A Christian who deny Jesus is God in Flesh

[justbyfaith]

Supposing the Gospel = trinitarian doctrine is ridiculous.

Trinitarian doctrine is bound up in the heart of the gospel; which is this:

God became a Man and poured out from heaven all of His wrath and justice against sin upon Himself, thus paying the penalty for our sins in order that we might have forgiveness and go to heaven instead of hell.

 

[Wrangler]

There is no corruption in the word of God

KJV <> Word of God

KJV translators got some things wrong.

 

[Wrangler]

No desperation here.

Very desperate.

 

[Wrangler]

God became a Man and poured out from heaven all of His wrath and justice against sin upon Himself

Saying it over and over again doesn’t make it any more right. No where in the OT is God incarnate prophesied. No where is the trinity as Biblical authors are all anti-trinitarian. (This fact should make you question the trinitarian projection onto the text)

 

[justbyfaith]

KJV <> Word of God

kjv = the word of God.

KJV translators got some things wrong.

Nope.

Very desperate.

Nope.

No where in the OT is God incarnate prophesied.

Nope. But you are willfully ignorant of those places in the OT where it has been prophesied and have also formed your arguments against those scriptures which clearly denote that God would come in the flesh to save mankind. Such arguments may help you to deny the truth for a season; but deep down you know that they don't hold any water and that we are supposed to take the holy scriptures at face value.

For in order to deny the reality of God incarnate in the Old and New Testaments, you have to apply anti-Trinity arguments to certain texts; which if taken at face value are in fact infallible proofs of the Trinity if you take them at face value.

So, the reality is that this is not an intellectual issue at all. It is a heart issue.

1Pe 2:6, Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
1Pe 2:7, Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
1Pe 2:8, And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.

 

[justbyfaith]

Saying it over and over again doesn’t make it any more right.

Correct...because it would be right even if I never even said it once.

 

[justbyfaith]

No where is the trinity as Biblical authors are all anti-trinitarian.

The biblical authors believed in and taught the Trinity.

 

[Wrangler]

Initially, you said you admit some verses appear to support some of the Trinity, but now they only appear to support the Trinity when they are distorted?

Yup. This is what 'appear' means in the sentence?

It only appears the emperor has new clothes based on what everyone is saying.

 

[Wrangler]

Initially, you said you admit some verses appear to support some of the Trinity, as in
those verses appear to support some of the Trinity by themselves.

Reading comprehension. That is one take on it, brother.

I meant appear, as in, upon closer inspection, the emperor has not clothes (despite what trinitarians want you to believe).

 

[Wrangler]

I’ve explained this many times. You didn’t see the vid I posted?

The Word is the Word of God. John 1:1 is properly interpreted as fulfilling Deuteronomy 18:15-18.

Trinitarians are so desperate to find anything, anything at all in Scripture to support their unworkable doctrine, they pretend figurative language is literal.

What is the significance of the singular pronoun ‘me’ in the 1C?

 

[jaybird]

I am of the kjv-superior understanding.

I believe that when people go to other translations, they are doing what was prophesied in 2 Timothy 4:3 and are heaping to themselves teachers in the translators of other Bibles, to tell them what their itching ears want to hear. And while you may not believe this, I believe that it would be expedient for you to consider it as a possibility.

then why does the kjv have so many errors?
why do Jesus and the 12 quote the LXX which was ignored in the kjv?

1Jo 5:7, For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

are you claiming this is the original text?

 

[jaybird]

Trinitarian doctrine is established in the heavenlies and has been the reality throughout eternity. It simply was not revealed until the 4th century.

in other words its not in the bible.

 

[justbyfaith]

in other words its not in the bible.

People discovered the doctrine in the Bible in the 4th century.

 

[justbyfaith]

are you claiming this is the original text?

I am saying that the Lord in his Omnipotence, sovereignty, and love, caused the verse to be included in the text of the kjv and that it exists in our kjv because it is the inspired word of the Lord.

 

[jaybird]

People discovered the doctrine in the Bible in the 4th century.

people discovered the doctrine . . . . in the bible? what happened did all the ancient text have the same page missing and the missing page was the day Jesus explained the trinity? and this page was found in the 4th c.
ohh boy here we go again.

 

[jaybird]

I am saying that the Lord in his Omnipotence, sovereignty, and love, caused the verse to be included in the text of the kjv and that it exists in our kjv because it is the inspired word of the Lord.

i dont know what that even means? it sounds like your saying you have no idea or that the original text are in error but all this was corrected when the Lord chose the KJV people to be prophets and write, i mean translate the kjv.
if they have a divine connection to the Lord, why translate at all? why not just write the bible through the guidance of the Lord?

 

[Wrangler]

People discovered the doctrine in the Bible in the 4th century.

You mean, man made doctrine in the 4th century.

 

[Wrangler]

I am saying that the Lord in his Omnipotence, sovereignty, and love, caused the verse to be included in the text of the kjv and that it exists in our kjv because it is the inspired word of the Lord.

Circular reasoning. The KJV translators imposed their trinitarian idolatry onto the text. I doubt they were even conscious of doing it. If 3 agree, we all KNOW what that 3 MUST be, right?

The trinity is not in the Bible. So, make it so.

HINT: Changing the word of God is not inspired by the Lord.

 

[Wrangler]

What is there in this verse to indicate that phrase is figurative

Words are not literally people or beings.

 

[Wrangler]

Based on this statement, you are speaking about verses in the Bible as they appear to you

Don’t tell me what I meant by what I said.