What Exactly Is The Trinity? Also, Is There A Satanic Trinity? (gospel, bible)

[Miss Shawn_2828]

Originally Posted by Campbell34

If 1 John 5:7 was debunked, why is it being quoted by Terullian in 200 A.D.?

Why does it appear in the majority of second century Latin Manuscrips of 200 A.D.?

And why are they now finding it in some of the early Greek Manuscrips?

If anything, the verse in question had been removed not inserted. Otherwise, we would not see early church fathers from 200 A.D. quoting it. Now you can ignore those facts, yet the truth is in print for all to see.

It's obvious He doesn't understand or know the information that He is giving. An atheists who understood that He didn't believe in God would quote from the bible, and then say that then give one of Jesus many titles, Son Of God. It's obvious He didn't understand what he was saying. LOL, he is saying there is no God, God doesn't exist, But God has a Son.

LOL, debating is not his strong point. Maybe we need to have debating 101.

[KCfromNC]

Originally Posted by Campbell34

If anything, 1 John 5:7 was removed from texts not inserted.

Can you propose a reasonable method for a this one isolated verse to be changed in the Bibles of various different independent churches in dozens of languages spread through Europe, Asia and N. Africa, so that all of them ended up reading the same way? None of those churches were unitarians, so it wasn't in their best interest to remove something which supported their theology. Your idea simply doesn't make sense.

Even Tertullian quotes this verse and he lived in 200 A.D.

Really? I've only read of him quoting John 10 instead of using the obvious proof text that you think existed at the time. That doesn't seem particularly smart of him - or it means that the obvious proof text was created later.

And in 250 A.D. Cyprian writes, "And again concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit it is written: and the Three are one".

Punctuation matters :

"Again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one.'"

The quote from John 8 is "And these three are one", the rest are his original words.

I would also point out, that the verse in question is found in the majority of second century Latin Manuscripts.

Please list these manuscripts. It's missing from the important Latin versions up until the 800s, at the least.

Also, they have discovered the verse in some of the early Greek manuscripts. Not a lot of them, yet it does appear.

If you mean "a grand total of eight 10th to 18th century Greek manuscripts translated from Latin", this sentence is correct. I don't consider writings from a thousand years after the fact to be "early", but I guess the Bible is a pretty fluid thing. Also, I don't count the 4 of 8 texts which include verse only as a variant or a margin note.

So to suggest it was a later addition would be false. Especially when we have early church fathers that quote it going back to 200 A.D.

Except that there's absolutely no evidence of this being the case, and you've got to imagine a world-wide conspiracy among the churches to eliminate a verse which is part of their central doctrine. A conspiracy which extends to this day, I might add, as most modern Bibles fail to include the text you're talking about.

[Miss Shawn_2828]

Originally Posted by justme58

Lassie

I was a theist for over 30 years and defended your gawd. Everything you cited is made up and NO, the OT does not point to Jesus, a second coming et al.

You assume way too much and what I have forgotten you still need to learn.

If shows that you are not answering the question because you don't know, typical.

You assume way too much and what I have forgotten you still need to learn

It that was the case, you still don't know anything.

You claim to have all of this knowledge, but you refuse to answer my questions from my post earlier.

The OT does point to Jesus, you just don't want to see it. If it doesn't tell me why and show the facts.

People who throw insults are only doing so because they can't debate up an argument. LOL, if you are so intelligent, then show the facts. Up until now you haven't shown anything but copied and paste information from other people, which shows that you know nothing.

Sinse you keep running from my others question, then answer this. You say there is no God. But you say that Jesus is the Son Of God. How is it that you paste and copy scriptures of a Son of God that you don't believe in? Does that make since?

If God does not exist, then HOw could He have a Son?

[justme58]

Originally Posted by Miss Shawn_2828

If shows that you are not answering the question because you don't know, typical.

Really?

It that was the case, you still don't know anything.

Really?

You claim to have all of this knowledge, but you refuse to answer my questions from my post earlier.

Hint!

The OT does point to Jesus, you just don't want to see it. If it doesn't tell me why and show the facts.

I do not have the time or inclination. Have at your sky fairy if it makes you sleep nights.

People who throw insults are only doing so because they can't debate up an argument. LOL, if you are so intelligent, then show the facts. Up until now you haven't shown anything but copied and paste information from other people, which shows that you know nothing.

Really? How wise one is (or arrogant) in their youth?

Sinse[sic] you keep running from my others question, then answer this. You say there is no God. But you say that Jesus is the Son Of God. How is it that you paste and copy scriptures of a Son of God that you don't believe in? Does that make since?[sic]

Since you do not know how to spell - that makes sense and insist on punctuating with "LOL" Who said I believe that Jesus is the son of god? I merely cited scriptures that claimed that

If God does not exist, then HOw could He have a Son?

It is plausible Jesus existed but your gawd is a myth and NO - I do not think the evidence supports the notion that Jesus was god.

If you feel you have scored a point - have at it. Your trinity is a myth invented by the RCC

[Miss Shawn_2828]

Originally Posted by justme58

Really?
Really?
Hint!
I do not have the time or inclination. Have at your sky fairy if it makes you sleep nights.
Really? How wise one is (or arrogant) in their youth?
Since you do not know how to spell - that makes sense and insist on punctuating with "LOL" Who said I believe that Jesus is the son of god? I merely cited scriptures that claimed that
It is plausible Jesus existed but your gawd is a myth and NO - I do not think the evidence supports the notion that Jesus was god.

If you feel you have scored a point - have at it. Your trinity is a myth invented by the RCC

You still refuse to answer any of my questions, you are a fool. If you were as you say, you would debate, but you give nothing. Ignorant people refuse to debate when they claim to have the answers. It's funny when people accept certain scripture, and refuse to accept the other. It is ignorant to quote scripture at all when you can't even back up what you are quoting.

I notice people who can't debate fact for fact or information for information, they jump around the question and attack. LOL, this is just another case of mouth and nothing to show for it.

It is plausible Jesus existed but your gawd is a myth

Of course it is, because the evidence is there!! You still want answer my question. You say that Jesus is the Son Of God, how can that be if He is the Son Of God. You quoted the scripture, so back up what you quote. The evidence as you say says that Jesus is the Son Of God. If God does not exist, why would you even quote if you don't believe in it.

Whose Son is Jesus?

Are you going to answer the question, or ignore and babble on about a myth God. So, Jesus is the Son of a myth God, then why not say that then say Son Of God. You are slow!!!!

I will wait on my answer!!! Whose Son is Jesus? YOu have already quoted it once, let's see if you will again!

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by Miss Shawn_2828

It's obvious He doesn't understand or know the information that He is giving. An atheists who understood that He didn't believe in God would quote from the bible, and then say that then give one of Jesus many titles, Son Of God. It's obvious He didn't understand what he was saying. LOL, he is saying there is no God, God doesn't exist, But God has a Son.

LOL, debating is not his strong point. Maybe we need to have debating 101.

Typical of you to attack the poster rather than the post every time you see something or someone who disagrees with your version of truth...Perhaps it is you that needs to enroll in debating 101.

[Miss Shawn_2828]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

Typical of you to attack the poster rather than the post every time you see something or someone who disagrees with your version of truth...Perhaps it is you that needs to enroll in debating 101.

I am not attacking him due to him not agreeing with me, I am attacking what he is saying because he is giving a bunch of all over the place answers, which shows that he does not know what he is talking about.

He says there is no God. Ok, no problem. Then he quotes scripture and says that Jesus is the Son of God. Oxymoronic to say. Sometimes it is better to say nothing.

Maybe you should help him, atleast when you say something you don't turn around and contradict yourself. I don't have a problem with people who disagree with me, I have a problem with people who say one thing, and can't back it up. I have a problem with people who claim to disprove something, with nothing to show for it.

I don't know everything, but I will back up what I say and know. I want beat around the bush and try to throw someone off by not answering questions.

If you haven't notice one thing about me is, if you tell me something that you say that you know, I want to hear and see it, not a bunch of garbage coming from someone's mouth. If the person is saying that something is false, then post the facts as they know, or give the information. I have only run into mouth talking, trash talking, with little information people.

I don't have a problem with people who disagree with me, like I told you before, I have a friend who is atheists and I love to debate with him. He comes with information, not junk and nothing to show for what he knows. I love to debate with people who will give what they know and understand. Not what they think. I think alot of things, but that means nothing.

My friend who is atheists keeps me on my toes, sorry, I can't say that about some on here. I don't have a problem with debating with atheists or non-believers on here, but I just don't see the challenge here. When I say challenge, I mean actually seeing what they are saying is false. I am not trying to be a pain, but I will atleast give information and research of what I have studied and learned, for some reason I don't really see other people doing that here.

There are some who say this and that, who have never really studied why they belief what they belief, or never even studied to see if the facts as we know things are true or false.

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by Miss Shawn_2828

I am not attacking him due to him not agreeing with me, I am attacking him because he is giving a bung of all over the place answers, which shows that he does not know what he is talking about.

He says there is no God. Ok, no problem. Then he quotes scripture and says that Jesus is the Son of God. Oxymoronic to say. Sometimes it is better to say nothing.

I don't see why that should be an oxymoron. He doesn't believe in God or believe that the bible is the word of God, but is it not true that the bible says that Jesus is the son of God? When quoting the bible or any other book it is not required to believe to quote what it says.

[Miss Shawn_2828]

Originally Posted by sanspeur

I don't see why that should be an oxymoron. He doesn't believe in God or believe that the bible is the word of God, but is it not true that the bible says that Jesus is the son of God? When quoting the bible or any other book it is not required to believe to quote what it says.

UMMM, it's oxymoronic to say. A child will understand the difference between the two. That would be like me saying I don't believe in God, but then turn around and quote scripture and say God so loved the word. That would be dumb on my part. UNless I said this is what your bible says, but I don't believe it. Other wise, the person will look foolish.

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by Miss Shawn_2828

UMMM, it's oxymoronic to say. A child will understand the difference between the two. That would be like me saying I don't believe in God, but then turn around and quote scripture and say God so loved the word. That would be dumb on my part. UNless I said this is what your bible says, but I don't believe it. Other wise, the person will look foolish.

justme58 clearly indicates that he does not believe in God...Why should that stop him from quoting the bible to make a point. He did not say God so loved the world. Quoting scripture does not a believer make.

I can quote parts of the Harry Potter games of quidich, but that doesn't make it my statement, or that I believe it.... My conclusion is that your attempt to make others look foolish is backfiring on you and making you seem rather childish.