What do you mean 'just saying', you just destroyed him! That was an excellent, sound and insightful exposition of the fundamental deficiencies, absurdities, and blasphemies of trinitarian theology. They will never address a single point that you made.mmm John Burgon, the same Anglican that attempted to defend the authenticity of the last 12 verses of Mark 16. When these verses were never found in any early manuscript of Mark. You are right, I'm not impressed and you can keep your precious source as your truth.
As I already said,
Instead of God, they used the word ‘He,’ ‘Who’ or ‘Which’ instead. Some examples, even from your fellow Trinitarians....they do get it right many times I have to admit...
NIV 1984 edition - “HE appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit...”
NASB 1995 edition - “HE WHO was revealed in the flesh, was vindicated in the Spirit...”
RSV - “HE was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit...”
ESV 2001 - “HE (R10) was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit...” Footnote 10 - Greek Who; some manuscripts God; others Which.
Holman Standard 2003 - “HE was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit”
ISV (International Standard Version) - “In flesh was HE revealed to sight, Kept righteous by the Spirit's might”
Catholic Douay-Rheims 1582 - “And evidently great is the mystery of godliness WHICH was manifested in the flesh, was justified in the spirit, appeared unto angels,”
Catholic Douay 1950 - "great is the mystery of godliness: WHICH was manifested in the flesh"
St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 - “HE was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit...”
Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 - “HE was made visible in the flesh, justified in the Spirit...”
Catholic Public Domain Version 2009 - "this mystery of piety, which was manifested in the flesh"
Besides, you are also missing the main point, it was Jesus that was seen by angels, given glory by his Father etc... his Father as YHWH never gave himself a human body and then gave glory to it....how sick is that...unless you invent impossible and imaginary processes like incarnation and the hypostatic union of two natures dwelling in one vessel and kept separate, mutually exclusive.
To force YHWH into a human body, to make him have his own divine nature plus a human nature, to fit a sick pagan theory that is a mystery and a lie. This mocks my Yahshua, Lord and Savior and my Creator, YHWH. It brings Yahshua, the Son of YHWH of no consequence or significance, and mocks his Father's role and power and influence on his Son to bring salvation to us all, who is also my YHWH.
It would be interesting to know who you pray to, and it must be difficult at times to keep it all straight with all this stuff going on, of dual-200% natures housed inside one living human body, walking around 2000 years ago, and as a god-man saviour, as God the Son, and God the Father, and a separate personality for YHWH's own Spirit?
just saying....
APAK
Unfortunately, and not to sound abusive, but these two specifically @justbyfaith and @Enoch111, are the epitomes of bias and indoctrination, and thus, you'll bang your head against the wall attempting to have a dialectically sound discussion with them. I'm sure that you've realized that.
They both incessantly and indicatively, make their appeals and establish their predication based on spurious sources, and cite them as though they were authoritative. And again, ignoring or denying the main fundaments of the argument, that is, the entire implausability of it's Ontology, Christology and Soteriology, and thus, ultimate offense to God on so many levels.
Unless you're doing this as either a personal excercise, or for others who may come across this thread, expect both obstinance and nonsense to ensue from the these two.