Trinity doctrine is a LIE.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

For those interested, I include a link to a United Church of God site which very clearly tells of the history of the adoption of the Trinity Belief. It states what I have believed all along - that the doctrine IS NOT BIBLICAL and that ..... well, you can read for yourself.

http://www.ucg.org/booklet/god-trinity/surprising-origins-trinity-doctrine/

[2014eelea]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

still sidestepping. I want to hear your comments on 1Cor that I posted. You have not answered ANY of my other posts, and if you don't answer that one ........ I'm going to take my ball and go home ...

---

No I am not sidestepping.You put your faith in man.I am asking questions that will prove that your faith in man is ill founded.

We can get to your questions but unless you answer it is pointless.

We can debate what we believe a Scripture means.I am going to PROVE without a shadow of a doubt that your so called scholars cannot be trusted and that your translators cannot be trusted.

If you do not want to answer then fine.Dont.I will be on my way.

So I will ask one last time.Do you agree or disagree that the crucifixion took place on a Friday?

[2014eelea]

---

@myoclon1cjerk wrote:
It:s not 'salvation', it:s 'salivation'.An obvious misprint.:) Most.of the ideas for that concoction we call the bible were stolen from earlier religions e.g the Egyptians.

---

Proof please.And please do not insult our intelligence by quoting zeitgeist.

---

[Anonymous]

on no not zeiitgeist 

[2014eelea]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

still sidestepping. I want to hear your comments on 1Cor that I posted. You have not answered ANY of my other posts, and if you don't answer that one ........ I'm going to take my ball and go home ...

---

Bye .I see that you like to quote so called Scholars but in reality you do not have must trust in what they say.

I recently heard a 7th day Adventist pastor preach that the woman giving birth in the Book of Revelation was Mary and the Child was Jesus at His birth 2000 years ago.I proved with ONE VERSE that he could not possibly be correct and asked why anything else he says should be accepted.His answer was much like yours.He showed me the door and said we could discuss it another time.

You trust these scholars.The Bible says not to.With one answer I will show you that you cannot trust them.But if I do that you will need to admit that what they teach cannot be trusted.So you are like the 7th day adventist pastor.You end the discussion.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

unfortunately, some of us have other obligations that mean we are away from the PC for extended periods..........  meanwhile, I am waiting for your comments on 1 Cor.

Or, you can leave - feel free! 

If you believe the Trinity - how can I trust anything you say anyway.

I will be gone for about 1/2 hr.

[2014eelea]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

For those interested, I include a link to a United Church of God site which very clearly tells of the history of the adoption of the Trinity Belief. It states what I have believed all along - that the doctrine IS NOT BIBLICAL and that ..... well, you can read for yourself.

http://www.ucg.org/booklet/god-trinity/surprising-origins-trinity-doctrine/

---

you quoted the UCG.So I will provide a link for you off their site.Tell me if anything on this link catches your attention?>

http://www.ucg.org/fundamental-beliefs-info/

[2014eelea]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

unfortunately, some of us have other obligations that mean we are away from the PC for extended periods..........  meanwhile, I am waiting for your comments on 1 Cor.

Or, you can leave - feel free! 

If you believe the Trinity - how can I trust anything you say anyway.

I will be gone for about 1/2 hr.

---

you are like the other 200 I met that argue like you.You want to discuss things but when asked a question thatPROVES yours sources are not able to be trusted you run.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

hello trbag, I'm back.

my source is The Bible - so they are not wrong.

how are you going on that response about 1Cor?? That to me is more important - the matter of the Trinity being a lie - the Trinity - the mainstay of most so called Christian religions - is a LIE.

And about your question re the day - I know all about the so called error on preparation day  etc etc - you can talk all you like about that but the FACT remains that Jesus died just prior to the beginning of the sabbath - that is why they had to hurriedly cut him down and wrap him, and why they didn't return for 2 days.

Now, about that 1 Corinithians comment you are afraid to make?

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

i wasnt aware the roman catholic church

was known by other names.

very confusing. 

---

Didn't you know She is the Whore Of  Babylon? 

As I said before, this argument is degenerating into a Big Endians versus Little Endians piece of absurdity

Out in the real world people are starving,  killing each other,and  dying of preventable diseases, yet  apparently salvation for the human race depends on knowing whether Jesus was really  God or only a demigod.

---

LOL yes!  i think i read about that

in the Watchtower

---

I read a Watchtower once .... many, many years ago. It seems that quite a few religions say that the Catholic Church is the whore of babylon, the JW's from memory say that the whole of false religion is the whore - I could be wrong on that.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@2014eelea wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

For those interested, I include a link to a United Church of God site which very clearly tells of the history of the adoption of the Trinity Belief. It states what I have believed all along - that the doctrine IS NOT BIBLICAL and that ..... well, you can read for yourself.

http://www.ucg.org/booklet/god-trinity/surprising-origins-trinity-doctrine/

---

you quoted the UCG.So I will provide a link for you off their site.Tell me if anything on this link catches your attention?>

http://www.ucg.org/fundamental-beliefs-info/

---

No, I didn't quote the ucg on anything other than their expose on the Trinity - I don't know what else they believe or don't believe. Having read that link, there is quite a bit that I don't agree with, but the historical evidence that they quote re the Trinity and it's sources - I do believe. Their evidence is backed up by both Biblical and historical writings.