The Case Against the Trinity

[101G]

I have attacked with scripture many times. However, the flaw in your language has many fronts and I am addressing each angle of ERROR. This includes:

• Logic
• Language Usage
• Definitions
• Mysticism/Dualism
• Denial Scripture is written by anti-trinitarians.

‘For us, there is one God, the Father’
1 Corinthians 8:6

NOTE: The verse above does not say one trinitarian God who is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and if you do not believe this, you cannot be saved. Please construct a stronger anti-trinitarian statement than 1 Corinthians 8:6. I ask because I cannot think of one.

first thanks for the reply, second, Logic?, ok, ‘For us, there is one God, the Father’ 1 Corinthians 8:6. ok, GOOD. question, is not the Son the "GOD?". yes or no and we will see if this is Logical.

your answer please.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Wrangler]

well then, used scripture, "ONLY",

No. As said, I will attack every front your ERROR takes.

 

[Wrangler]

your answer please.

My question for you to answer is Please construct a stronger anti-trinitarian statement than 1 Corinthians 8:6. I ask because I cannot think of one.

Another trinitarian front of error is to always be on offense, always attacking in the form of questions BUT NOT ANSWERING QUESTIONS. So, answer the question of a construct a stronger anti-trinitarian statement than 1 Corinthians 8:6.

 

[101G]

No. As said, I will attack every front your ERROR takes.

Good, then lets start with your, scripture you gave,

‘For us, there is one God, the Father’
1 Corinthians 8:6

well I say the Son is the Father, (the one true, and Living GOD), as the one ECHAD of Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" and here's my scripture proof, Hebrews 1:8 "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom." here the Son is God, and this is used with the definite article. indicating the supreme Being, GOD.
Now is this a true statement in Hebrews 1:8, YES, or NO.

after your answer, we will get to Deuteronomy 6:4

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Wrangler]

well I say the Son is the Father,

This is not an answer to my question.

Beyond that, it is such an illogical statement, it’s hard to imagine worse critical thinking than this.

Please stop trolling this thread. This thread is about STRENGTHENING the case against the trinity. Bye now.

 

[101G]

This is not an answer to my question.

Beyond that, it is such an illogical statement, it’s hard to imagine worse critical thinking than this.

Please stop trolling this thread. This thread is about STRENGTHENING the case against the trinity. Bye now.

Oh yes it it, I said, the Son is the Father, which answered your 1 Corinthians 8:6 scripture, and I gave proof, for your correction, Hebrews 1:8 see how i used the scriptures to refuit you statement?. now after I answer your question, I question you to REPROVE me,
so we can take this as you cannot reprove me?.

see you gave an excuse, so again, is the Son in Hebrew 1:8 God the superme God ? YES or NO.

only a yes or no is required. else we will take it as you cannot answer, and that means you're ignorant of the word, and your statement is illogical.

now your answer ... please, and quit stalling.....

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[101G]

This thread is about STRENGTHENING the case against the trinity. Bye now.

anytime you confront a false prophet with the word of God ..... they cannot answer.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Wrangler]

Oh yes it it, I said, the Son is the Father, which answered your 1 Corinthians 8:6

No. I’ll decide if your post answers my question. The question was to construct a stronger anti-trinitarian statement.

 

[jaybird]

I have attacked with scripture many times. However, the flaw in your language has many fronts and I am addressing each angle of ERROR. This includes:

• Logic
• Language Usage
• Definitions
• Mysticism/Dualism
• Denial Scripture is written by anti-trinitarians.

‘For us, there is one God, the Father’
1 Corinthians 8:6

NOTE: The verse above does not say one trinitarian God who is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and if you do not believe this, you cannot be saved. Please construct a stronger anti-trinitarian statement than 1 Corinthians 8:6. I ask because I cannot think of one.

I agree 1 cor is a good one. But for me (personal preference) the Shema is the strongest. Trins can come back with their "we agree the Most High is one BUT. . ." And continue with their trin logic that only makes sense to other trins. But I think many fail to understand what the Shema means and why they said it all the time.
"He is one" ok, one as opposed to what exactly?
Some trins say the Shema is a proclamation of monotheism, I don't think so, if that's what they were saying it should be something like-
We worship one G-D not many gods. But other gods are not part of the Shema. The Shema is teaching something about the Most High, that He (he is single person) is one. And to Jews, "one" never meant a trinity.

 

[jaybird]

Angels could not have been used regarding Gen. 1:26 for reasons explained in post #584 and that is why the comparison of Sodom of Gomorrah does not work.

The sodom destruction proves you wrong. You know this.

 

[Wrangler]

I agree 1 cor is a good one. But for me (personal preference) the Shema is the strongest. Trins can come back with their "we agree the Most High is one BUT. . ."

LOL. Their mental gymnastics is so funny. They agree with everything we say BUT disagree also. Mysticism. Dualism.

The only reason I reference 1 Corinthians 8:6 so often is that, unlike the Shema, it attacks directly their claim that by one God, it is to be understood as F+ S + HS.

 

[101G]

No. I’ll decide if your post answers my question. The question was to construct a stronger anti-trinitarian statement.

first thanks for the reply, second, NOPE, you, or anyone else will decide, only God, his scriptures. also, your answer was not construct to be stronger, it only played into the trinitarian hands. but the reason why it was not stronger, because you got the Deuteronomy 6:4 verse WRONG. the verse states that the LORD our God is "ONE LORD" ..... NOT "ONE" God. if you wanted a stronger construction of a scripture then you should have used Deuteronomy 6:4, WITH THE CORRECT UNDERSTANDING. if i was a trinitarian, and that was all you had, (the 1 Corinthians 8:6 scripture), i would eat you up on that one verse you gave, but the Mark 12:29, (Deuteronomy 6:4 reference), without knowledge as to what it really means is a downfall for you.

now to show you where I'm coming from, in the Hebrew 1:8 scripture, THE "SON" is the "FATHER", in a "diversified" state, is this, Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."
this right here puts an END to any three person Godhead, it closed the door on the "ONE" LORD who is God. because of Deuteronomy 6:4, with it's understanding, confirms the Hebrews 1:8 scripture that God is ONE LORD, who is "Lord", of an ECHAD, in an Ordinal First and the Ordinal Last state. Zechariah 12:10 clearly shows this, as the LORD, (Father), as the "SON", who was pierced is the same one person.

so 1 Corinthians 8:6 is not a stronger case aganist any three person Godhead.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Wrangler]

The sodom destruction proves you wrong. You know this.

It’s the same thing with God lying. The verse says a Spirit came to God and proposed putting a lying Spirit to the prophets of the king. God told this spirit to proceed. So, technically God did not lie to 400 false prophets - but he authorized the use of deception.

 

[Wrangler]

first thanks for the reply, second, NOPE, you

OK. So what is the strongest anti-trinitarian sentence you can write?

 

[101G]

I have a bunch, and I mean a bunch.... they are right there in the bible, just READ. and 1 Corinthians 8:6 is not one of them......

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Wrangler]

101G, you are trolling this thread. Move along.

 

[101G]

101G, you are trolling this thread. Move along.

don't worry abot me anymore I will get off YOUR topic here.
see ya...... .... LOL.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[jaybird]

I have shown you why it does not.

No what you did is basically say it's wrong because I say it's wrong, not very credible.

 

[jaybird]

It’s the same thing with God lying. The verse says a Spirit came to God and proposed putting a lying Spirit to the prophets of the king. God told this spirit to proceed. So, technically God did not lie to 400 false prophets - but he authorized the use of deception.

Yeah, when the Father sends someone, angel, spirit,etc, it's still an act of G-D, they know what it is and what it proves. But they will never admit it no matter how many times you prove them wrong.

 

[jaybird]

LOL. Their mental gymnastics is so funny. They agree with everything we say BUT disagree also. Mysticism. Dualism.

The only reason I reference 1 Corinthians 8:6 so often is that, unlike the Shema, it attacks directly their claim that by one God, it is to be understood as F+ S + HS.

Do you think there is an agenda behind the trinity? Or you think it was a genuine attempt to explain things for people to understand?
One thing that always bothered me is in the days of Jesus and the 12, they were just another Jewish sect practicing judaism, a few hundred years later you have 2 different religions. When Jesus taught crowds of Jews followed Him every where, after rome takes over Jews won't touch it with a 10 ft pole. A conspiracy? I don't know but if I wanted to separate the Jews out of my religion I would come up with a doctrine that i knew no Jew would ever accept. And what do Jews today say when you talk to them about the faith? The first think out of their mouth will be "we don't worship three gods" and they may continue with the problems of the trinity and all the christology dogma. The things that Jesus actually taught and said won't even come up in the conversation.
I'm not saying this is how it went down, but it's an awful convenient coincidence how it worked out.