] . . . Sometimes it does express existence as a predicate like any other verb, as in [e·goʹ ei·miʹ] (Jo. 8:58).”—Nashville, Tenn.; 1934, p. 394.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, pp. 1582, 1583.

Acts 20:28:

JB reads: “Be on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you the overseers, to feed the Church of God which he bought with his own blood.” (KJ, Dy, NAB use similar wording.) However, in NW the latter part of the verse reads: “the blood of his own [Son].” (TEV reads similarly. Although the 1953 printing of RS reads “with his own blood,” the 1971 edition reads “with the blood of his own Son.” Ro and Da simply read “the blood of his own.”)

Which rendering(s) agree with 1 John 1:7, which says: “The blood of Jesus his [God’s] Son cleanses us from all sin”? (See also Revelation 1:4-6.) As stated in John 3:16, did God send his only-begotten Son, or did he himself come as a man, so that we might have life? It was the blood, not of God, but of his Son that was poured out.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, p. 1580.

Romans 9:5:

JB reads: “They are descended from the patriarchs and from their flesh and blood came Christ who is above all, God for ever blessed! Amen.” (KJ, Dy read similarly.) However, in NW the latter part of the verse reads: “from whom the Christ sprang according to the flesh: God, who is over all, be blessed forever. Amen.” (RS, NE, TEV, NAB, Mo all use wording similar to NW.)

Is this verse saying that Christ is “over all” and that he is therefore God? Or does it refer to God and Christ as distinct individuals and say that God is “over all”? Which rendering of Romans 9:5 agrees with Romans 15:5, 6, which first distinguishes God from Christ Jesus and then urges the reader to “glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ”? (See also 2 Corinthians 1:3 and Ephesians 1:3.) Consider what follows in Romans chapter 9. Verses 6-13 show that the outworking of God’s purpose depends not on inheritance according to the flesh but on the will of God. Verses 14-18 refer to God’s message to Pharaoh, as recorded at Exodus 9:16, to highlight the fact that God is over all. In verses 19-24 God’s superiority is further illustrated by an analogy with a potter and the clay vessels that he makes. How appropriate, then, in verse 5, the expression: “God, who is over all, be blessed forever. Amen”!—NW.

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology states: “Rom. 9:5 is disputed. . . . It would be easy, and linguistically perfectly possible to refer the expression to Christ. The verse would then read, ‘Christ who is God over all, blessed for ever. Amen.’ Even so, Christ would not be equated absolutely with God, but only described as a being of divine nature, for the word theos has no article. . . . The much more probable explanation is that the statement is a doxology directed to God.”—(Grand Rapids, Mich.; 1976), translated from German, Vol. 2, p. 80.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, pp. 1580, 1581.

Philippians 2:5, 6:

KJ reads: “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” (Dy has the same wording. JB reads: “he did not cling to his equality with God.”) However, in NW the latter portion of that passage reads: “who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure [Greek, har·pag·monʹ], namely, that he should be equal to God.” (RS, NE, TEV, NAB convey the same thought.)

Which thought agrees with the context? Verse 5 counsels Christians to imitate Christ in the matter here being discussed. Could they be urged to consider it “not robbery,” but their right, “to be equal with God”? Surely not! However, they can imitate one who “gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.” (NW) (Compare Genesis 3:5.) Such a translation also agrees with Jesus Christ himself, who said: “The Father is greater than I.”—John 14:28.

The Expositor’s Greek Testament says: “We cannot find any passage where [har·paʹzo] or any of its derivatives [including har·pag·monʹ] has the sense of ‘holding in possession,’ ‘retaining’. It seems invariably to mean ‘seize,’ ‘****** violently’. Thus it is not permissible to glide from the true sense ‘grasp at’ into one which is totally different, ‘hold fast.’”—(Grand Rapids, Mich.; 1967), edited by W. Robertson Nicoll, Vol. III, pp. 436, 437.

Colossians 2:9:

KJ reads: “In him [Christ] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead [Greek, the·oʹte·tos] bodily.” (A similar thought is conveyed by the renderings in NE, RS, JB, NAB, Dy.) However, NW reads: “It is in him that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily.” (AT, We, and CKW read “God’s nature,” instead of “Godhead.” Compare 2 Peter 1:4.)

Admittedly, not everyone offers the same interpretation of Colossians 2:9. But what is in agreement with the rest of the inspired letter to the Colossians? Did Christ have in himself something that is his because he is God, part of a Trinity? Or is “the fullness” that dwells in him something that became his because of the decision of someone else? Colossians 1:19 (KJ, Dy) says that all fullness dwelt in Christ because it “pleased the Father” for this to be the case. NE says it was “by God’s own choice.”

Consider the immediate context of Colossians 2:9: In verse 8, readers are warned against being misled by those who advocate philosophy and human traditions. They are also told that in Christ “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” and are urged to “live in him” and to be “rooted and built up in him and established in the faith.” (Verses 3, 6, 7) It is in him, and not in the originators or the teachers of human philosophy, that a certain precious “fulness” dwells. Was the apostle Paul there saying that the “fulness” that was in Christ made Christ God himself? Not according to Colossians 3:1, where Christ is said to be “seated at the right hand of God.”—See KJ, Dy, TEV, NAB.

According to Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, the·oʹtes (the nominative form, from which the·oʹte·tos is derived) means “divinity, divine nature.” (Oxford, 1968, p. 792) Being truly “divinity,” or of “divine nature,” does not make Jesus as the Son of God coequal and coeternal with the Father, any more than the fact that all humans share “humanity” or “human nature” makes them coequal or all the same age.

Titus 2:13:

RS reads: “Awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.” (Similar wording is found in NE, TEV, JB.) However, NW reads: “while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of the Savior of us, Christ Jesus.” (NAB has a similar rendering.)

Which translation agrees with Titus 1:4, which refers to “God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior”? Although the Scriptures also refer to God as being a Savior, this text clearly differentiates between him and Christ Jesus, the one through whom God provides salvation.

Some argue that Titus 2:13 indicates that Christ is both God and Savior. Interestingly, RS, NE, TEV, JB render Titus 2:13 in a way that might be construed as allowing for that view, but they do not follow the same rule in their translation of 2 Thessalonians 1:12. Henry Alford, in The Greek Testament, states: “I would submit that [a rendering that clearly differentiates God and Christ, at Titus 2:13] satisfies all the grammatical requirements of the sentence: that it is both structurally and contextually more probable, and more agreeable to the Apostle’s way of writing.”—(Boston, 1877), Vol. III, p. 421.

See also NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, pp. 1581, 1582.

Hebrews 1:8:

RS reads: “Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.) However, NW reads: “But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’” (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.)

Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression “God, thy God,” showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in RS, reads “Your divine throne.” (NE says, “Your throne is like God’s throne.” JP [verse 7]: “Thy throne given of God.”) Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit “upon Jehovah’s throne.” (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the “throne,” or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him.

Hebrews 1:8, 9 quotes from Psalm 45:6, 7, concerning which the Bible scholar B. F. Westcott states: “The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the·osʹ] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the·osʹ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo·himʹ] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the·osʹ] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’”—The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26.

1 John 5:7, 8:

KJ reads: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” (Dy also includes this Trinitarian passage.) However, NW does not include the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth.” (RS, NE, TEV, JB, NAB also leave out the Trinitarian passage.)

Regarding this Trinitarian passage, textual critic F. H. A. Scrivener wrote: “We need not hesitate to declare our conviction that the disputed words were not written by St. John: that they were originally brought into Latin copies in Africa from the margin, where they had been placed as a pious and orthodox gloss on ver. 8: that from the Latin they crept into two or three late Greek codices, and thence into the printed Greek text, a place to which they had no rightful claim.”—A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament (Cambridge, 1883, third ed.), p. 654.

See also footnote on these verses in JB, and NW appendix, 1984 Reference edition, p. 1580.

Other scriptures that are said by Trinitarians to express elements of their dogma

Notice that the first of these texts refers to only the Son; the other refers to both Father and Son; neither refers to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and says that they comprise one God.

John 2:19-22:

By what he here said, did Jesus mean that he would resurrect himself from the dead? Does that mean that Jesus is God, because Acts 2:32 says, “This Jesus God raised up”? Not at all. Such a view would conflict with Galatians 1:1, which ascribes the resurrection of Jesus to the Father, not to the Son. Using a similar mode of expression, at Luke 8:48 Jesus is quoted as saying to a woman: “Your faith has made you well.” Did she heal herself? No; it was power from God through Christ that healed her because she had faith. (Luke 8:46; Acts 10:38) Likewise, by his perfect obedience as a human, Jesus provided the moral basis for the Father to raise him from the dead, thus acknowledging Jesus as God’s Son. Because of Jesus’ faithful course of life, it could properly be said that Jesus himself was responsible for his resurrection.

Says A. T. Robertson in Word Pictures in the New Testament: “Recall [John] 2:19 where Jesus said: ‘And in three days I will raise it up.’ He did not mean that he will raise himself from the dead independently of the Father as the active agent (Rom. 8:11).”—(New York, 1932), Vol. V, p. 183.

John 10:30:

When saying, “I and the Father are one,” did Jesus mean that they were equal? Some Trinitarians say that he did. But at John 17:21, 22, Jesus prayed regarding his followers: “That they may all be one,” and he added, “that they may be one even as we are one.” He used the same Greek word (hen) for “one” in all these instances. Obviously, Jesus’ disciples do not all become part of the Trinity. But they do come to share a oneness of purpose with the Father and the Son, the same sort of oneness that unites God and Christ.

In what position does belief in the Trinity put those who cling to it?

It puts them in a very dangerous position. The evidence is indisputable that the dogma of the Trinity is not found in the Bible, nor is it in harmony with what the Bible teaches. (See the preceding pages.) It grossly misrepresents the true God. Yet, Jesus Christ said: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:23, 24, RS) Thus Jesus made it clear that those whose worship is not ‘in truth,’ not in harmony with the truth set out in God’s own Word, are not “true worshipers.” To Jewish religious leaders of the first century, Jesus said: “For the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’” (Matt. 15:6-9, RS) That applies with equal force to those in Christendom today who advocate human traditions in preference to the clear truths of the Bible.

Regarding the Trinity, the Athanasian Creed (in English) says that its members are “incomprehensible.” Teachers of the doctrine often state that it is a “mystery.” Obviously such a Trinitarian God is not the one that Jesus had in mind when he said: “We worship what we know.” (John 4:22, RS) Do you really know the God you worship?

Serious questions confront each one of us: Do we sincerely love the truth? Do we really want an approved relationship with God? Not everyone genuinely loves the truth. Many have put having the approval of their relatives and associates above love of the truth and of God. (2 Thess. 2:9-12; John 5:39-44) But, as Jesus said in earnest prayer to his heavenly Father: “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3, NW) And Psalm 144:15 truthfully states: “Happy is the people whose God is Jehovah!”—NW.

Everything you post is a lie from your father the devil. You are dead in your sins. You are a dead burying a dead. You are spiritually blind, deaf and dumb. Unless you finally accept the truth of the Diety of Jesus Christ, that He is God with us, you are living a lie that may cost you eternal salvation. 

The one verse that gets misconstrued to invent the idea of soul sleep actually applies perfectly to you.

"The dead know nothing."

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, PrehistoricMan said:

AGain for the uneducated....The bible is written so MAN can understand it.  It is NOT Gods thoughts to say streets of gold.  IT is an earthly term to describe heaven to a man.  But again, you think everything is literal and all are gods thoughts.  How about Judas turning against JEsus?  Did God um, think that up?  Or did it really happen?

 

AGain for the third time, please markinsa put ALL your thoughts into one post.  That way I dont have to respond 8 frickin times.  But this is what I am against folks.  Fighting with 4 people here.  THEY dont have the courage to go one on one against me.  They love to dogpile.

For you my uneducated friend ,  The Word of God: Evidence that Scripture is Divine

 

First, I believe the Bible is the Word of God because of its scientific accuracy. The Truth of the Word of God tells us that God “hangeth the earth upon nothing” (Job 26:7). How did Job know that the earth hung in space before the age of modern astronomy and space travel? The Holy Spirit told him. The scientists of Isaiah’s day didn’t know the topography of the earth, but Isaiah said, “It is [God] that sitteth upon the circle of the earth” (Isaiah 40:22). The word for “circle” here means a globe or sphere. How did Isaiah know that God says upon the circle of the earth? By divine inspiration.

 

Secondly, the Bible is affirmed through historical accuracy. Do you remember the story about the handwriting on the wall that is found in the fifth chapter of Daniel? Belshazzar hosted a feast with a thousand of his lords and ladies. Suddenly, a gruesome hand appeared out of nowhere and began to write on a wall. The king was disturbed and asked for someone to interpret the writing. Daniel was found and gave the interpretation. After the interpretation, “Then commanded Belshazzar, and they clothed Daniel with scarlet, and put a chain of gold about his neck, and made a proclamation concerning him, that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom.” (Daniel 5:29). Basing their opinion on Babylonian records, the historians claim this never happened. According to the records, the last king of Babylon was not Belshazzar, but a man named Nabonidas. And so, they said, the Bible is in error. There wasn’t a record of a king named Belshazzar. Well, the spades of archeologists continued to do their work. In 1853, an inscription was found on a cornerstone of a temple built by Nabonidas, to the god Ur, which read: “May I, Nabonidas, king of Babylon, not sin against thee. And may reverence for thee dwell in the heart of Belshazzar, my first-born favorite son.” From other inscriptions, it was learned that Belshazzar and Nabonidas were co-regents. Nabonidas traveled while Belshazzar stayed home to run the kingdom. Now that we know that Belshazzar and Nabonidas were co-regents, it makes sense that Belshazzar would say that Daniel would be the third ruler. What a marvelous nugget of truth tucked away in the Word of God!

 

Third, from Genesis to Revelation, the Bible reads as one book. And there is incredible unity to the Bible. The Bible is one book, and yet it is made up of 66 books, was written by at least 40 different authors over a period of about 1400-1800 years, in 13 different countries and on three different continents. It was written in at least three different languages by people in all professions. The Bible forms one beautiful temple of truth that does not contradict itself theologically, morally, ethically, doctrinally, scientifically, historically, or in any other way. It is consistent again with the texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls. This consistency is what Bible Scholars use to eliminate the false books and doctrines the same bible warns us believers about in the words ... to beware of false doctrines. Like the false doctrines of prehistoricman . You cannot get this consistency in the Bible , written by 40 different authors, in at least 3 different languages, without God inspiring , breathing life into, the writing of these books wihtin The Book.

 

What exactly did the apostle Paul mean when he said that the Bible is “inspired of God”? (2 Timothy 3:16) Paul, writing in the Greek language, used a word that literally means “God-breathed.” By that, Paul meant that God by means of his holy spirit guided the Bible writers to write only what He wanted them to write. These Bible writers “spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit,” said the apostle Peter.  (2 Peter 1:21) Hence, the apostle Paul could also describe the books of the Bible as “holy writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through the faith in connection with Christ Jesus.”—2 Timothy 3:15.

 

Your problem is you do not believe, Satan has more respect for the word of God than you. Thou she would probably not accept you in either , would she, him, shim ? Thats kinda like a septic tank not accepting your "refuse ."

 

  • Like 2
  • Pow! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.