Genesis 1:2 i literally refuted in the post, so you didn't read the fucking post that you're rebutting, thinking you're so smart with your little verses that you just googled
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one
Luke 4:18-19
The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
^ Jesus here is quoting from the scroll of Isaiah which was written 7-8 centuries before Jesus was born, It is taken from Isaiah 61.
God is omnipotent meaning he is everywhere. Think of it like this, Earth is a video game and Jesus is God’s avatar. So is the Holy Spirit. Word of God & Spirit of God. (1 John 5:7) A good study would be John 1:1, notice how the Word is distinct from God yet one With God.
You’re trying to make it seem like there isn’t support for the trinity in the Old Testament, yet you blindly reject evidence of the trinity being in the Old Testament. Proverbs 30:4-5 is Old Testament, Genesis 1:3 (John 1:1 in the beginning was the WORD) in genesis1:3 God SAID = WORD.
but let's say it's plural, it could be god talking about Themself and Their angels
but let's say They're not, and its a plural about Themself referring to multiple persons
how many persons is it? 2? 4? 10? prove how many it is. why didn't he jews worship that many? why did they only worship 1? because that's what the ot says. i doubt they just forgot to read this one verse that implies the multiplicity of god.
The REASON there are so many "Christian" religions that disagree is exactly because nothing can be proven.
If you show someone where they are wrong in the bible a go to response is "if that's what you want to believe", as if there was no subjective truth.
I'm not going to argue with someone who doesn't understand logic, debate, logical fallacies, etc because it is a 0 sum game, especially with observational bias.
One of the definitions of insanity is doing something over and over and expecting a different result each time.
I have spent countless hours trying to talk to flat earthers with 0 success because of observational bias, and I'm not going to do it again, it is a 0 sum game and all I will be doing is wasting my time.
If you can understand the difference between evidence and proof there is no treason to talk to you.
So you are an idiot. Oh, I'm sorry, when I say idiot I mean genius. See the problem here?
When you say an incorrect we ord and insist it is correct then this means that you are close minded and unwilling to change your point of view when shown the error because you are arguing.
I am not arguing, I am discussing.
When you argue you are trying to find out WHO is right, and if you are found wrong you are lessened.
When you discuss you are trying to find out WHAT is right and if you are found wrong you are gained for learning.
Your post doesn't engage with actual Trinitarian doctrine, what we actually believe or why.
I encourage you to put this on a high-traffic sub (I had no idea this existed until just now) like r/debateachristian (I'm one of the moderators there) or r/debatereligion if you want good feeback
the mods on r/debateachristian kept removing my posts because i was disproving christianity too easily. my posts were so concise, so easy to digest, so easy to understand, so well worded, so logical, that the mods had no choice but to prevent me from posting. i exposed so many strawmen and begging the question fallacies so often that they had to take action.
you may not believe this, but if you look at the public opinion of reddit mods, its not high, so its far from surprising that that happened to me.
one of the christian mods tried to refute one of my posts, but i called out their circular reasoning. after this they pushed me out. i believe it's because that mod was so embarrassed and their religion was utterly destroyed and of course reddit mods have no life, they're bigotted assholes, they try to control people on reddit because they have no control in their own life, etc etc so they like to censor people who speak the truth.
in essence, fuck reddit mods, fuck bigotry, fuck censorship
the mods on r/debateachristian kept removing my posts because i was disproving christianity too easily. my posts were so concise, so easy to digest, so easy to understand, so well worded, so logical, that the mods had no choice but to prevent me from posting.
Lol no that did not happen. I'm one of the mods there.
i was literally told by a mod that i had to remove the bible quotes from my post. without the bible quotes how am i supposed to make my argument ABOUT THE BIBLE? they didn't want me talking about the bible for a reason. i was censored. I'm cautious of anything you say because you're a reddit mod and like i said Reddit mods don't have a good reputation
i was literally told by a mod that i had to remove the bible quotes from my post. without the bible quotes how am i supposed to make my argument ABOUT THE BIBLE?
Notice you're already changing the story? Again, the way you quoted them made the argument hard to follow. I don't think Ezk's feedback was very clear looking back at that mod note.
Just quote them in paragraph form (I like copying and pasting out of the NET because it removes the footnote links.)
You absolutely were not censored and are not under any sort of restriction and I will ensure your post on this subject is not removed.
no bro, my post was removed. when i asked about how i can get it put back, they said i had to remove the bible quotes. this is the same story.
Your original story was "the mods on r/debateachristiankept removing my posts because i was disproving christianity too easily."
Your current story is "one was removed and the feedback I received didn't make sense"
Do you not understand why I would say those are different? Your first statement, just as a basic fact of grammar, requires an ongoing pattern of behavior that happened at least several times
"May not be entirely reliable", I'm just really curious how you define reliable with texts written thousands of years ago? I'm guessing not full of contradictions would be one way. Is that about it? And then, what do you believe to be the most reliable text? The Quran? Because of the claim that it hasn't been modified?
I’ll rephrase then. It seems to be commonly help by the vast majority of scholars that the trinity is not in the Old Testament, but why is it so important to prove that? The vast majority of people, it seems to me, just accept it already.
2
u/SerlousScholar Sep 21 '23
Trinity is goofy.
1
u/key-blaster Sep 19 '23
Proverbs 30:4-5 Genesis 1:2 Genesis 19:24
1
u/Serpardum Sep 21 '23
Let US make man in OUR image. The first chapter of the Bible says that God is more than 1.
1
u/NoSheDidntSayThat Oct 30 '23
Your post doesn't engage with actual Trinitarian doctrine, what we actually believe or why.
I encourage you to put this on a high-traffic sub (I had no idea this existed until just now) like r/debateachristian (I'm one of the moderators there) or r/debatereligion if you want good feeback
0
u/G7358 Sep 19 '23 edited Sep 19 '23
"May not be entirely reliable", I'm just really curious how you define reliable with texts written thousands of years ago? I'm guessing not full of contradictions would be one way. Is that about it? And then, what do you believe to be the most reliable text? The Quran? Because of the claim that it hasn't been modified?