Paul is Anti-Christ teachings here is a list of points

[wizanda]

1. Christ said he came to fulfill the law and not to end it. Paul said he came to end the Law, and if we are in Christ we are free of the Law.

2. Christ said that we are judged by the commandments; Paul said we are free of them, if we are in Christ.

3. Christ said that we should not judge, Paul said that the spiritual may judge and should not be judged.

4. Christ said that God is the judge, Paul said Christ is.

5. Christ said that the inheritance is from God and they killed him to try and steal it, as in the parable of the vine dresser; Paul said that we have an inheritance because of Christs death.

6. Christ said not to sacrifice the innocent, Paul praised the fact that Christ died.

7. Christ said that God is the lord of the living; Paul said that we should remain with Christ in death.

8. Christ showed that reincarnation happens, as he said John was Elijah, Paul said we only live once.

9. Christ said God is spirit, Paul said Christ is the image of God; breaking the second commandment.

10. Christ said he was sent and was a servant and a son, Paul said Christ is equal to God and even said he was God.

11. Christ said to worship God, Paul said to worship Christ.

12. Christ said to be one in God, Paul said to be one body in Christ.

13. Christ said that faith in God is powerful; Paul said that faith is "the faith and so turning its meaning in to church attendance.

14. Christ showed and said to have faith in God; Paul said have faith in Christ.

15. Christ said have one father, Paul said he had begotten people in Christ so making him a father to them.

16. Christ said that we should want of nothing and trust in God, giving up wealth and helping the poor after his death, 3 thousand people were practicing this. Paul ended this and then said if we dont work we dont eat, and even went back to work while preaching him self.

17. Christ said it will be hard for a rich man to enter heaven; Paul aspired to have wealth and for two years he rented his own house.

18. Christ said we have forgiveness for forgiving others; Paul said we have forgiveness in Christ.

19. Christ said we are justified by our words, Paul said we are justified by Christ.

20. Christ said God would show mercy to the merciful, Paul said we have mercy in Christ.

21. Christ said to be like children to enter heaven; Paul said not to be like children.

22. Christ said to be the light of the world and to show the bad through love how to be good, Paul said to have nothing to do with bad people and push them out.

23. Christ and the Bible said wisdom will make you shine in heaven, and he said that we should increase the talents we are born with; Paul said to be simple in Christ.

24. Christ said, if you help collect in the harvest (works) you will receive your reward, Paul said it is not by works but by faith in Christ alone.

25. Christ said dont make vain repetition in prayers; Paul established it as a way to pray, through the wording he used and the Pharisee ways he showed.

26. Christ said hate self and love through Gods love, then this is unconditional, Paul said who doesnt love them selfs.

27. Christ said women can be sisters (equal), Paul said they should remain lower.

28. Christ said we should remember him through the sharing of bread (start of acts, only bread); Paul said to remember him through wine.

29. Christ said that his disciples should only drink water; Paul made the drinking of wine (communion) a religious Ritual.

30. Christ clearly showed and said do not worry about being accepted by man, Paul said to be accepted by many.

31. Christ said take up your cross and follow me, as the cross was a symbol in many cultures for God. Paul turned the cross into only a symbol of Christs death, and caused it to become idolatry.

32. Christ said he came to bring division, meaning that we all follow God; Paul said Christ came to bring peace.

33. Christ said God is the teacher, Paul said him self is a teacher.

34. Christ said God and the kingdom of heaven is within you, Paul said that a fake prophet would say that God is within you.

35. Christ warned of those who say the time is near, Paul preached the time is near.

36. Christ said invite the poor to your house and feed the hungry, Paul said let the hungry eat at home, and showed to only invite friends for food.

There may be more, yet this is a start to many of things that are contradictory between Paul and Yeshua.

[Metacrock]

Recommend you fashion that into a more credible argument, Goat. There's noting in the Tanakh that argues against a divine trinity. To the contrary, there's been a lot of evidence presented to bolster it.

Here oh isreal, the lord our god, the lord is ONE.

(In this case, from context, it is a sinuglar one, not a compound one).

So, you are wrong.

I am sorry. on the thread about the Heberw roots of the Doctrine of Trinity you admitted "Shekinah is just another manifestation of God." That gives us the argument.

sure it is. Persona does not mean "person" it means mask. its' the mask the Greek actors wore. So that's it's saying, and identiy like a name, not a full personhood. That's like a mask to call God "Shekinah" and see him in the manifestaion of glory. that's just like persona.

Logos and Holy Spirit are just other manfifestations of God as is memra and shekniah and the angel of the Lord and the HolySpirit.

then that justifies the :Trinty. John says the Logos became flesh and that was Jesus. you just amdit it's another manfiestation of God, that's gives me the whole argument in the Hebrew Trinity thread.

So you have no basis for reading this "one" in a way that negates multiple manifestations. no one is saying there is more than one God. We are saying he appears in different forms and you hardly deney that? Or don't you bleieve MOses aw a burning bush?

so you have no argument.

Yes, I do. You just blindly reject it.

clearly you can't defend it because you can't address yourself to what I just said.

You see, the Shekhina is not another 'personia'. the shekhina IS god.. in every way. It is just another name for god.

Jesus is God in everyway, he's just another name for God.

but you know you're distorting Shekina becuase it's more than just a name, it's a "manifestation" meaning, the way something appears.

you are reading too much inot the concept of "persona" and I've told you taht all along. What is a mask? Its' a cover for the face, so its' a manifestaion of the way something appears.

In the 'Trinity', each 'triad' is a seperate PERSON , that is mysteriously (i.e. it can't be explained logically) merged into one on a divine level

.


Nope! you are not an expert on the doctrine. It is not a seperate person, but a serate perosna. meaning an identity. It is not a seperate entity.

I know this hard to undersand, it's a subtle concept, you must think about it. Just having a center of consciousness doesn't necessarily make it a different entity. Just a person with a multiple personatiy still has a single identy as one person.

I know you are unable to accept this fact, because it ruinds your entire faith, but that is the way it is.

you are making up your own facts. you are not quotiong the councils or the creeds.

[Goat]

Recommend you fashion that into a more credible argument, Goat. There's noting in the Tanakh that argues against a divine trinity. To the contrary, there's been a lot of evidence presented to bolster it.

Here oh isreal, the lord our god, the lord is ONE.

(In this case, from context, it is a sinuglar one, not a compound one).

So, you are wrong.

I am sorry. on the thread about the Heberw roots of the Doctrine of Trinity you admitted "Shekinah is just another manifestation of God." That gives us the argument.

Yet, the arguement is that the father , son and holy ghost are the "PERSONS", yet the shikhina is not a seperate person. I know you won't admit it, but that invalidates your analogy.

sure it is. Persona does not mean "person" it means mask. its' the mask the Greek actors wore. So that's it's saying, and identiy like a name, not a full personhood. That's like a mask to call God "Shekinah" and see him in the manifestaion of glory. that's just like persona.

Logos and Holy Spirit are just other manfifestations of God as is memra and shekniah and the angel of the Lord and the HolySpirit.

That is where you are wrong. The 'angel of the lord' is not the lord, and memra is not a manifestation of God either, not in the Jewish tradition.
You refuse to look at that last from the primary source , in context.
This is not surprising, since if you looked at things in the original, in context, you could not make your case.

then that justifies the :Trinty. John says the Logos became flesh and that was Jesus. you just amdit it's another manfiestation of God, that's gives me the whole argument in the Hebrew Trinity thread.

In yuour mind, maybe. However, to me, it is grasping at straws to justify a piece of nonsense.

So you have no basis for reading this "one" in a way that negates multiple manifestations. no one is saying there is more than one God. We are saying he appears in different forms and you hardly deney that? Or don't you bleieve MOses aw a burning bush?

so you have no argument.

Yes, I do. You just blindly reject it.

clearly you can't defend it because you can't address yourself to what I just said.

You see, the Shekhina is not another 'personia'. the shekhina IS god.. in every way. It is just another name for god.

Jesus is God in everyway, he's just another name for God.

but you know you're distorting Shekina becuase it's more than just a name, it's a "manifestation" meaning, the way something appears.

you are reading too much inot the concept of "persona" and I've told you taht all along. What is a mask? Its' a cover for the face, so its' a manifestaion of the way something appears.

In the 'Trinity', each 'triad' is a seperate PERSON , that is mysteriously (i.e. it can't be explained logically) merged into one on a divine level

.


Nope! you are not an expert on the doctrine. It is not a seperate person, but a serate perosna. meaning an identity. It is not a seperate entity.

I know this hard to undersand, it's a subtle concept, you must think about it. Just having a center of consciousness doesn't necessarily make it a different entity. Just a person with a multiple personatiy still has a single identy as one person.

I know you are unable to accept this fact, because it ruins your entire faith, but that is the way it is.

you are making up your own facts. you are not quoting the councils or the creeds.

I don't have to quote any 'councils or creeds'. I quote directly from the
Scriptures. However, I did point to a source you did admit was accurate that says 'The father , son and holy ghost are three separate persons'.

You have not been able to counter that yet, except with rhetoric, repeating invalid claims, and pure chuzpah

[Metacrock]

Recommend you fashion that into a more credible argument, Goat. There's noting in the Tanakh that argues against a divine trinity. To the contrary, there's been a lot of evidence presented to bolster it.

Here oh isreal, the lord our god, the lord is ONE.

(In this case, from context, it is a sinuglar one, not a compound one).

So, you are wrong.

I am sorry. on the thread about the Heberw roots of the Doctrine of Trinity you admitted "Shekinah is just another manifestation of God." That gives us the argument.

Yet, the arguement is that the father , son and holy ghost are the "PERSONS", yet the shikhina is not a seperate person. I know you won't admit it, but that invalidates your analogy.

The dispute here is over the meaning of the term "person." You want to interpirit that term in such a way as to make the three seperate beings apart from each other. I am interpriting it in such a way as to make the three manifestations of the same being. I say that's what the doctrine means

I've demonstrated that this si what the New Testament has in mind by John and Paul's use fo the term memra and Peter's reflection upon "the excellent glory" which is a euphemism for memra.

so you have no basis for your arugment. You might say latter generations of chrsitians got it wrong, fine. Christians have gotten a lot of things wrong over the centruies. but the original doctrine was not as you say about seperate beings.

sure it is. Persona does not mean "person" it means mask. its' the mask the Greek actors wore. So that's it's saying, and identiy like a name, not a full personhood. That's like a mask to call God "Shekinah" and see him in the manifestaion of glory. that's just like persona.

Logos and Holy Spirit are just other manfifestations of God as is memra and shekniah and the angel of the Lord and the HolySpirit.

That is where you are wrong. The 'angel of the lord' is not the lord, and memra is not a manifestation of God either, not in the Jewish tradition

.


Memra certainly is! I just got through demonstrating that with over a dozen expersts! It is the presence revaled in a dowanrd fashion. It's the downward revelation fo God's presence. As Edersheim puts it.

You refuse to look at that last from the primary source , in context.
This is not surprising, since if you looked at things in the original, in context, you could not make your case.

you have presented no evidece so you have no arguemnt about context. you have not presented a single passage or exegesis so there is no argument of context in this debate.

then that justifies the :Trinty. John says the Logos became flesh and that was Jesus. you just amdit it's another manfiestation of God, that's gives me the whole argument in the Hebrew Trinity thread.

In yuour mind, maybe. However, to me, it is grasping at straws to justify a piece of nonsense.

you admitted to the prmise of my argument. that means the argument stands. the premise is addmitted to the argument wins. please learn soemthigna bout debate. why are you here debating when you clealry don't undestand much about argumentation?

So you have no basis for reading this "one" in a way that negates multiple manifestations. no one is saying there is more than one God. We are saying he appears in different forms and you hardly deney that? Or don't you bleieve MOses aw a burning bush?

so you have no argument.

Yes, I do. You just blindly reject it.

clearly you can't defend it because you can't address yourself to what I just said.

You see, the Shekhina is not another 'personia'. the shekhina IS god.. in every way. It is just another name for god.

Jesus is God in everyway, he's just another name for God.

but you know you're distorting Shekina becuase it's more than just a name, it's a "manifestation" meaning, the way something appears.

you are reading too much inot the concept of "persona" and I've told you taht all along. What is a mask? Its' a cover for the face, so its' a manifestaion of the way something appears.

In the 'Trinity', each 'triad' is a seperate PERSON , that is mysteriously (i.e. it can't be explained logically) merged into one on a divine level

.


Nope! you are not an expert on the doctrine. It is not a seperate person, but a serate perosna. meaning an identity. It is not a seperate entity.

I know this hard to undersand, it's a subtle concept, you must think about it. Just having a center of consciousness doesn't necessarily make it a different entity. Just a person with a multiple personatiy still has a single identy as one person.

I know you are unable to accept this fact, because it ruins your entire faith, but that is the way it is.

you are making up your own facts. you are not quoting the councils or the creeds.

I don't have to quote any 'councils or creeds'.

yes you sure do. if you want us to think the doctrine says something (like what "person" means) you must quote the sources that make that idea an officla doctrine so we can know what the doctrine really says.

I quote directly from the
Scriptures. However, I did point to a source you did admit was accurate that says 'The father , son and holy ghost are three separate persons'.

the official doctrine of Trinity is not stated as such in Scripture. IT is infurred from scripture and interprited by the coucnils.

You have not been able to counter that yet, except with rhetoric, repeating invalid claims, and pure chuzpah

are you kidding? You dont even read the material in front of your face. You dont' even know the evidential cliams of the material I post. you have proven that. so how are we to believe you understand rhetoric?

[Goat]

< snip so that we don't get into hugh repeitions >

In the 'Trinity', each 'triad' is a seperate PERSON , that is mysteriously (i.e. it can't be explained logically) merged into one on a divine level

.


Nope! you are not an expert on the doctrine. It is not a seperate person, but a serate perosna. meaning an identity. It is not a seperate entity.

I know this hard to undersand, it's a subtle concept, you must think about it. Just having a center of consciousness doesn't necessarily make it a different entity. Just a person with a multiple personatiy still has a single identy as one person.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

Within Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity states that God is a single Being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a perichoresis of three persons (personae, prosopa): Father (the Source, the Eternal Majesty); the Son (the eternal Logos or Word, incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth); and the Holy Spirit (the Paraclete or advocate). Since the 4th Century, in both Eastern and Western Christianity, this doctrine has been stated as "One God in Three Persons," all three of whom, as distinct and co-eternal "persons" or "hypostases," share a single Divine essence, being, or nature. Supporting the doctrine of the Trinity is known as Trinitarianism,
[/quote]

One god, three persons, three distinct persons.

This is different that then concept of the Shekhina. One God, one person, another name.

I know you are unable to accept this fact, because it ruinds your entire faith, but that is the way it is.

you are making up your own facts. you are not quotiong the councils or the creeds.

There, I quoted from the creed. Deny it... that is your only resource.

[Metacrock]

< snip so that we don't get into hugh repeitions >

In the 'Trinity', each 'triad' is a seperate PERSON , that is mysteriously (i.e. it can't be explained logically) merged into one on a divine level

.


Nope! you are not an expert on the doctrine. It is not a seperate person, but a serate perosna. meaning an identity. It is not a seperate entity.

I know this hard to undersand, it's a subtle concept, you must think about it. Just having a center of consciousness doesn't necessarily make it a different entity. Just a person with a multiple personatiy still has a single identy as one person.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

look at the great authorotative source. what do I know I only went to a major seminary and got a Masters degree. I'd rather believe a soruce that changes every day. you youself and Eliahu and your ant9-christian missioanry tovia singer guys probobaly re wrote it yourselves.

the doctrine is defeined by the creeds I quoted, not by wikepidia.

Within Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity states that God is a single Being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a perichoresis of three persons (personae, prosopa): Father (the Source, the Eternal Majesty); the Son (the eternal Logos or Word, incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth); and the Holy Spirit (the Paraclete or advocate). Since the 4th Century, in both Eastern and Western Christianity, this doctrine has been stated as "One God in Three Persons," all three of whom, as distinct and co-eternal "persons" or "hypostases," share a single Divine essence, being, or nature. Supporting the doctrine of the Trinity is known as Trinitarianism,

One god, three persons, three distinct persons.

This is different that then concept of the Shekhina. One God, one person, another name.

I know you are unable to accept this fact, because it ruinds your entire faith, but that is the way it is.

you are making up your own facts. you are not quotiong the councils or the creeds.

There, I quoted from the creed. Deny it... that is your only resource.[/quote]


listen listen listen. why do you refuse to listen open your littel bigotterd and listen

how many many times must I say this?


it's the esence that makes what we are. that's the way Plato had it figureed. it's the esence that makes us what we are. doesnt' matter how many persona if they share the same essence, they are the same being.

the trintiiy coudl be a pickle. a girl scout and thousand hippos and each one a differnt person and if they had the same esence they are the same person.

essence is what makes us what we are, we aren't anything without out essenc.e the personhood is a diffeirent. issue.

but the official doctrine is defined by the two creeds I quoted, now you read those creeds and you see they do not say persons. get it they don't say that.

[Goat]

it's the esence that makes what we are. that's the way Plato had it figureed. it's the esence that makes us what we are. doesnt' matter how many persona if they share the same essence, they are the same being.

the trintiiy coudl be a pickle. a girl scout and thousand hippos and each one a differnt person and if they had the same esence they are the same person.

essence is what makes us what we are, we aren't anything without out essenc.e the personhood is a diffeirent. issue.

but the official doctrine is defined by the two creeds I quoted, now you read those creeds and you see they do not say persons. get it they don't say that.

The Christian Classics Etherial library also has my definition. They quote
from the defintiion the Easton's bible

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/easton/ebd2.html?term=trinity

A word not found in Scripture, but used to express the doctrine of the unity of God as subsisting in three distinct Persons.

I will accept their definition. I don't care if you went to seminary school. All the sources I see are against you.

[Cathar1950]

1001 the new definition of the trinity.
"a girl scout and thousand hippos" all made out of atoms.
I like it.

[otseng]

listen listen listen. why do you refuse to listen open your littel bigotterd and listen

Moderator Formal Warning

Metacrock, after several warnings, I'm not even sure you have read the rules. You are hereby issued a formal warning for continuing to attack others. Please be advised that a subsequent warning will result in a probation.