How could a heaven operate?

[basics]

God didn't write it, it was written by others who claim god wrote it through them.

Yes, quite true, it was written by men of God imbued with the Holy Spirit and so one can easily deduct it was then as if God Himself had penned the words. Better watch out Akar, He might just be getting to you.

[Akar]

Better watch out Akar, He might just be getting to you.

Yes, just like the Son of Sam and those damned barking dogs

[wanderwegger]

Yes, quite true, it was written by men of God imbued with the Holy Spirit and so one can easily deduct it was then as if God Himself had penned the words. Better watch out Akar, He might just be getting to you.

Where does it say the Holy Spirit is a He in the Bible? Or this is this more of the same confusion? It would be nice if the God you claim ownership of got to you a little.

[Sir Adrian]

Everywhere. You should read it sometime.

[wanderwegger]

Everywhere. You should read it sometime.

One instance will suffice. Holy Spirit called He. Good luck. Whoever is wrong admits they are a simpleton.

[basics]

One instance will suffice. Holy Spirit called He. Good luck. Whoever is wrong admits they are a simpleton.

wnaderwegger,

John 14:26. " But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father will send in my name, He will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you...." Of course Papists want the Holy Ghost to be Mary to give legitimacy to praying to her but no ole son God is One, Father, Son and Holy Ghost male and have to be in the order of creation. Jesus is the Head of man and man is head of the woman. Oh and by the way I won't consider you a simpleton, why? Sometimes one gets more sense out of a simpleton but not you I'm afraid.

[conon394]

wnaderwegger,

John 14:26. " But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father will send in my name, He will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you...." Of course Papists want the Holy Ghost to be Mary to give legitimacy to praying to her but no ole son God is One, Father, Son and Holy Ghost male and have to be in the order of creation. Jesus is the Head of man and man is head of the woman. Oh and by the way I won't consider you a simpleton, why? Sometimes one gets more sense out of a simpleton but not you I'm afraid.

I do believe the point was find your particular construction of Trinity in the Old Testament of course you can build it out of the New. Just like of course the LDS can point to the book of Mormon for their construction .

[basics]

I do believe the point was find your particular construction of Trinity in the Old Testament of course you can build it out of the New. Just like of course the LDS can point to the book of Mormon for their construction .

" In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." God's name, Elohim is a plural word. " Let us make man in our image..." Us and Our tell us that these are plural too. Now the Father being a blinding Light upon Whom no man may look and live who are the others within Elohim and Us and Our? There's no secret that God is one so it follows that there can't be another God outside of Elohim or Us and Our. The conclusion therefore must be that God has different Personalities in His Oneness. That David could write seing the Lord talking to His Lord has to be Jesus in conversation with His Father. If the Trinity did not exist where did Jesus come from? He was the " seed " promised to come to contend with Satan for the souls of men, yes the " seed " that walked and talked with Adam in the garden the same " seed " that would come in the form of Melchizadec to converse with Abraham and the same " seed " that would wrestle with Jacob. The Father couldn't do that so it must have been Jesus. So, I'm afraid the Trinity is there if one looks hard enough and to top that off look at the number of false religions that popped up after the flood that had a trinity in their systems.

[conon394]

" In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." God's name, Elohim is a plural word. "

It is but modified by singular words all around. The overall structure is Singular. We been around this. The nothing inside of the OT by itself that says the plural used must be the NT trinity you hold to that exist only in the NT. You manage many different logical construction depending on what was written about Jesus said.

Also obviously god finds a indirect rout to chat with Moses. I'm not sure I see any reason to suppose David could not likewise have a nice indirect talk.

That David could write seing the Lord talking to His Lord has to be Jesus in conversation with His Father.

Citation please.

If the Trinity did not exist where did Jesus come from? He was the " seed " promised to come to contend with Satan for the souls of men, yes the " seed " that walked and talked with Adam in the garden the same " seed " that would come in the form of Melchizadec to converse with Abraham and the same " seed " that would wrestle with Jacob.

Where in the OT are you getting the seed reference again please cite passages. where citing Thucydides at you I would do the same sure you might dig up the text if I don't but it is rude to not provide the verse you are citing.

The Father couldn't do that so it must have been Jesus. So, I'm afraid the Trinity is there if one looks hard enough and to top that off look at the number of false religions that popped up after the flood that had a trinity in their systems.

Err really which ones?

[basics]

conon394,

Genesis 3;15 for the " seed. " All the prophets giving testimony to His coming and dying. Psalm 110;1 regarding David's seeing. The Chaldean Mysteries were the starter but then there was the Sumerian, the babylonians, the Puranas of India, In Greece, In Egypt, the Pagan Irish,

Notice what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4: “All our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed [or accompanied] them, and that Rock was Christ.”

Jesus was the One who spoke to Moses and told Him to return to Egypt to bring the Israelites to freedom. Jesus was the Lord (Yhwh) who caused the plagues to come on Egypt. He was the God who led the Israelites out of Egypt and through the wanderings for 40 years. He was the Lawgiver who gave the laws to Moses and spoke to Moses on a regular basis. He was the Lord God who dealt with Israel throughout their national history.

Yes, astounding as it seems, Jesus Christ is the Lord (Yhwh) spoken of so often in the Old Testament.
Jesus Christ
the Rock
Old Testament.

[conon394]

The Chaldean Mysteries were the starter but then there was the Sumerian, the babylonians, the Puranas of India, In Greece, In Egypt, the Pagan Irish,

OK I pick one, what Trinity to believe you see in Greek religion that has even the vaguest relationship to the NT trinity.

Notice what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4: “All our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed [or accompanied] them, and that Rock was Christ.”

Not acceptable. Of course Paul would say the NT is a retrofit on the OT. I want forward looking out of te OT. Not what Paul says.

Jesus was the One who spoke to Moses and told Him to return to Egypt to bring the Israelites to freedom. Jesus was the Lord (Yhwh) who caused the plagues to come on Egypt. He was the God who led the Israelites out of Egypt and through the wanderings for 40 years. He was the Lawgiver who gave the laws to Moses and spoke to Moses on a regular basis. He was the Lord God who dealt with Israel throughout their national history.

That again is only clear if you choose to believe the particular version and edits of the NT and how they apply that to OT by the various authors of the NT.

Thus Genesis 3;15 for the " seed. ". From the NT prospective there is a desire to translate this as an individual. The Grammar in the original is problematic. I can also be rendered as plural or collective meaning of descendants. Clearly the LXX alters the Greek usage to get to a single seed. But what seed Jesus or a savior of Israel in the sense that was expected.

Psalm 110;1 regarding David's seeing

Looks metaphorical and prophetical to me not seeing if you will. Also note the construction of Lord is almost always a reference to a Human. But like the seed above viewed from behind the NT it can unpacked to be some kind direct reference. to Jesus.

[wanderwegger]

Papists want the Holy Ghost to be Mary. I am starting to understand which sect you belong to.

Your translation of John comes from the KJB I believe. KJB is riddled with errors, understandably considering sources of sources and who wrote it. (Basically anti papists who didn't really know their hebrew or greek and were already sourcing from inferior translations.)

A better translation closer to the Hebrew and Greek sources we have from the early Church.

I will ask the Father to give you another Helper (or Advocate), to be with you always.

He does not appear in any of the early Bibles we have access to. Or translations for nearly a 1000 years after Jesus' death.

Might want to throw your KJB out. Its trash.

wnaderwegger,

John 14:26. " But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father will send in my name, He will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you...." Of course Papists want the Holy Ghost to be Mary to give legitimacy to praying to her but no ole son God is One, Father, Son and Holy Ghost male and have to be in the order of creation. Jesus is the Head of man and man is head of the woman. Oh and by the way I won't consider you a simpleton, why? Sometimes one gets more sense out of a simpleton but not you I'm afraid.

[basics]

wanderwegger,

Oh it may be trash to you but not me and many others.

[Akar]

The number of people who believe in something has no bearing on the validity of it.

[wanderwegger]

https://margmowczko.com/7-things-about-the-king-james-bible/

(3) THE KJV HAS BEEN THROUGH SEVERAL EDITIONS.

Some King-James-Only Christians believe that the King James Bible perfectly preserved the Scriptures for all time. If this is the case there would have been no need for further edits. The current edition of the KJV is different from the original 1611 translation and several other early editions. “The KJV Bible we use today is actually based primarily on the major revision completed in 1769, 158 years after the first edition.”


Interestingly, the 1611 version, and all other editions of the KJV that were published for the next fifty years, contained the Apocrypha. Protestant Christians do not regard the apocryphal books as uniquely inspired and authoritative. The 1666 edition was the first edition of the KJV that did not include these extra books. (Article six of the Thirty-Nine Articles, ratified in 1562 before the KJV was first published, explains the Church of England’s position on the canonical and apocryphal books of the Bible.)

[basics]

wanderwegger,

The core message within the KJV has not changed one iota. The fault that many couldn't handle was that it was written in an old language style that modern readers found hard to grasp and that is why there are so many other translations the best of these being the ESV and the NKJV. There isn't a Bible that denies Jesus Christ being God, coming into the world as a man, dying on a cross for the sins of many for whom He was a Substitute for so it all comes down to preference. I love my KJV as well as my NKJV so there's nothing you can say to change my mind. The power of God unto salvation remains the Gospel nothing to do with what man thinks about that. It's all of God.

[wanderwegger]

I love Slim Jim’s. Still accept they are trash. If I believed what you believe using a slapdash translation of Gods Word would be last on my wish list.

Are farts of God?

[Akar]

The core message within the KJV has not changed one iota.

Literally false.

[basics]

Literally false.

Akar,

How is that false?

[conon394]

The core message within the KJV has not changed one iota. The fault that many couldn't handle was that it was written in an old language style that modern readers found hard to grasp and that is why there are so many other translations the best of these being the ESV and the NKJV. There isn't a Bible that denies Jesus Christ being God, coming into the world as a man, dying on a cross for the sins of many for whom He was a Substitute for so it all comes down to preference. I love my KJV as well as my NKJV so there's nothing you can say to change my mind. The power of God unto salvation remains the Gospel nothing to do with what man thinks about that. It's all of God.

No the problem I have with it is that for is poetical-ness it remains a poor translation and as read by most it fails the reader in not pointing out ambiguous usage in rendering often across multiple translations. Critically while the core message may be the same there are points for validly questioning a particular understanding of the Bible as a believer when you realize the translation of KJV is poor.

Also it core message might seem a bit different if it Included the Gospel of Thomas.