This is old ground. We have already learned – via Christian scholarship – the Trinity is not in the Old Testament. Sadly, some neo-Trinitarian Christians insist the trinity is in the Old Testament – one such being a Christian zealot calling himself Keith Truth (Keith Thompson).
We showed Keith Thompson a clip where the Christian scholar William Lane Craig confirmed the Trinity is not in the Old Testament yet this zealot proclaimed Dr Craig was “wrong”.
You Decide – a Christian fundamentalist Vs Scholarship
Who do you want to believe; a young Christian zealot on the internet or scholarly authority?
Well, alongside William Lane Craig, Dr Laurence Brown and Harper Collins’ Encyclopaedia we have Bart Ehrman and James White to also tell us the trinity is not present in the Old Testament – the former mocks the argumentations of the neo-Trinitarian Christians who wrongly claim the Trinity is present in the Old Testament.
Dr James White on the Trinity
James White, as an evangelical Christian apologist from Alpha and Omega Ministries, believes the Trinity is revealed after the Old Testament but before the New Testament is written:
One of the most important truths to grasp about the Bible’s revelation of the Trinity is that the truth of the Trinity is revealed primarily in acts of God — specifically, in the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and in the coming of the Holy Spirit to indwell the church. The greatest proof that God is Triune is found in the ministry, death, burial, and resurrection of the Son of God and in the coming of the Spirit. These events took place between the writing of the Old and New Testaments. The Old Testament contains predictions and glimpses of what comes into clear view only in the ministry of Christ recorded in the New Testament. In the same way the Trinity is revealed before the writing of the New Testament so that is written by Trinitarians for Trinitarians. [Loving the Trinity by James R. White, Christian Research Center]
Dr Laurence Brown on the Trinity
Dr Laurence Brown does not believe the Trinity is in either the Old or New Testament
Rabbi Tovia Singer on the Trinity
To represent those who follow the Hebrew Bible (i.e. Jews) we can refer to Rabbi Tovia Singer who does not see any Trinity in the Old Testament.
Dr William Lane Craig on the Trinity
Dr Craig is a renowned Christian apologist and scholar, who upon reading the Old Testament, does not see any Trinity therein.
Professor Bart Ehrman on the Trinity
Professor Bart Ehrman mocks the manner at which some Christians promote the idea there is a trinity in the Old Testament. Ehrman does teach us the absence of the Trinity in the Bible has troubled Christian theologians for centuries. In fact, Ehrman teaches us there is no trinity in the ENTIRE Bible and the only reference to the trinity was the 1 John 5:7-8 forgery. Daniel B. Wallace writes:
The Trinitarian formula (known as the Comma Johanneum) made its way into the third edition of Erasmus’ Greek NT (1522) because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared (1516), there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma because he found no Greek manuscripts that included it. Once one was produced (codex 61, written by one Roy or Froy at Oxford in c. 1520), Erasmus apparently felt obliged to include the reading. He became aware of this manuscript sometime between May of 1520 and September of 1521. In his annotations to his third edition he does not protest the rendering now in his text, as though it were made to order; but he does defend himself from the charge of indolence, noting that he had taken care to find whatever manuscripts he could for the production of his Greek New Testament. In the final analysis, Erasmus probably altered the text because of politico-theologico-economic concerns: he did not want his reputation ruined, nor his Novum Instrumentum to go unsold [The Textual Problem in 1 John 5:7-8 by Daniel Wallace]
Conclusion
We could present more evidence against the claims of the Christian zealot (Keith Truth) but it would simply be a case of striking the carcass and I am beginning to worry that Keith will continue going against logic and scholarship regardless of the evidence against him.
The fact remains, the Trinity is not in the Old Testament according to honest scholarship and logical reading of the Old Testament.
Perhaps the real reason why we are seeing a glut of Christian fundamentalists absurdly claiming to possess “air tight” arguments for the Trinity being present in the Old Testament is due to the recognition of the confusion surrounding the Trinity:
For many Christians, the Trinity is an abstract principle, a confusing and difficult doctrine that they believe, although they are not really sure why in their most honest moments [Loving the Trinity, James R White, Christian Research Center]
Appendix
Let’s showcase the immature and unscholarly response from Keith Truth (Keith Thompson) to this blog post. Once our young friend, Keith Thompson, was done with throwing insults and immature ridicule our way he offered nothing of scholarly substance to back up his claims of “air tight arguments”, “fact”, "Dr Craig is wrong" etc...
Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
71 comments:
Appeal to authority much?
When did they quit teaching logic in European schools?
It’s not too late. Just google logical fallacies and read
peace
Yahya Snow
More isolated incidents of Muslims not getting your memo, and still acting like Muslims.
Ali this first one is for you. I guess this Saudi guy was poor and un educated too.
BRISTOL, R.I. -- The suspicious person arrested at Roger Williams University on Thursday was a Saudi Arabia man studying English, police said Monday. They had been called to investigate a possible bomb threat.
Source
This next one is very sick, but it is making the rounds of good Muslims. We all know how you like to see pictures of blown up Pali, And Iraqi Children.
"Muslims in Southern Thailand have spent years trying to rid the area of non-Muslims and non-Islamic influences. As the government pushes back against terrorism, the tactics of Muslims are escalating in brutality. Now Muslims are beheading children."
Alla Akbar Allah Is SOOO PLEASED
Another Man stoned to death in Indonesia. Wasn't Indonesia the only case in Islamic history that was settled by "peaceful Muslims"?
Well take a lot how that worked out.
Oh Allah is so pleased
As you can see its been a berry berry busy week for Mohamed and his messengers.
The sad part is there is more to come.
@Yahya Snow
I don't know how I missed this one. Yahya Snow, maybe you can update your memo to include rules for Muslims when they fly in air planes. For instance a include list of do's and don'ts.
The first Don't should be.
1.DO NOT CHARGE THE COCKPIT SCREAMING ALLA AKBAR.
SAN FRANCISCO – The passengers sat stunned as they watched a man walk quickly toward the front of American Airlines Flight 1561 as it was descending toward San Francisco. He was screaming and then began pounding on the cockpit door.
Muslims what not to do on a air plane
Wow I can't believe it is only Tuesday.
Hey Yahya,
While you are brushing up on your fallacies you might want to check out the fallacy of the excluded middle.
The position the OT takes in regards to the Trinity can be stated as one of the following propositions
a) The OT unambiguously declares that God is Triune
b) The OT explicitly supports the Trinity
c) The OT implicitly supports the Trinity
d) The OT is unmindful of the Trinity
e) The OT is agnostic about the Trinity
f) The OT implicitly rejects the Trinity
g) The OT explicitly rejects the Trinity
h) The OT unambiguously rejects the Trinity
Denying “a” does not mean you accept “h”
Peace
Hey Yahya! Read this:
This was a thought out decision that took months of prayer, consideration, evaluation and knowledge-seeking on my part. Every bit as it has been a search for meaning and truth is has been a grieving process for me to realize that what I have been attached to all of these years is in fact not the ultimate reality behind our existence. - Farhan Qureshi Renounces Islam
Peace.
Almost forgot:
"Iron sharpens Iron as one man sharpens another" - Proverbs 27
To Fifth Monarchy Man
Does the Old testament, explicitly or implicitly rejects the Four-unity? Four-unity is God being in 4 persons.
Interesting about farhan. I would like to hear from a muslim who has spoken to him for more details.
Farhan Qureshi declares his Apostasy from Islam.
Interesting what he had to say.
"My apostasy has not been based on disliking Islam or its requirements rather it was based on a realization that Islam is in direct contradiction with contemporary knowledge involving and including science, philosophy, ethics, anthropology, and the field which I am most interested in, educated in and practice as my line of work, namely, psychology: the science and study of human behavior.
1mm asks
Does the Old testament, explicitly or implicitly rejects the Four-unity? Four-unity is God being in 4 persons.
I respond
I would say The OT is unmindful of a four-unity.
but you would have to explain just what you mean by the concept.
It would be helpful if you posted somthing like the 5 fondational truths that I posted in the other thread so that I would know exactly what you mean by this term.
For example I don't know who the four persons are. If one is a created being then the OT would reject four unity outright.
peace
Not only is it not in the Old Testament, but not in the New Testament according to:
"There is little doubt the doctrine of the trinity evolved from human philosophies and not from the Bible. Most Christian scholars agree with Dr. Bruce N. Kaye, "Scripture had an indirect role in forming the doctrine of the Trinity." (Kaye, "The New Testament," OGT). After conducting a thorough examination of the concepts of Trinity as found in the Bible, the Jesuit scholar, Edmund J. Fortman, concludes:
"There is no formal doctrine of the Trinity in the New Testament writers, if this means an explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons.... The Biblical witness to God, as we have seen did not contain any formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity..." (as quoted in Robinson, S., p.74).
This conclusion is echoed again and again by traditional Christian theologians and Biblical scholars. For example, "Nowhere in the Bible do we find the doctrine of the Trinity clearly formulated... There is no formal statement of trinitarian doctrine in the Bible." (Keeley, p.164). "Careful reading of the Old Testament shows no indication of the trinity itseld." (Ibid., p. 166). "Neither the word nor the doctrine of trinity appears anywhere in the New Testament." (Cantelon, p.75). "The Trinity is not really a biblical doctrine." (Erickson, p.97). "Trinity does not appear in the Bible." (Marty. p.80). "The doctrine of the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine in the sense of being specifically found in the New Testament writings. It is a creation of the fourth century church." (Richarddon, p.100). "It is worth noting that the doctrine of the Trinity is also absent in all extant writings of the Apostolic Fathers from the first and early second centuries." (Rusch, p.3; 37-42)." (Dwight E. Monson - Shared Beliefs, Honest Differences: A Biblical Basis for Comparing the Doctrines Of Mormons And Other Christians - Cedar Fort, 1998 - Page 18).
"The formal doctrine of the trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the New Testament." (Paul J. Achtemeier - Harper's Bible Dictionary - Harper & Row,1985 - Page 1099).
"There is no doctrine of one God in three persons (modes of being), no doctrine of a 'tri-une God', a 'trinity'." (Hans Kung - Christianity: Essence, History, Future - Continuum, 2001 - Page 97).
"There is no doctrine of the Trinity in the New Testament in the sense of an understanding of triunity." (William J. Hill - The Three-Personed God: The Trinity As A Mystery Of Salvation - CUA Press, 1982 - Page 29).
"The doctrine of the Trinity as such is not revealed in either the Old Testament or the New Testament." (The Harper Collins Encyclopedia Of Catholicism - Page 1270).
More encyclopedia's are cited: truegospelofjesus.org/articles/trinity.html
The Fifth Monarchy MAn,
What I mean by Four-unity, is exactly what you mean by Trinity, except instead of 3 persons, I would suggest there is a fourth person who is not revealed in scripture. It's disingenuous from you, you claim to understand the concept of the Trinity, but as soon as I Add just another person, you cease to understand!! The Trinity assumes that the Bible revealed all persons of God. If the third person of God was not revealed in the OT, what makes you confident that a Fourth person is not revealed at all? And why not a fifth person and so on.
@1moremuslim
You said "I would suggest there is a fourth person who is not revealed in scripture."
I swear we should start a show, "Muslims say the DUMBEST things"
LOL
1moremuslim,
who is the fourth person?
Looks like 1moremuslim is making up scripture, hey why not his prophet did it.
farhan qureshi is not a scholar. he is related to nabeel 2
1MM:
I would suggest there is a fourth person who is not revealed in scripture.
Me:
So four-unity goes beyond what is written. Then of course the OT explicitly rejects it.
1mm
It's disingenuous from you, you claim to understand the concept of the Trinity, but as soon as I Add just another person, you cease to understand!!
Me:
I understand the Trinity because it is divine revelation and the Holy Spirit helps me to understand that is the same way I understand all doctrine.
Add another person and that is not the case. It's not disingenuous to limit ones speculations to that which is revealed in the word of God.
1mm:
The Trinity assumes that the Bible revealed all persons of God. If the third person of God was not revealed in the OT, what makes you confident that a Fourth person is not revealed at all? And why not a fifth person and so on.
Me:
I believe the third person was revealed in the OT so I reject the premise of your question.
You might ask it of someone who does not believe that Christ is in the OT.
peace
Radical Moderate:
Of course , when you can't answer the question, or make a meaningful reply, you have no choice but calling names.
Do you believe that the Holy Spirit is God in the OT?
To Fifth Monarchy Man:
" I understand the Trinity because it is divine revelation and the Holy Spirit helps me to understand that is the same way I understand all doctrine. :
Does the Holy Spirit help you understand the doctrine of immaculate conception, sola fide and purgatory?
" I believe the third person was revealed in the OT so I reject the premise of your question. "
It's also the premise of James White, W Lane Craig, and every single Bible commentator before 100 AD.
" So four-unity goes beyond what is written. Then of course the OT explicitly rejects it. "
The most that you can say is that the Bible is silent about a fourth Person. If you don't make the difference between Silence and rejection... Silence cannot be an argument for or against. You are still assuming that the Bible reveals ALL the persons of God.
Saying that God have ONLY 3 persons is also going beyond scripture. Furthermore The Bible doesn't say anything about BEING and PERSON. look at Hebrews 1: 3 in different translations.
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his BEING NIV.
3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his PERSON KJV
who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance ASV
Scholars of Greek can't decide how to translate one word "Hypostasis" which is essential to explain the Trinity, isn't supposed to be clear distinction?
Hey all it's FMM somthings wrong I can't post normally
1mm
Does the Holy Spirit help you understand the doctrine of immaculate conception, sola fide and purgatory?
me
No, depends on how you define it, and no
1mm
It's also the premise of James White, W Lane Craig, and every single Bible commentator before 100 AD.
Me
Assuming you are correct. What does that have to do with me?
1mm
Silence cannot be an argument for or against.
Me silence in the OT cannot be an argument for or against silence in in all of scripture is an argument against.
Quote:
Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar.
(Proverbs 30:5-6)
1mm
Saying that God have ONLY 3 persons is also going beyond scripture. Furthermore The Bible doesn't say anything about BEING and PERSON.
Me
I never said any of those things. Did you even read the 5 truths I affirmed and posted?
Peace
Anon said:
he [farhan] is related to nabeel 2
Oh no! He is related to nabeel! We must avoid him like the plagues! Obviousely there is some sort of zionist controlled genetic disorder going on in that family!
The OT is saturated with The Holy Triune God.
The Spirit of God has made me, and the Spirit of the Almighty gives me life! - Job 33
"The Spirit of God has made me, and the Spirit of the Almighty gives me life! - Job 33"
Wasn't Jesus who created you?
A distinction between Jesus and the Son has to be made.
Jesus is a historical person posessing two natures, divine and human. The Holy Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, created you.
Jesus is the Incarnate Son of God whom "upholds all things by the word of His power" Heb 1.3 "and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God" Heb 12.2. He exists along with God the Father in eternity as the second person of the Trinity, the Son, but took upon himself a human nature in the Incarnation.
The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, and is coequal and coeternal.
Messiah is Elohim Ps 45.6 Heb 1.8, Immanuel Isa 7.14 Mat 1.8, and El Gibbor Isa 9.6.
The LORD is our Judge
The LORD is our Lawgiver
The LORD is our King
He will save us.
Is 33
But wasnt Farhan an orthodox sunni Muslim who held onto "consistent Islamiyya theology?
The Holy Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, created you.
The distinction between the Son and Jesus has nothing to do with my question.
If the Father created me, the Holy Spirit created me and the Son created me, that means that every person of the 3 persons has created 1/3 a third of me. Then you cannot conclude that every person is fully God, since no one of these three has created the Universe Alone.
The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, and is coequal
This statement is contradictory in itself. If the Spirit proceeds from the Father, and the Father doesn't proceed from the Spirit , so they cannot be coequal.
By the way, there are christians who believe that the Spirit proceeds only from the Father, opposing the Double procession Doctrine. Go figure who is right and who is wrong.
@anon
All this hoohaa over Farhan was to be expected. The bigots are out in full force cuyber-patting Farhan on the back whilst a year ago they hated him.
Interesting.
Blogger sure messed up yesterday. No comments, no posts...
sheeesh
Fifth Monarchy Man:
"So four-unity goes beyond what is written. Then of course the OT explicitly rejects it. "
To be consistent with your reasoning, saying that All persons of God, were revealed in the Bible is going beyond scripture, because it's not written, so the Bible rejects that God has ONLY three persons.
Also, fixing an age of consent for Girl is beyond what is written, the Bible reject fixing minimum age of consent, I don't want to catch you saying anything to Aisha 's marriage, OK?
The Bible rejects also that women would cover their breasts, because it's beyond scripture... and so on, I can go forever.
One last question, why the Holy spirit doesn't help 2 billion christians understand Doctrines, like sola fide, sola scriptura, predestination...? Are they not Christians?
1mm
All persons of God, were revealed in the Bible is going beyond scripture, because it's not written, so the Bible rejects that God has ONLY three persons.
Me
It’s impossible to prove a negative so I won’t try. I don’t need to.
The Bible reveals that God exists in three persons
The Bible says that God has revealed himself to us sufficiently
In the Bible God says not to go beyond what is written
I feel it’s best to obey God
1mm
Also, fixing an age of consent for Girl is beyond what is written, the Bible reject fixing minimum age of consent,
me
I don’t need to know the exact age of consent to know it is wrong to do to others what I would not want done to me and that God has a special disdain for those who harm a child
You:
The Bible rejects also that women would cover their breasts, because it's beyond scripture...
Me:
The Bible commands women dress modestly. Modestly is defined culturally and by the law written on the heart.
besides these things you have the binding and loosing function that is explicitly given to the local church and the command to not give your brothers cause to stumble
1mm
and so on, I can go forever.
Me
You could but the results would be the same.
Peace
TO Fifth Monarchy Man:
You lost your debate in your last post miserably. Law written in the heart? lol. You are going beyond scripture. You fail to give a single verse. Have you seen those cultures where Women don't cover their breasts in Africa? Do they have hearts?
1mm
You lost your debate in your last post miserably.
I say;
What exactly are we debating? You seem to have went from declaring that a supposed silence in the OT proves that there is no Trinity to arguing that it’s OK to add man's speculations to the scripture.
I’m having a hard time keeping up with your position.
1mm said:
Law written in the heart? lol.
The Bible says
For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them
(Romans 2:14-15)
I say,
It's not wise to mock God
1mm:
Have you seen those cultures where Women don't cover their breasts in Africa? Do they have hearts?
me;
yes,
Your point is?
peace
Is tawḥīd in the Qur'ān???
To Fifth Monarchy Man:
Your point is
This is the third time you are faking not to understand my point
Romans 2 says that people who are ignorant about the law, have no excuse for their ignorance, because even if they don't have the law, they have it written in their hearts, Right? So those African tribes have the law written in their heart, but they chose to disobey the law, going around naked. Tell me if I understand it right?
1mm
So those African tribes have the law written in their heart, but they chose to disobey the law, going around naked. Tell me if I understand it right?
me
Either the covering of a women’s body is a cultural norm like the Burka that is only necessary in sex crazed cultures like ours or it’s a universal law that those women willfully violate.
Either way what women do in stone age African societies has zero to do with the revelation of the trinity in the OT.
I wonder why you have such an obsession with the female anatomy.
This is not the first time a theological discussion with Muslims have degenerated into talk about sex.
As a Christian I try and not spend a lot of time dwelling on such topics (Philippians 4:8, Colossians 3:5 etc)
Especially since it has absolutely nothing to do with me. I’m not a woman and I don’t live in Africa.
Why not put some effort in taming your own evil desires in this regard instead of worring about what other people do all the time.
This kind of preoccupation with the carnal for no good reason seems to be a common flaw with muslims.
I wonder why?
peace
FMM.
I am obsessed rather with Christian Doctrines. But when you are in shortage of answers don't play this game of doing a psychological analysis of Muslims. Nobody has ever raised the matter of Sex, it was you who just brought up the word. This is just not the first time you don't get my point, you can't see past your nose. The Bible doesn't hesitate to make Pornographic imagery to illustrate the punishment of God, but when I take an example of women clothing, I am accused of sexual obsession. That example came to mind because of your nude Churches in USA, I was astonished to know that the scripture ALONE cannot condemn nudity at all.
I am asking questions, if you don't feel to answer, don't do it.
You said that Those women violate the law of God willfully, right? And their tribes who made Gods of wood and stones, are they violating the law written by God willfully, knowing that they are doing wrong? If yes, would they be in Hell for knowingly worshiping Idols, according to Romans 2?
1mm
I was astonished to know that the scripture ALONE cannot condemn nudity at all.
me:
What are you talking about? Who said anything remotely like that?
quote
likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness--with good works.
(1 Timothy 2:9-10)
end quote:
As for the rest of your post I’m really not interested in a discussion about original sin or the inherent guilt of man kind in a thread that was supposed to be about the Trinity in the OT.
It looks like you need to learn to focus
Why don't you tell me what your present line of inquiry has to do with the topic at hand. Then we can move foward.
peace
1mm
This is just not the first time you don't get my point, you can't see past your nose.
me:
Perhaps it's because your "points" have nothing at all to do with anything we are talking about.
So far in this short discussion we’ve seen appeal to authority, excluded middle and now you are tossing red herrings like they were Frisbees
This dialogue has been a seminar in logical fallacies.Ive never seen anything like it.
good grief
peace
To Fifth Monarchy Man:
I reiterate once again my old question, bear with me with patience as scripture teaches you.
You said that Those women violate the law of God willfully, right? And their tribes who made Gods of wood and stones, are they violating the law written by God willfully, knowing that they are doing wrong? If yes, would they be in Hell for knowingly worshiping Idols, according to Romans 2?
Hey 1mm
I beleive I am showing patience.
That is why I’m giving you every opportunity to show that your question is relevant to the topic and that you are not just throwing dung aginst the wall to see if anything sticks.
Given your rabbit trail into the fashion choices of African women surely you can see why I might be concerend.
I repeat
Why don't you tell me what your present line of inquiry has to do with the topic at hand. (Trinity in the OT) Then we can move foward.
Do that and I will be happy to answer.
If you refuse to do that small thing I'll assume that you really are not interested in discussion and bid you good day
peace
To FMM,
Does the Bible teach you to answer questions only relevant to the title of the Blog? What should I do get you answer my question? Should I delay until my questions fit into the Title of the thread? If you don't know the answer, just say it.
1mm:
Does the Bible teach you to answer questions only relevant to the title of the Blog?
me:
It depends on the motive of the questioner.
Quote:
Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself.
(Proverbs 26:4)
End quote
I’m only trying to determine your motive in asking this question.
Your recent behavior makes me think that you are just fishing for anything you can find to disparage the gospel. It appears that you are not at all interested in discussion but only in engaging in juvenile brinkmanship
If that is the case it’s best to leave you to your games.
quote:
When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent.
(Proverbs 10:19)
end quote:
1mm:
What should I do get you answer my question? Should I delay until my questions fit into the Title of the thread?
Me:
You might ask Yahya to let you guest post your thoughts so that you could explain just exactly what it is you are looking for and people could decide if it is worth their time to engage with you.
That would be the candid way to do it.
1mm:
If you don't know the answer, just say it.
me:
Oh I know the answer.
What I don’t know is why it is you are afraid to explain why you would think it is a relevant question to ask a Christian in reference to this paticular discussion.
Peace
To Fifth Monarchy Man,
I don't believe that you know the answer, you are avoiding to answer because you know you will contradict either your own statement or your scripture. And I suspect you know that there is another place in scripture where it says clearly that the gentile are ignorant about the law and God overlooked their ignorance, no written law in their heart whatsoever. I leave you swimming in your world of theological confusion, where you seem to be the only one having the Holy Spirit. Poor James White, W L Craig and all the catholics, I believe they deserve the guidance of the Holy Spirit as much as you.
To Fifth Monarchy Man,
I've just saw your first post, You are saying 'appeal to authority' is a fallacy, I think you should begin to learn logic yourself.
marouane said:
I don't believe that you know the answer, you are avoiding to answer because you know you will contradict either your own statement or your scripture.
I say
just for you......
1mm asked
And their tribes who made Gods of wood and stones, are they violating the law written by God willfully, knowing that they are doing wrong?
The answer is:
The Bible says that when it comes to knowledge of God unbelievers “became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened” (Romans 1:21) so it follows that all things being equal they (like you) probably would be ignorant that there perverse ideas are wrong.
like all violations of the law written on the heart sometimes their "conflicting thoughts accuse and sometimes even excuse them" (Romans 2:15).
All that being said ultimately the only reason people go to hell is because they lack an atoning sacrifice.
Now what does all of that have to do Trinity in the OT?
peace
1mm:
You are saying 'appeal to authority' is a fallacy, I think you should begin to learn logic yourself.
Me:
Yes it is a fallacy. Surely you know that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Peace
To Fifth Monarchy Man:
If appealing to authority is always a fallacy, why did you just appeal to wikipedia? Why do you use a fallacy?
I think you don't understand what you read.
A fallacy is when you say that X is certainly, true, only because Y said it is true. But everything we know, is from authority. You believe that Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark, well, you believe it because of a fallacy. If you reject Authority, nothing of your faith would be left. Who selected the Gospels for you? Have you found all the Christian Doctrines for your own? You are smarter than Many of the church fathers!?
1mm
A fallacy is when you say that X is certainly, true, only because Y said it is true.
Me:
Actually a fallacy is when the only evidence you give for believing something is (human authority)
The only evidence Yahya provided in this post is the testimony of supposed authorities. So by any fair measure he committed this fallacy.
1mm:
But everything we know, is from authority.
Sam:
Perhaps that is true of Muslims but not for the Children of God much of what we know comes to us with out the mediation of human authority. It’s sad thing to have to trust in the testimony of men. I truly am sorry that that is all you have.
Quote:
1mm
Who selected the Gospels for you?
Me:
The Holy Spirit
1mm:
Have you found all the Christian Doctrines for your own?
Me:
I’ve learned a lot from other Christians but I don’t believe anything just because they do.
Quote:
But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie--just as it has taught you, abide in him.
End quote:
(1 John 2:27)
You are smarter than Many of the church fathers!?
I never said I was smarter than the church fathers.
However I'm not not Necessarily dumber than them either and I have a lot more information than they did.
Most importantly I base none of my faith on their authority. My faith rests solely on God in the person of Jesus Christ
Peace
To Fifth Monarchy Man;
Either Gentiles have the law written in their heart, so they disobey willingly. Or they are ignorant of the law, because the law is not really written on their heart. But you wanted to have you cake and eat it at the same time.
" For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse "
This verse is crystal clear, ( what you try to avoid), those who worshiped Idols are without excuse, because they disobey God knowingly.
" people go to hell is because they lack an atoning sacrifice
It's sad that you reduce all what God wants, to just killing animals. For I desire mercy, not sacrifice,
To Fifth Monarchy Man:
"Who selected the Gospels for you?
Me:
The Holy Spirit "
The Holy Spirit informed you about the Gospels? you must be holier than the Church Fathers. They have debated for centuries about what to put in and what to exclude !! This kind of answer makes me convinced of wasting my time. Please ask the Holy Spirit to stop teaching false Doctrines to Catholics.
Imagine what a debate against Fifth Monarchy Man looks like :
Who told me that your Bible is corrupt? I knew it from God. End of debate.
1mm
This verse is crystal clear, ( what you try to avoid), those who worshiped Idols are without excuse, because they disobey God knowingly.
me
actually the verse says that God's invisible qualities are clearly seen not that idolaters sin willingly
and everyone knows that ignorance of the law is no excuse.
1mm
It's sad that you reduce all what God wants, to just killing animals. For I desire mercy, not sacrifice,
me
I never said sacrifice is what God wants.
It is however the only way that God's wrath is appeased
without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
(Hebrews 9:22b)
For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.
(Leviticus 17:11)
Fools mock at the guilt offering, but the upright enjoy acceptance.
(Proverbs 14:9)
peace
1mm
you must be holier than the Church Fathers. They have debated for centuries about what to put in and what to exclude !!
me:
All of God's people are holy
and not just the Church fathers every Christian must struggle with the issue of cannon. The startling thing is the extent to which we all agree.
It can only be described as a God thing.
1mm
Please ask the Holy Spirit to stop teaching false Doctrines to Catholics.
me:
The Holy Spirit does not teach false doctrine
1mm
Imagine what a debate against Fifth Monarchy Man looks like :
Who told me that your Bible is corrupt? I knew it from God. End of debate.
Me
ever heard of testing the Spirits?
We Christians do it all the time. It's how we know that a Spirit is from God.
If you want to show that the Bible is corrupt all you have to do show that the Spirit that bears witness to it is demonic.
This would not be hard if your claim was true but you won't do it by simply appealing to human authority.
peace
To Fifth Monarchy Man.
actually the verse says that God's invisible qualities are clearly seen not that idolaters sin willingly
and everyone knows that ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Thank you for contradicting the Bible:
Acts 17 29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.
God overlooked the ignorance of those who worshiped idols, and guess what without any sacrifice.
Marouane:
Thank you for contradicting the Bible:
me:
How did I do that?
“God overlooked ignorance” and “ignorance is no excuse’ are not contradictory statements.
In fact it has to be true that “ignorance is no excuse’ for there to be any transgression for God to overlook. Use your head man
Marouane:
God overlooked the ignorance of those who worshiped idols, and guess what without any sacrifice.
me:
who told you that it was with out any sacrifice?
quote:
and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.
(Romans 3:24-25)
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
(Revelation 13:8 kjv)
end quote
you really need to read the Bible for yourself. It might save you from making these kinds of erroneous claims
peace
@Fifth Monarchy Man
I thank the True living God for you sir. I have learned a great deal by reading your responses.
I would just like to add to your last response to Marouane.
Marouane said...
"God overlooked the ignorance of those who worshiped idols, and guess what without any sacrifice."
Maruoane “Did you know that traditional Judaism, based on the Torah, teaches that the Temple sacrifices made atonement for the Gentile world? This was part of Israel’s call as a priestly nation, and it was Israel’s Temple offerings that helped make Gentile repentance acceptable to God.” (See Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, vol. 2, pp. 152-153.)
Radical Moderate said:
I thank the True living God for you sir. I have learned a great deal by reading your responses.
I say,
I am truly humbled.
If you have learned anything from me it is a powerful testimony that God can draw a strait line with a crooked stick.
quote:
But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.
(1 Corinthians 1:27-29)
end quote:
Peace
To Fifth Monarchy Man:
You should be consistent, if you are honest, reading Radical Moderate's response, you should tell him that he has just used a fallacy (Appeal of jewish authority), but you didn't. Because your thinking is biased and flawed, you see wrong only in your opponents.
1mm
reading Radical Moderate's response, you should tell him that he has just used a fallacy (Appeal of jewish authority),
Me
I’m sorry, what authority did RM appeal to? I did not even see a name.
It looked to me that he was just sharing interesting information about what traditional
Jews believe. He was not in any way arguing that these folks were correct in their thinking.
In fact I’m reasonably sure that he does not agree with these folks that the sacrifices offered in the temple actually atoned for sin.
Quote:
For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me;
(Hebrews 10:4-5)
End quote:
For the most part we Christians believe that the temple sacrifices were merely atypical representations of Christ’s passion.
1mm
Because your thinking is biased and flawed, you see wrong only in your opponents.
me
Actually I made it very clear that I disagree with the opinion of the folks that Yahya appealed when it comes to the Trinity in the OT even though at least some of them could not in any way be considered my opponent.
In fact you just expressed shock that I would not automatically agree with the Church Fathers on some subjects and I guarantee I don’t consider those folks to be my opponents
Peace
To radical Moderate:
Read FMM 's last response. Do you still learning from hi ? loool. I think I was debating a mentally retard, and I mean it.
@1moreMuslim
You Wrote
"Read FMM 's last response. Do you still learning from hi ? loool. I think I was debating a mentally retard, and I mean it."
FMM is correct, I was sharing interesting information that shows a Jewish tradition that the repentance of Gentiles was accepted do to the sacrifices being done in the temple. Israel was just performing it's duties as a priestly nation.
The reason that this is interesting is because this demonstrates in the Jewish tradition the need for blood atonement even for Gentiles.
I was certainly not appealing to authority of the author who is Dr Michael brown, I was not citing his opinion, because this is not his opinion it is Jewish Tradition.
I'm sorry you can not discern between sharing factual information and citing the opinion of a author as something to be believed as the Gospel Truth.
As far as your comment about "debating a retard" well all I can say is that you are wise in your own eyes.
@1moreMuslim
You Wrote
"Read FMM 's last response. Do you still learning from hi ? loool. I think I was debating a mentally retard, and I mean it."
FMM is correct, I was sharing interesting information that shows a Jewish tradition that the repentance of Gentiles was accepted do to the sacrifices being done in the temple. Israel was just performing it's duties as a priestly nation.
The reason that this is interesting is because this demonstrates in the Jewish tradition the need for blood atonement even for Gentiles.
I was certainly not appealing to authority of the author who is Dr Michael brown, I was not citing his opinion, because this is not his opinion it is Jewish Tradition.
I'm sorry you can not discern between sharing factual information and citing the opinion of a author as something to be believed as the Gospel Truth.
As far as your comment about "debating a retard". All I can say is that you have a simple god because you are simple minded and you are truly wise in your own eyes.
Radical Moderate:
FMM said It looked to me that he ( RM) was just sharing interesting information about what traditional
Jews believe. He was not in any way arguing that these folks were correct in their thinking.
Why in the world, in answering my question, you bring a quote you don't believe it's true. What good thing would I benefit from the wrong beliefs of Jews?
And I don't believe quoting authority is a fallacy, FFM does. ( read his first post) , Without Authority you cannot prove that smoking gives you cancer. You can't believe that Jesus ever existed. We have to rely on Authority in 99% of our beliefs, FMM can't get it.
I am convinced that FMM can't discern what he reads, but I believe also that since God created him with this limited intellectual capacity, God would judge him according to his level.
1mm
And I don't believe quoting authority is a fallacy, FFM does
me:
do you honestly not understand the difference between quoting an authority and the logical fallacy of appeal to authority?
Let me help you out
A legitimate appeal to authority might look like this……..
‘Four out of five dentists surveyed recommend trident to their patients who chew gum”
The logical fallacy of appeal to authority looks like this…..
“We have already learned – via Christian scholarship – the Trinity is not in the Old Testament.”
You have got to spend a little time learning about logic.
1mm:
Without Authority you cannot prove that smoking gives you cancer.
Me:
How about looking at the studies that show that smoking causes cancer?
1mm
You can't believe that Jesus ever existed.
Me
How about looking at the historical evidence for and against his existence and judging for yourself as to it‘s relative merit?
Come on man use your noggin. This is not rocket science.
Appeal to authority is about believing something only because somebody else does. It would not surprise me to learn you are a Muslim for that reason but I’m sorry that you don’t feel qualified to think for yourself.
If your beliefs are only based on human authority then why should anyone care what you have to say?
Why can’t we just bypass the middle man and listen to the real originators of your opinions
Peace
FMM,
I thought you have only 2 neurones, I was wrong, may be you have three.
" We have already learned – via Christian scholarship – the Trinity is not in the Old Testament."
Show me that Muslim who believes that The Trinity is not in the OT, because James White or any other " misguided" Christian scholar?
" How about looking at the studies that show that smoking causes cancer?"
Who did the studies? You or an authority? You rely on authority, because as I see your QI, you can't study anything. So you Believe that Smoking gives cancer ONLY because Human authority.
How about looking at the historical evidence for and against his existence and judging for yourself as to it‘s relative merit?
Oh , you are historian yourself?!! Historians have evidence for Jesus , not you. You have to rely on Human authority in History.
Now it's enough, I am fed up debating your 3 neurones.
1moreMuslims said...
"I am convinced that FMM can't discern what he reads,"
1moreMuslim amazing how you make that accusation against FFM right after you make this statement.
1moreMuslim wrote.
"Why in the world, in answering my question, you bring a quote you don't believe it's true."
The answer is I DIDNT lol. Really man what is it with Muslims?
You all seem to suffer from a serious reading comprehension problem. Here is what I wrote.
"would just like to add to your last response to Marouane.
Marouane said...
"God overlooked the ignorance of those who worshiped idols, and guess what without any sacrifice."
Maruoane “Did you know that traditional Judaism, based on the Torah, teaches that the Temple sacrifices made atonement for the Gentile world? This was part of Israel’s call as a priestly nation, and it was Israel’s Temple offerings that helped make Gentile repentance acceptable to God.” (See Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, vol. 2, pp. 152-153.)
I was responding to someone else on a completely different topic lol
Radical Moderate:
Marouane is me, and I am Marouane.
The one who said that You are referencing to wrong Jewish beliefs is not me, it's FMM. He said
'. It looked to me that he was just sharing interesting information about what traditional
Jews believe. He was not in any way arguing that these folks were correct in their thinking. '
So According to FMM, these jews are wrong in their belief, if FMM is right, what the wrong beliefs of Jews can prove anything about God overlooking ignorance of Pagan Gentiles, who died worshiping Idols?
1mm says,
Marouane is me, and I am Marouane.
I say,
So you used multiple usernames in order to try and mislead me into saying something to dishonor my God.
Yet even when you used rank deception you were unsuccessful in tainting the Bible with the charge of contridiction.
Allah must be so proud.I wonder what your fellow muslims think about your tactics.
Good day
FMM :
So you used multiple usernames in order to try and mislead me into saying something to dishonor my God.
Oh No! You foiled my plan, you discovered my double identity all alone!! You are really smarter than I ever thought.
You see Radical Moderate, When I said mentally retard, I mean it.
Good night.
The Facts
According to the FBI database, there have been 318 terrorist incidents in the US from 1980-2005. That includes 209 bombings and 43 arsons. Out of those incidents, 42% were committed by Latino groups, 24% by Extreme Left Wing groups, 7% by Jewish Extremists, 6% by Muslim Extremists, and 5% by Communists. 1
A RAND Corporation [funded by the U.S. government] report titled “Would-be Warriors” reveals some very interesting facts:
1.Not a single U.S. civilian has been killed by Muslim extremists since Sept 11, 2001.
2.Only 3 out of 83 acts of terrorism between 9/11 and 2009 were done by Muslim extremists. Most were by animal rights and environmental activists.
3.There was more terrorism in the 1970s than the 21st century. There were over 60 terrorist incidents per year on U.S. soil, most of them being bombings. That’s 15 – 20 times more terrorism than post 9/11.
Europol’s report titled “EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report” showed that 0.4% of terrorist attacks from 2006-2008 were committed by Muslim extremists. That means 99.6% of terrorist attacks were by non-Muslims, most of which were separatists and leftists.
Post a Comment