Replies

Thats correct, since you said nothing about 'comparing', you said only Trinity.

OK, Lurkers, here is a direct quotation from my post:

Really Godzilla, I expected better.

I had expected that you would try to explain yourself, but I see now that, that won't happen as you get too long when you do, you tried to quote people who while they talked about the Trinity a lot, like a teenager, the never got over their beliefs to compare with others. At the risk of sounding patronizing. Godzilla, people will ask you this again, let me give you a few better sites.

So, I didn't say Godhead, I said compare with others... I dunno, I guess you are even more of a literalist than I am which is quite an accomplishment since I am autistic.

Ah yes, the Nauvoo Expositor reflex. You opinion is worthless since you can't prove hate and misinformation for all your bluster

LOL! OK, so some sites are banned because they promote hate, and I'll just concede that the site I quoted from has "hate speech on it" I didn't quote hate speech, but I'll just concede that because I have no intent of defending them and it's irrelevant to my point, OK?

So, who decides what is hate speech and what is not?

Obviously this being a privates site owned by Jim Robinson, he gets to decide. OK, what are his criteria, what do I need to find on a site in order to get it banned as hate speech? Is there a list somewhere? Is there a published method for requesting this? I bet there isn't. It would take too much time and nobody cares that much.

The point is, it's being done subjectively, and for a conservative site, we need to be seen to be fair, this subjective stuff does not help.

As for an "expositor" reflex, Nobody is advocating the web site be taken down, and no one is proposing to do it by force. I could just as easily accuse you of Hauns mill massacre reflex, or Extermination order reflex, but let's just drop the hyperbole, OK?

Given you own words that you didn't investigate it and that was your only criteria - go figure.

I read the article I was referencing, not the rest of the site. Are you seriously saying that to quote from Wikipedia, you have to have read the whole site?

No doubt, but then you should examine you selection criteria more closely if you want to maintain your reputation.

Not really worried about my reputation, I think your standards for me are way higher than the standards you expect from yourself or anyone else. AKA Double standards.

Delph IMHO, you are making this post (and several more) about me, not the topic. Stop it.

GZ LOL, your actions, not mine. :) Really? Fine, so you posted one scripture and I posted John 17:21-22, I then talked about without linking (If you don't think it's in there, LOL, ask.) scriptures, God telling Adam and Eve to be one flesh, God tells members to be one Body, Jesus telling the Apostles to be one, and Jesus drawing a simile (Linked above) to his oneness and the Fathers.

Let's explore a few usages of "One" in the bible, shall we?

1 Corinrians 12:11-27

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14 For the body is not one member, but many.
15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?
20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:
25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. 27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

So, how is Christ using "one" here? When people join the church do they become of one substance? While physically separate, are they still part of the body?

How about Romans 12:4-5

4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:
5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

So, how is "one" used here? As a side not, notice, the members of the Body have different offices? so not everyone is ready to see, hear or receive revelation for the church...

Then, here is Jesus responding to a challenge about divorce from the Pharisees... Matthew 19:4-6

4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

So, how does Jesus use "one" here? How did the Pharisees respond? they were trying to catch Jesus in some link error, oops er, verbal trap. Did they jump all over his usage of the word one to mean more than one person joined in a way other than substance? No they did not, they came back with so why are we allowed to divorce our wives?

"One" is used this way throughout the Bible, and all the sudden, when God says "1 Timothy 2:5: 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;" You think Aha! he means he and god are one substance, no wait, the then speaks in the same sentence of Jesus as a separate individual, hmm must be promoting polytheism then... LOL!

Or maybe Ephesians 4:4-6

4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

So, lets see the body and spirit are one substance... no they get separated at death.

OK, On lord one faith, one baptism... hmm how to make that one substance... Nah!

One God STOP READING!! JUST STOP HERE BEFORE THE BIBLE MESSES IT UP. Dang, now it talks of God the Father as as separate being in the SAME SENTENCE!

Honestly, I have a hard time seeing how the trinity is the "prevailing" view among "Orthodox Christianity" there is so much evidence against it IN THE BIBLE!

OK, Godzilla, you have said you could prove this to me, prove to me that the Trinity is the correct interpretation of the Bible (when the word isn't even in there) and the Godhead (which is in the Bible) isn't the correct interpretation.

Go ahead, do your stuff, prove it to me.

Delph