Yahwah is a Holy Spirit

[CherubRam]

You Alone Are God.

2 Kings 19:15
And Hezekiah prayed to the Lord: “Lord, the God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim, you alone are God over all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth.

Psalm 86:10
For you are great and do marvelous deeds; you alone are God.

Isaiah 37:16
“Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim, you alone are God over all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth.

Nehemiah 9:6
You alone are (the Lord / Yahwah.) You made the heavens, even the highest heavens, and all their starry host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them. You give life to everything, and the multitudes of heaven worship you.

Psalm 83:18
Let them know that you, whose name is (the Lord / Yahwah) — that you alone are the Most High over all the earth.

Revelation 15:4
Who will not fear you, (Lord / Yahwah,) and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed.”

 

[Mungo]

That isn't what I said sir. I tried to plainly state that faith/ belief in GOD, is not dependent upon scripture. And one can surely know what is true by what I leads to.

You are dodging the issue.
You said:

Men aren't infallible though.

To which I replied:

Right.
So the men that wrote the scriptures were fallible
And the men that decided what writings were the word of God were fallible.
So all the scriptures could contain multiple errors.

And

No caveats, no exceptions.
That means the men who wrote scripture and the men that canonised scripture were not infallible.

And

OK, so you don't believe scripture has any value because you have no idea if any of it is true.

Christianity could just be another myth.

You just keep dodging these points.

 

[Mungo]

Triad
tri·ad
NOUN
A group or set of three connected people or things.


Trinity
trin·i·ty
NOUN
The Christian one God in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Exactly.
So the examples you give from paganism are triads and Christians believe God is a Trinity.
Two different beliefs.
So stop making your false claims that Trinitarianism comes from paganism.

 

[CherubRam]

True God.

2 Chronicles 15:3
For a long time Israel was without the true God, without a priest to teach and without the law.

Isaiah 65:16
Whoever invokes a blessing in the land will do so by the one true God; whoever takes an oath in the land will swear by the one true God. For the past troubles will be forgotten and hidden from my eyes.

Jeremiah 10:10
But (the Lord / Yahwah) is the true God; he is the living God, the eternal King. When he is angry, the earth trembles; the nations cannot endure his wrath.

John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

1 Thessalonians 1:9
for they themselves report what kind of reception you gave us. They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God,

1 John 5:20
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

 

[CherubRam]

Exactly.
So the examples you give from paganism are triads and Christians believe God is a Trinity.
Two different beliefs.

A trinity is a triad.

 

[CherubRam]

Yahwah is a Spirit, and He is Holy; and that is why He is called Holy Spirit.

Psalm 51:11
Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me.

Isaiah 63:10
Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them.

Isaiah 63:11
Then his people recalled the days of old, the days of Moses and his people— where is he who brought them through the sea, with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them,


Leviticus 24:16
anyone who blasphemes the name of (the Lord / Yahwah) is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death.

Numbers 15:30
“‘But anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or foreigner, blasphemes (the Lord / Yahwah) and must be cut off from the people of Israel.

Mark 3:29
but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.”

Luke 12:10
And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.

Matthew 12:31
And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

John 4:24
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.

 

[Mungo]

Bibles Burned.

The Council of Tarragona of 1234,
in its second canon, ruled that:

“No one may possess the books of the Old
and New Testaments, and if anyone possesses
them he must turn them over to the local bishop
within eight days, so that they may be burned…”
– The Church Council of Tarragona 1234 AD;
2nd Cannon – Source : D. Lortsch,
Historie de la Bible en France, 1910, p.14.

The Synod of Tarragon was a local synod dealing with a local problem, namely that of corrupt texts produced by heretics. It did not prohibit the reading of authentic texts.

After the death of Innocent III, the Synod of Toulouse directed in 1229 its fourteenth canon against the misuse of Sacred Scripture on the part of the Cathari: "prohibemus, ne libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti laicis permittatur habere" (Hefele, "Concilgesch", Freiburg, 1863, V, 875). In 1233 the Synod of Tarragona issued a similar prohibition in its second canon, but both these laws are intended only for the countries subject to the jurisdiction of the respective synods (Hefele, ibid., 918) texts.
Catholic Enclyclopedia

 

[Mungo]

A trinity is a triad.

No it isn't. At Triad is 3 different beings. Your own definition says that:

Triad
tri·ad
NOUN
A group or set of three connected people or things.

The Trinity is one being. Your own definition says that:

Trinity
trin·i·ty
NOUN
The Christian one God in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

 

[Mungo]

Trinity fact.
When a council of bishops convened by the Emperor Constantine in (280–337 AD) he decreed that the Father and Son were homoousios (same substance or essence.)

Untrue - but then, as usual, you provide no evidence for your claims

Christian trinity theology of that creed is rooted in the terminology of Augustine's, "On the Trinity." (published about 415 AD) It was about this time when it was determined that the Holy Spirit is a third person.

Untrue - but then, as usual, you provide no evidence for your claims.
According to St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica
In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom (To Autolycus II.15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (On Pudicity 21). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:

There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P.G., X, 986).

 

[CherubRam]

The Synod of Tarragon was a local synod dealing with a local problem, namely that of corrupt texts produced by heretics. It did not prohibit the reading of authentic texts.

After the death of Innocent III, the Synod of Toulouse directed in 1229 its fourteenth canon against the misuse of Sacred Scripture on the part of the Cathari: "prohibemus, ne libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti laicis permittatur habere" (Hefele, "Concilgesch", Freiburg, 1863, V, 875). In 1233 the Synod of Tarragona issued a similar prohibition in its second canon, but both these laws are intended only for the countries subject to the jurisdiction of the respective synods (Hefele, ibid., 918) texts.
Catholic Enclyclopedia

COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D.
Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.

 

[Mungo]

COUNCIL OF TOULOUSE - 1229 A.D.
Canon 14. We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old or New Testament; unless anyone from motive of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.

If you actually read my posts you would see that I have already dealt with this.
But here it is again:

The Synod of Tarragon Toulouse was a local synod dealing with a local problem, namely that of corrupt texts produced by heretics. It did not prohibit the reading of authentic texts.

After the death of Innocent III, the Synod of Toulouse directed in 1229 its fourteenth canon against the misuse of Sacred Scripture on the part of the Cathari: "prohibemus, ne libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti laicis permittatur habere" (Hefele, "Concilgesch", Freiburg, 1863, V, 875).
Catholic Enclyclopedia

 

[Mungo]

CherubRam
Regarding the translation of scripture into the vernacular before the synods of Tarragon & Toulouse:

The early Church used the Greek LXX Old Testament and the NT was written Greek anyway. So those that could read, read it in Greek, which was the lingua franca of the day. Later translations were also made into Latin. At the end of the fourth century Jerome, tri-lingual in Greek, Latin and Hebrew, made an updated Latin translation using Hebrew and Greek as well as earlier Latin texts. This was completed around 405 AD. However in 406 the barbarian hoards crossed the Rhine and swept into Gaul and Spain, and three years later Italy was attacked and in 410 Rome itself was sacked by Alaric of the Visigoths. Europe descended into barbarism. Learning was kept alive by the Church and Latin was the language of those that could read or write, and not many could.

As the Church expanded translations were made into local languages. For example at the beginning of the eighth century the Venerable Bede, living in his monastery in Jarrow in North East England, translated the Bible (or at least some of it) into Anglo-Saxon. Some say the whole Bible, but according to his scribe, the Deacon Cuthbert, he just completed translating John’s gospel before he died. I doubt he left that until last.

Saints Cyril and Methodius converted the Moravians in the 9th century and created the forerunner of the Cyrillic alphabet to translate the Bible into the local language.

Even earlier, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “In 406 the Armenian alphabet was invented by Mesrob, who five years later completed a translation of the Old and New Testament from the Syriac version into Armenian.”

Returning to English here are a couple of relevant quotes from "Where We Got the Bible" by Father Henry G. Graham, chapter 11 which is entitled "Abundance of Vernacular Scriptures before Wycliff".

“....After the Norman conquest in 1066, Anglo-Norman or Middle-English became the language of England, and consequently the next translations of the Bible we meet with are in that tongue. There are several specimens still known, such as the paraphrase of Orm (about 1150) and the Salus Animae (1050), the translations of William Shoreham and Richard Rolle, hermit of Hampole (died 1349). I say advisedly 'specimens' for those that have come down to us are merely indications of a much greater number that once existed, but afterwards perished.....”

“Moreover, the 'Reformed' Archbishop of Canterbury, Cranmer, says, in his preface to the Bible of 1540: 'The Holy Bible was translated and read in the Saxon tongue, which at that time was our mother tongue, whereof there remaineth yet divers copies found in old Abbeys, of such antique manner of writing and speaking that few men now be able to read and understand them. And when this language waxed old and out of common use, because folks should not lack the fruit of reading, it was again translated into the newer language, whereof yet also many copies remain and be daily found.'”
Where we got the bible

 

[popsthebuilder]

It’s not I. I was discussing Matt 28:19 with someone else and gave evidence that suggests the ending of that verse was quite possibly how it currently is. You replied to that with: “Can't you see how unbalanced the weights are in this regard? Basically all opposing reference material was literally destroyed.”

So, since I was discussing a particular verse and which ending it has, any opposing reference material would be manuscripts or writings that contained the verse with a different ending than what we currently have. If those were destroyed, then they would be destroying scripture, would they not?

I was referring to writings not in scripture, that could be said to support the trinity doctrine in some way. I apologize for not being more clear.

 

[Free]

The word Trinity is not in the bible.

A lot of words aren't in the Bible that we use to to describe concepts that are in the Bible, such as monotheism, omniscience, omnipotence, and incarnate.

God states that there is no other person whom is God. Single person who is a single God and not a multiple.

Where does God say this?

John1:1.
In English we have:
In the beginning was The Word, and The Word was with (the only) Divine Eternal, and divine was The Word.

Why do translators drop off the definite article TON (the only) before Divine Eternal?

I've addressed this twice already. It is irrelevant because that is not how we talk in English. Translations use "God" and it is grammatically awkward and unnecessary to have the article in front, especially when we know there is only one God.

Why do you ignore that the Word was both divine (necessarily God) and with (intimate relationship) God, having been in existence when the beginning began (absolute existence)?

 

[CherubRam]

A lot of words aren't in the Bible that we use to to describe concepts that are in the Bible, such as monotheism, omniscience, omnipotence, and incarnate.


Where does God say this?


I've addressed this twice already. It is irrelevant because that is not how we talk in English. Translations use "God" and it is grammatically awkward and unnecessary to have the article in front, especially when we know there is only one God.

Why do you ignore that the Word was both divine (necessarily God) and with (intimate relationship) God, having been in existence when the beginning began (absolute existence)?

"No other" means no other person. Before anyone existed there was only Yahwah.

 

[CherubRam]

CherubRam
Regarding the translation of scripture into the vernacular before the synods of Tarragon & Toulouse:

The early Church used the Greek LXX Old Testament and the NT was written Greek anyway. So those that could read, read it in Greek, which was the lingua franca of the day. Later translations were also made into Latin. At the end of the fourth century Jerome, tri-lingual in Greek, Latin and Hebrew, made an updated Latin translation using Hebrew and Greek as well as earlier Latin texts. This was completed around 405 AD. However in 406 the barbarian hoards crossed the Rhine and swept into Gaul and Spain, and three years later Italy was attacked and in 410 Rome itself was sacked by Alaric of the Visigoths. Europe descended into barbarism. Learning was kept alive by the Church and Latin was the language of those that could read or write, and not many could.

As the Church expanded translations were made into local languages. For example at the beginning of the eighth century the Venerable Bede, living in his monastery in Jarrow in North East England, translated the Bible (or at least some of it) into Anglo-Saxon. Some say the whole Bible, but according to his scribe, the Deacon Cuthbert, he just completed translating John’s gospel before he died. I doubt he left that until last.

Saints Cyril and Methodius converted the Moravians in the 9th century and created the forerunner of the Cyrillic alphabet to translate the Bible into the local language.

Even earlier, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “In 406 the Armenian alphabet was invented by Mesrob, who five years later completed a translation of the Old and New Testament from the Syriac version into Armenian.”

Returning to English here are a couple of relevant quotes from "Where We Got the Bible" by Father Henry G. Graham, chapter 11 which is entitled "Abundance of Vernacular Scriptures before Wycliff".

“....After the Norman conquest in 1066, Anglo-Norman or Middle-English became the language of England, and consequently the next translations of the Bible we meet with are in that tongue. There are several specimens still known, such as the paraphrase of Orm (about 1150) and the Salus Animae (1050), the translations of William Shoreham and Richard Rolle, hermit of Hampole (died 1349). I say advisedly 'specimens' for those that have come down to us are merely indications of a much greater number that once existed, but afterwards perished.....”

“Moreover, the 'Reformed' Archbishop of Canterbury, Cranmer, says, in his preface to the Bible of 1540: 'The Holy Bible was translated and read in the Saxon tongue, which at that time was our mother tongue, whereof there remaineth yet divers copies found in old Abbeys, of such antique manner of writing and speaking that few men now be able to read and understand them. And when this language waxed old and out of common use, because folks should not lack the fruit of reading, it was again translated into the newer language, whereof yet also many copies remain and be daily found.'”
Where we got the bible

You trust the Catholic Papacy, and I don't. The New Testament comes from the letters of the disciples. The letters were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

 

[CherubRam]

A lot of words aren't in the Bible that we use to to describe concepts that are in the Bible, such as monotheism, omniscience, omnipotence, and incarnate.


Where does God say this?


I've addressed this twice already. It is irrelevant because that is not how we talk in English. Translations use "God" and it is grammatically awkward and unnecessary to have the article in front, especially when we know there is only one God.

Why do you ignore that the Word was both divine (necessarily God) and with (intimate relationship) God, having been in existence when the beginning began (absolute existence)?

Only Yahwah is God, any other immortal being is (a god.)

 

[Free]

"No other" means no other person. Before anyone existed there was only Yahwah.

Only Yahwah is God, any other immortal being is (a god.)

All of that goes without saying. I don't understand your point.

 

[Mungo]

You trust the Catholic Papacy, and I don't.

I know.

The New Testament comes from the letters of the disciples. The letters were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

a) I never said otherwise.
b) Your comment is irrelevant to my post.

 

[GodsGrace]

You said
"But the Council of Nicaea changed the day of rest to Sunday, which they had no right to do." and claimed it was in a canon of the Council of Nicaea
But you cannot provide the number of the canon or an actual quote.
The best you can do is claim that some (un-named) Catholic Bishop on a you tube video (no link) stated that the
Catholic Church changed the Sabbath.
Why should anyone believe that when you have obviously lied about the Council of Nicaea?

The Catholic Church does NOT admit they changed the Sabbath, and I can prove it with actual quotes- unlike you.

What is the difference between changing the Sabbath and worshipping on Sunday?

Sunday worship began while Apostles were still alive. Isn't this changing the day of rest??