JESUS IS NOT YHWH

[Nihilo]

I think you'll have to do better than that to show Peter as expressly teaching the Trinity, because the above does not necessarily prove a Trinity

That's not what I was doing Freelight. Here are the posts I responded to.

Re. Nihilo's post #481, what did Peter say on the Trinity? I must have missed something. According to everything I have read in the Scriptures, Peter didn't believe in a Trinity.

Peter never mentions "trinity" or anything that even slightly resembles it in concept or any other way

And my response:

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied."

Besides Peter himself believing in and teaching the Trinity, as supreme pastor of the Church (Jn21:15-17KJV), all his successors have always taught the same. Always.

as later church councils decided to formulat/describe it - Also note that both epistles of Peter are questionable as 'pseudographical', more particularly 2 Peter, so what is in them is not always wholly reliable with the greater context of things in sight, even if a follower of Peter was one of the scribes. I would also look into some apocryphal works attribute to Peter, which I may research in due time.

Futhermore, Peter himself says this by revelation about Jesus IDENTITY - its pretty important -

15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.


Matthew 16:15-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

> Notice here Peter had ample opportunity to say "O Jesus you are God himself manifest in the flesh!, the logos,... even YHWH!" - Did he? Jesus further confirms Peter's answer...that he being God's Messiah-Son was revealed to him from heaven. Peter did NOT identify Jesus as YHWH.

Argument from silence.

Peter confirms Jesus being the MAN attested by God by his works, whom God raised up to be both 'lord' and 'Christ'.

What does Lord mean, though (Ro10:9KJV).

His Day of Pentecost sermon is true to his Jewish roots, consonant within his traditional monotheistic Unitarian concept of God

Begging the question.

...and his Messiah, a man born from the seed (loins) of David. (Acts 2). We can spiritualize things here of course,...but the physical lineage is pretty important to the Jews and that Messiah is to be a man, and not a demi-god or a God-man.

Begging the question again.

(easy now, I enjoy various demi-god motifs and different variations of Christ-figures, just saying). Of course Trinitarians have the versatile advantage of highlighting both 'human' and 'divine' aspects of the man Jesus, which in some ways gives much more liberal "wiggle room" on Christological matters, but hey its all good

Some just choose to stay basically biblical Unitarians, after all....all ancient and modern traditional-orthodox Jews are, and Jesus and his disciples, including his brother James the Just who led the Jerusalem Community, were just that.

Begging the question, or bare assertion.

You've really got to be kidding to assume that what Rome produced in the 3rd-6th centuries for their 'church-state' was the original religion of Jesus and his Jewish apostles. So much morphing, adopting, transposing, interpolations of the merging culture, mythos and imagery was amagalmated into the religious cult of that time, and continued to expand thru the centuries, that what we NOW have as so called 'Christianity' is but a mangled or decorated mirror of what the true original was.

There's the matter of the Resurrection, which Biblical Unitarians reject as fiction, "spiritualizing" it whatever that means. While history and Scripture backs up that the Church for all time believed in and taught the Trinity, even this evidence pales in comparison, to that which shows that the Church has always believed, taught, received and preached the Resurrection, as unequivocally and unambiguously and indisputably nonfiction.

That's just the tip of the iceberg.......

So you do not believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, nonfictionally? You only believe it was "spiritual" or only the soul, or some other explanation, other than the Resurrection is plain and simple nonfiction?

 

[Nihilo]

And there you are, about the same spiritual place as Evil.Eye, believing that the words of the Messiah are a trap.

:AMR: Don't put words in my mouth Daqq. You're the one setting a trap, not Him.

Suit yourself, I was only trying to help you see that passages like John 1:1 do not say what you have imagined them to say in your overly vivid imagination. Your church has made up your doctrine for you and told you what to believe. John 1:1 does not even mention the name Jesus and yet you and the herd have practically insisted that it does by way of your erroneous doctrines.

John 1:1 AND John 1:14, is what I actually referenced. lain:

You do not believe the words of the Master and therefore I do not believe anything else you say about doctrine.

:idunno: I already knew that you don't care what I or what anybody says about doctrine. You're just another Protestant in that regard, assuming that you believe that the Resurrection is nonfiction. That assumes that when you said you believe in the Resurrection, that you weren't trying to be tricky, but just answered straight forwardly. So I assume that. You're just another Protestant, to not listen to what anybody else says about doctrine.

You can say "why should we believe you" all day long but you only feel safe in saying that because you consider yourself part of a giant herd of giants.

Nope.

The reason you should believe what I say is because I am quoting the words of the one you claim is God Almighty. But I already made that point time and time again with you; you do not believe the words of the same one whom you claim is God Almighty.

Again, and again, and again, yes I do.

I just wonder if maybe that Greek word Word, is a homonym, especially since "the Word," just at the start of John, was introduced as "with God," and as, "God," and that "the Word was made flesh." So I am dubious of your claim, and it is flat unjust of you to go on to conclude that therefore I don't believe in the Resurrection, because I don't receive your "outside the box," never heard of before in all Church history, reading of passages.

You not only prove yourselves deceived but disprove your own doctrine from the start; for you cannot prove that he is God Almighty and at the same time believe his own Testimony and words concerning himself.

See above.

You invented for yourselves a religion designed to incorporate the pagan religions in the Roman empire, circa 300-350AD, what did you expect? You have exactly what you wished and exactly what you were hoping for.

You're arguing that the Church has been wrong, and damnably wrong, blasphemously wrong, the highest of blasphemies blasphemously wrong, pretty much since she was born in Jerusalem on Pentecost in AD 33. Listen---you---listen to what the quote-unquote Master says "I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." The highest of high blasphemy occurred within the first century, Daqq, and never let go. This is your view, whether or not you accept it, everybody else does, because that's what your position means.

You believe Him, everything He said? You believe all His "testimony?" Why'd He lie. He lied.

If you're right.

Do you start to see why I can't believe you?

 

[daqq]

:AMR: Don't put words in my mouth Daqq. You're the one setting a trap, not Him.
John 1:1 AND John 1:14, is what I actually referenced. lain:
:idunno: I already knew that you don't care what I or what anybody says about doctrine. You're just another Protestant in that regard, assuming that you believe that the Resurrection is nonfiction. That assumes that when you said you believe in the Resurrection, that you weren't trying to be tricky, but just answered straight forwardly. So I assume that. You're just another Protestant, to not listen to what anybody else says about doctrine.
Nope.
Again, and again, and again, yes I do.

I just wonder if maybe that Greek word Word, is a homonym, especially since "the Word," just at the start of John, was introduced as "with God," and as, "God," and that "the Word was made flesh." So I am dubious of your claim, and it is flat unjust of you to go on to conclude that therefore I don't believe in the Resurrection, because I don't receive your "outside the box," never heard of before in all Church history, reading of passages.
See above.
You're arguing that the Church has been wrong, and damnably wrong, blasphemously wrong, the highest of blasphemies blasphemously wrong, pretty much since she was born in Jerusalem on Pentecost in AD 33. Listen---you---listen to what the quote-unquote Master says "I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." The highest of high blasphemy occurred within the first century, Daqq, and never let go. This is your view, whether or not you accept it, everybody else does, because that's what your position means.

You believe Him, everything He said? You believe all His "testimony?" Why'd He lie. He lied.

If you're right.

Do you start to see why I can't believe you?

Luke 16:31 W/H
31 ειπεν δε αυτω ει μωυσεως και των προφητων ουκ ακουουσιν ουδ εαν τις εκ νεκρων αναστη πεισθησονται

:sheep:

 

[Nihilo]

Luke 16:31 W/H
31 ειπεν δε αυτω ει μωυσεως και των προφητων ουκ ακουουσιν ουδ εαν τις εκ νεκρων αναστη πεισθησονται

:sheep:

I'll take that as positive.

 

[daqq]

I'll take that as positive.

Take it as you will but as for your previous comments he did not lie, in fact, all those statements quoted to you are plain clear emphatic statements that are never going to pass away. You say you believe he is God Almighty but you do not believe his words. It is not him who lied.

 

[Nihilo]

Take it as you will but as for your previous comments he did not lie, in fact, all those statements quoted to you are plain clear emphatic statements that are never going to pass away. You say you believe he is God Almighty but you do not believe his words. It is not him who lied.

Stop calling me a liar you censored.

 

[daqq]

Stop calling me a liar you censored.

Stop saying that I am calling the Master a liar just because his words refute your beliefs.

 

[Nihilo]

Take it as you will but as for your previous comments he did not lie, in fact, all those statements quoted to you are plain clear emphatic statements that are never going to pass away. You say you believe he is God Almighty but you do not believe his words. It is not him who lied.

How long did you think you'd be able to sit there in your ivory tower and lob that accusation at me? How stupid are you? I'm a Trinitarian, I'm the 99%. You're the "outside the box" "never before heard of" interpretation here. I'm not lying, but your twisted reading of this, along with your tunnel vision wrt plain Church history, does have the Lord lying; His Church plunging into full darkness wrt theology proper, right after the starter's pistol fired? That's what you believe happened. And you still won't address that, you "won't touch it," because you've got nothing to defend your view here, and neither, I notice, did you ever address whether you'd be able to maintain your witness to the Resurrection on pain of death, so maybe you're the liar here Daqq, maybe you don't believe in Him, and you don't believe that He is risen. Maybe it's you.

 

[Nihilo]

Stop saying that I am calling the Master a liar just because his words refute your beliefs.

They don't. Your, stupid, reading of them does. And who cares, what "Daqq from the internet" thinks about anything? Nobody, bud.

 

[daqq]

How long did you think you'd be able to sit there in your ivory tower and lob that accusation at me? How stupid are you? I'm a Trinitarian, I'm the 99%.

You're the "outside the box" "never before heard of" interpretation here. I'm not lying, but your twisted reading of this, along with your tunnel vision wrt plain Church history, does have the Lord lying; His Church plunging into full darkness wrt theology proper, right after the starter's pistol fired? That's what you believe happened. And you still won't address that, you "won't touch it," because you've got nothing to defend your view here, and neither, I notice, did you ever address whether you'd be able to maintain your witness to the Resurrection on pain of death, so maybe you're the liar here Daqq, maybe you don't believe in Him, and you don't believe that He is risen. Maybe it's you.

Your dogmas and creeds therefore openly contradict the Testimony of the Master:

Matthew 24:35 (also Mark 13:31)
35 The heavens and the earth shall pass away; but my words shall not pass away.

John 5:22
22 For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment unto the Son:

John 8:15
15 You judge after the flesh: I judge no one.

John 8:50
50 And I seek not my own glory: one there is who seeks and judges.

John 12:47-48
47 And if anyone hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but that the world be saved.
48 The one rejecting me, and not receiving my words, has one who judges him: the Logos which I have spoken, that one shall judge him in the last day.

John 14:24
24The one not loving me does not keep my words: and the Logos which you hear is not my own, but is the Father's who sent me.

The Father judges no one, (John 5:22)
The Anointed one judges no one, (John 8:15, 12:47)
The Logos-Word is the Son: the Seeker and the Judge, (John 5:22, 8:50, 12:48).
No one has seen or beheld Elohim at any time, (John 1:18a, 1John 4:12a).
The words of the Anointed one shall not pass away, (Matthew 24:35, Mark 13:31).

The Logos-Word is the only Judge:

John 12:47-48
47 And if anyone hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but that the world be saved.
48 The one rejecting me, and not receiving my words, has one who judges him: the Logos which I have spoken, that one shall judge him in the last day.

Revelation 19:11-16 KJV
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The [Logos] Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

:sheep:

 

[daqq]

They don't. Your, stupid, reading of them does. And who cares, what "Daqq from the internet" thinks about anything? Nobody, bud.

Lol, "daqq from the internet" is posting the words of the one whom you claim is God Almighty, and yet, you do not believe those words of the one whom you claim is God Almighty. You therefore do not truly believe he is God Almighty. Go back and read what "daqq from the internet" said to you about lip-service. :chuckle:

 

[Lon]

To Lon's post #437: Yay!!! How about being off to more interesting forums?

I've been here since forever. You are welcome to go where ever you like.

 

[Nihilo]

Lol, "daqq from the internet" is posting the words of the one whom you claim is God Almighty, and yet, you do not believe those words of the one whom you claim is God Almighty. You therefore do not truly believe he is God Almighty. Go back and read what "daqq from the internet" said to you about lip-service. :chuckle:

Still, you continue to ignore that according to you the gates of hell prevailed rather instantly, and you won't touch whether you'd die, painfully, for your witness to Christ's Resurrection either. You're just ignoring them. I didn't realize how spineless and low quality a user account you were before, but you're certainly leaving no room for a benefit of the doubt now. :idunno: Whatever.

 

[daqq]

Still, you continue to ignore that according to you the gates of hell prevailed rather instantly, and you won't touch whether you'd die, painfully, for your witness to Christ's Resurrection either. You're just ignoring them. I didn't realize how spineless and low quality a user account you were before, but you're certainly leaving no room for a benefit of the doubt now. :idunno: Whatever.

You first need to step up and man-up to what the Master says.
What *you* say has no consequence, it is neither here nor there, whether this or that.
Remember?

PS ~ Calling people stupid is forbidden by the Master.
Herein again you do not believe his words, (Matthew 5:22).

 

[Nihilo]

Stop saying that I am calling the Master a liar just because his words refute your beliefs.

No. How 'bout you just answer how you understand the Church plummeting into utter darkness and spiritual destitution right away, within the first generation, as the gates of hell not prevailing against her? Just give it a shot.

Is making the Lord equal with God (Jn5:18KJV Jn10:33KJV) blasphemy or not Daqq? It's His own Church that did it, and still does it.

 

[Nihilo]

You first need to step up and man-up to what the Master says.
What *you* say has no consequence, it is neither here nor there, whether this or that.
Remember?

PS ~ Calling people stupid is forbidden by the Master.
Herein again you do not believe his words, (Matthew 5:22).

You are a filthy liar.

" "

lain:

 

[Nihilo]

Stop saying that I am calling the Master a liar just because his words refute your beliefs.

No. How 'bout you just answer how you understand the Church plummeting into utter darkness and spiritual destitution right away, within the first generation, as the gates of hell not prevailing against her? Just give it a shot.

Is making the Lord equal with God (Jn5:18KJV Jn10:33KJV) blasphemy or not Daqq? It's His own Church that did it, and still does it.

Daqq will not touch this. Watch....

 

[daqq]

You are a filthy liar.

" "

lain:

From the mouth of the Accuser.

Daqq will not touch this. Watch....

No. How 'bout you just answer how you understand the Church plummeting into utter darkness and spiritual destitution right away, within the first generation, as the gates of hell not prevailing against her? Just give it a shot.

Is making the Lord equal with God (Jn5:18KJV Jn10:33KJV) blasphemy or not Daqq? It's His own Church that did it, and still does it.

Nope, not the first generation because they were the true faithful; but more like the end of the second century and into the third century, about the time your fathers and your mother church came up into power and began to murder the faithful because they could not convince them of what have now become your dogmas. People who murder in the name of Elohim do not know Elohim. So, yes, of course they plummeted themselves into utter darkness; that is clear and obvious from your own histories, and the darkness continued on into the dark ages as a direct result of your mother church and church fathers murdering the faithful. The scripture stands true: what you sow, you shall reap.

 

[Lon]

Re. Nihilo's post #481, what did Peter say on the Trinity? I must have missed something. According to everything I have read in the Scriptures, Peter didn't believe in a Trinity.

2Pe 1:1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ

 

[Nihilo]

From the mouth of the Accuser.

That's all you've been doing to me since round one, so stuff it, censored.

Nope, not the first generation because they were the true faithful; but more like the end of the second century and into the third century, about the time your fathers and your mother church came up into power and began to murder the faithful because they could not convince them of what have now become your dogmas. People who murder in the name of Elohim do not know Elohim. So, yes, of course they plummeted themselves into utter darkness; that is clear and obvious from your own histories, and the darkness continued on into the dark ages as a direct result of your mother church and church fathers murdering the faithful. The scripture stands true: what you sow, you shall reap.

So you confess that you don't believe quote-unquote the master. The gates of hell, prevailed.

So sad.

Didache was first century, and confirms Matthew 28:19 (KJV) as legit, plus Peter's and Paul's Trinity references, plus John 1, plus Philippians and Colossians.... You have homonyms and improbable readings and inherent, insoluble ambiguity. Are you crazy? Most Unitarians are crazy, unless they admit they're Muslims, then they've got a chance at stability; I said a chance.