On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:54:54 -0400, "Dan Barker" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

"After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold,
the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove
and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is
My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased." Matthew 3:16-17
If you've seen the Trinity clearly displayed before your very eyes, you
don't need to hear the word "trinity" to believe it.

Calling him the son of god did not necessarily mean he was god. The
phrase was also used to describe kings. Furthermore there is no
reason to think that any trinity is being mentioned in those verses.

On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:54:54 -0400, "Dan Barker" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

"Truth Hunter" <hunter77099@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e164e783.0309200605.27e6258e@posting.google.com...

Jesus' twelve apostles lived and died never having heard of any
"Trinity" !

"After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold,
the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove
and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is
My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased." Matthew 3:16-17

If you've seen the Trinity clearly displayed before your very eyes, you
don't need to hear the word "trinity" to believe it.

Calling him the son of god did not necessarily mean he was god.

phrase was also used to describe kings.

reason to think that any trinity is being mentioned in those verses.

Thomas P.

On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:54:54 -0400, "Dan Barker" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

"Truth Hunter" <hunter77099@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e164e783.0309200605.27e6258e@posting.google.com...

Jesus' twelve apostles lived and died never having heard of any
"Trinity" !

"After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold,
the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove
and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is
My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased." Matthew 3:16-17

If you've seen the Trinity clearly displayed before your very eyes, you
don't need to hear the word "trinity" to believe it.

Calling him the son of god did not necessarily mean he was god.

phrase was also used to describe kings. Furthermore there is no
reason to think that any trinity is being mentioned in those verses.





Thomas P.

On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:54:54 -0400, "Dan Barker" <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

"Truth Hunter" <hunter77099@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e164e783.0309200605.27e6258e@posting.google.com...

Jesus' twelve apostles lived and died never having heard of any
"Trinity" !

"After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold,
the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove
and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is
My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased." Matthew 3:16-17

If you've seen the Trinity clearly displayed before your very eyes, you
don't need to hear the word "trinity" to believe it.

Calling him the son of god did not necessarily mean he was god. The
phrase was also used to describe kings. Furthermore there is no
reason to think that any trinity is being mentioned in those verses.





Thomas P.

"Christopher Robin" <anonyngaddr@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Tg%ab.39268$xx4.3846031@twister.neo.rr.com>...

"Truth Hunter" <hunter77099@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e164e783.0309200605.27e6258e@posting.google.com...

Read your Bible!

I have... and I do...

Interesting Oneness cult theology. Thanks

Jesus' twelve apostles lived and died never having heard of any "Trinity"

!

Not hearing the term, perhaps... but the concept is quite clear. Go back
and read your Bible. It's clear throughout the Bible.

The strongest evidence for Trinity, First Epistle of John (5:7 and 8)
has already been retranslated. It is no longer "For there are three
that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy
Ghost...". The new translation reads, "For there are three that bear
witness, the Spirit and the water and the blood...". For almost two
thousand years, the original verse was used to justify Trinity. It is
amazing what a little bit of re-thinking and retranslating would do.
It can change people's beliefs. The other verse which is used, Matthew
28:19, does not say that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are
one.

The mistake that most people make is that they take isolated verses
from the Bible to prove their point. They do not look at the Bible in
totality. I agree that Jesus could have said a few things that were
meant to override the old Jewish law, but it is hard to imagine that
he could have suddenly changed the nature and the attributes of God,
as God was known before him. How could an active God, who is so
personally involved in the welfare of Jewish people, suddenly decides
to take a back seat or to project an unheard aspect of himself. It
almost sounds like the "old man upstairs" was about to retire and He
decided to hand over the reigns to his son.

If you have read the Bible closely, you will find that the Gospel of
John goes much further in pointing to the divinity of Christ than the
other three Gospels. There are many statements attributed to Jesus in
John that are not supported by Matthew, Mark and Luke. Most Christian
scholars have acknowledged that problem (see James Dunn's 'The
Evidence for Jesus) and believe that, had Jesus made those statements,
the other three Gospels would have certainly reported them.

For example look at these quotes from John:
1. "I am the light of the world" (John 8:12)
2. "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9)
3. "And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life" (John 6:35)
4. "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:58)
5. "I am the door of the sheep" (John 10:7)
6. "I am the resurrection, and the life" (John 11:25)
7. "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6)
8. "I am the true vine" (John 15:1)

These are indeed powerful statements. Yet, you will not be able to
find similar statements in the other three Gospels. Since John was
written 'after' the three, it is hard to imagine that this new
evidence had suddenly come to light. According to the New Jerusalem
Bible, the Gospel of John "was amplified and developed in several
stages during the second half of the first century." More likely,
scholars believe, John reflects the later church beliefs that were
incorporated into the Bible.

The following is a lengthy quote from Shabir Ally's essay:

"The book of the Acts of the Apostles in the Bible is an important
piece of evidence on the present subject. This book details the
activity of the disciples over a period of thirty years after Jesus
was raised up. It is important to see what the disciples were saying
about Jesus, and what titles they used in referring to him.

"It will be quickly obvious that they often referred to him as a
servant of God, but never Son of God. Peter, for example, said:

"The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has
glorified his servant Jesus" (Acts 3:13).

"Peter further said:

"God raised up his servant" (Acts 3:26), where the title servant
refers to Jesus.

"Not only Peter, but the entire group of believers viewed Jesus as
God's servant. When they raised their voices together in prayer to
God, in the course of their speaking to God they called Jesus "your
holy servant Jesus whom you anointed" (Acts 4:27). They repeated this
title also in verse 30. Consistently, Jesus was being called servant
of God by the original followers of Jesus.

"Some people mistakenly thought that the disciples called Jesus Son of
God. An inconsistency of translation actually helped to give this
wrong impression. In the King James Bible, the translators call Jesus
"Son of God" in Acts 3:13, 26, and "child of God" in Acts 4:27. They
simply translated the Greek word 'paida' as "son" or "child." But the
word paida also means "servant", and the present context demands this
translation since the author of Acts is trying in this passage to
establish that Jesus is indeed the servant of God.

"The translators knew that the Greek word 'paida' means servant. When
the same word was used for David in chapter 4, verse 25, they
translated it "servant." Why not call Jesus also by the same title?
Or, if they feel that "son" is the correct translation, why not also
call David "Son of God?" Jesus and David are both called by the same
title in Greek. Why not call them by a same title in English also?

"Other translators recognized this inconsistency and corrected it in
the modern translations of the Bible. Therefore the New International
Version of the Bible and many others call Jesus Servant of God in the
verses already quoted above. Nevertheless, the fact that Jesus was
God's servant was so well known that even the King James Bible called
him by this title in Matthew 12:18. Referring back to Isaiah 42:1,
Matthew identified Jesus as the servant of the one true God Yahweh."

In Islam, Jesus is the servant and messenger of God, and if you accept
that, it all begins to make sense.

On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 16:30:43 GMT, "Christopher Robin"
<anonyngaddr@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Truth Hunter" <hunter77099@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e164e783.0309200605.27e6258e@posting.google.com...

Read your Bible!

I have... and I do...

Jesus' twelve apostles lived and died never having heard of any "Trinity"

!

Not hearing the term, perhaps... but the concept is quite clear. Go back
and read your Bible. It's clear throughout the Bible.

Congratulations, Chris. For ONCE we are in total agreement. But to
answer the question directly, the Trinity are introduced in Genesis
1:1.

John W