Minister with 45 years of Rabbinic Hebrew training challenges Bobby Richardson


The email that started it all ...

----- Original Message -----
From: Steve
To: acts2@impact-ministry.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 8:12 PM
Subject: question


Do you speak and understand Biblical hebrew.

If not, then you do not know what you are talking about.

Hear O Israel the Lord, Our God, the Lord is One.
Hear O Israel the Lord (the Father), Our God (the Son), the Lord (the Holy Spirit) is Unique/One/A Unity.

E C H A D IN HEBREW

ONE ................................................. E C H A D


Adam and Eve became ONE Flesh ..... in hebrew BASAR ECHAD.


ELOHIM MEANS TRINITY.

Bobby responds to Steve's rebuke, and is still waiting for Steve to follow up ..

((THE ACTUAL EMAIL THAT WAS SENT OUT))

----- Original Message -----
From: Bobby Richardson
To: Bobby Richardson
Bcc: Steve (and to about 70 people in my Bible disussion forum)

Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 11:45 PM
Subject: discussion with Steve - April 30 - PM


NOTE: This is being sent via blind carbon copy to about 70 people who follow the Bible discussions/debates I am involved with from time to time. Your identity, contact information nor your email address is compromised. All anyone knows it your first name, Steve. At any rate, I am going to attempt to keep the contents of this discussion in tact, inserting our responses where they fall in this on-going dialogue ... in order to keep everything above board, revealing that which has been addressed and that which has not been addressed ... and by whom it was addressed OR by whom something was skipped over. The smaller font (italicized parts) will be that which has either been covered already, and may not require any futher response, OR has been skipped over by one ... or both ... of us.


Bobby (from original response): Dear Sir, I would like to inform you that I am a "former" trinitarian, and that I do, most certainly, know what I am talking about.

Steve: ... you think you know....

Bobby: Nope, Steve, I "know" that I know, and have proven and re-proven it over and over and over again. Just because you "think" you speak with authority, does NOT amount to a hill of beans with me.

Bobby (from original response): God is referred to throughout the entire Bible in the singular as .... I, ME, MY, HE, HIS and HIM. Israel had just ONE LORD according to Deuteronomy 6:4, "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God is ONE LORD:" (Not two ... not three ... ONE!)...

Steve: ... Israel has one Lord manifest in three Persons....

Bobby: Nowhere in the entire Bible will you find what you just said. You really should learn to speak where the Bible speaks and remain silent where it is silent. Otherwise, you will find yourself adding to or taking from the Word of God and/or bearing a false witness.

Bobby (from original response): To assert that God is actually two Lords

Steve: ...one Lord in a compound unity of three Persons ..

Bobby: Just how do you explain you can get a compound unity of three persons out of the vast preponderance of Scriptural references to God as ... "I, ME, MY, MINE, HE, HIS AND HIM"??? Can you furnish me with one single, solitary, verse any where in the entire Bible, spoken by anyone at any time, which refers to Almighty God as you so adamantly assert, as being "one Lord manifest in three Persons" ... or as being "one Lord in a compound unity of three persons" ... or even just being referred to as being two or three "persons"?? If not, I would suggest that you stop putting words in God's mouth, and bearing a false witness like that.

Bobby (from original response): or is a plurality of three separate and distinct "persons" who are each co-equal, co-eternal and co-existent with one another, either portrays three individual "persons" of Deity

Steve: ..no, three Persons, one God ...

Bobby: Again, I'll have to call your hand and challenge you to either put up or shut up. And, give me one single solitary verse anywhere in the entire Bible, spoken by anyone at any time which says what you just said ... there are "three Persons, one God". I realize it is possible for some folks to think a little too highly of themselves, but just because somebody says something does NOT make it so. And, this is NOT my first day at the rodeo. I don't take anybody's word over the Word of God. And, I suggest that nobody take my word for anything, but to search the Scriptures for themselves to see if I am telling it like it really is or not.

Bobby (from original response): like three people who make up one family/household,

Steve: ... no, not a family ... that's Armstrongism ...

Bobby: Steve, two or three separate and distinct "persons" who are joined together in a union to form ONE ENTITY ... whether we are talking about one family, one team, one company, ONE GOD, or what have you, the principal is the same. So, I'm not going to let you get by with avoiding an issue, giving something a label and expecting me to move on to something else. You're gonna come back and re-lick this calf. I want to know how you can honestly explain that there has to be two or three separate and distinct "persons" in order to have ONE GOD.

Bobby (from original response): OR it portrays God as being one "person" with three "heads"

Steve: ...no, that's Pentecostal Oneism...

Bobby: There you go again. Look, I am NOT interested in learning all about the labels you throw around. I just want you to answer my questions and deal with the things I present to you ... openly, honestly and POINT BY POINT. **IF** you don't believe God is like three separate and distinct "persons" who make up one family, AND you don't believe God is like one person with three "heads", then explain to me your concept that two or three separate and distinct "persons" are required in order to have ONE GOD.

Bobby (from original response): both of which is a whole lot closer to paganism and polytheism than I am comfortable with.

Steve: ...no, you are a Jehovah's Witness type..

Bobby: You are very wrong, Steve. I'm no Jehovah's Witness type. I embrace, promote and defend the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine. And the Jehovah's Witnesses do NOT worship Jesus in any shape, form or fashion. Nor, do they believe the Incarnate Christ was God manifest in the flesh. So, I'd appreciate it if you would quit trying to throw around so many labels, as if you are the only one (between the two of us) who knows and understands the Truth ... in it's entirety. You will find that I am NOT easily intimidated, Steve. Nor, do I back down from anyone who doubts, disputes or disparrages the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine.

Bobby (from original response): You do what you want to about it, though.

Steve: ...no need to do anything, when you're born again.

Bobby: That's not true. What makes you want to make false statements like that? The Bible plainly tells us that we are to be "doers" of the Word, NOT hearers only. Also, the ole boy who buried his talent, and did nothing, was in for a rude awakening when his Master returned, and he had to give an account for what he had done (or not done), wasn't he?

Bobby (from original response): At any rate, the word "one" in Deuteronomy is the Hebrew word 'echad Strong's # 0259.

Steve: ...before there ever was a Strong's, the ancient Rabbi's understood it to mean a compound unity.

Bobby: I don't care what any ancient Rabbi may have thought or understood. Unless or until you produce some Scriptural documentation that says it like you say it is, I am going to continue to think of you as bearing a false witness, and saying that which God has NOT said.

Bobby (from original response): I believe it is a grave mistake to interpret the word "one" in Deuteronomy 6:4 to mean that there is more than ONE LORD "numerically."

Steve: ... 'echad' does not mean that.

Bobby: Please give me book, chapter and verse documentation which verifies your assertion that "echad" means Israel had MORE than ONE GOD ... OR MORE THAN ONE LORD. **IF** Israel's LORD of Deuteronomy 6:4 was ONE GOD "numerically speaking" (which I firmly believe is the case), then the "echad" in Deuteronomy 6:4 meant Israel had only ONE GOD ... AND ... ONE LORD "numerically" speaking. I'm NOT going to let you get away by trying to say the "echad" of Deuteronomy 6:4 turns the ONE LORD "numerically speaking" ... who is Israel's ONE GOD "numerically speaking" ... into MORE than one ANYTHING "numerically speaking". That just ain't gonna fly!

Bobby (from original response): There is over whelming Scriptural evidence that there is ONLY ONE LORD AND THAT .... THE LORD [03068] thy God [0430], he [is] God [0430].

Steve: ....correct, one Elohim manifest in three Persons.

Bobby: God has many characteristics and attributes. But, the word Elohim does NOT mean that MORE than one separate and distinct "person" is essential in order to have ONE GOD. By the way, I have noticed, thus far in your response back to me, you have NOT used a single, solitary Scripture. Everything, so far, has just been Steve 3:16, I guess. Needless to say, I do NOT elevate Steve 3:16 to the same level as that of the Word of God.

Bobby (from original response): I will admit that the word one in the Old and New Testaments can be used to specify one "numerically" or one "group" of subjects.

Steve: ....no need to 'admit' anything ... just understand how 'echad' is used.

Bobby: Understanding how "echad" is used is essential to this conversation. While there are many gods (lower case "g"). There is only ONE SUPREME BEING ... ONE GOD. Therefore, "echad" very definitely means ONE "numerically speaking" as it relates to Almighty God ... NOT a cluster or a group of TWO or THREE "persons", each of whom are God, as your man-made theology asserts. So, I'll give you a few examples of how "echad" is used to verify the fact that "echad" does NOT identify MORE than ONE PERSON in other places, and, therefore does NOT identify MORE than ONE PERSON regarding Almighty God. Furthermore, I will Scripturally prove, conclusively, that the Bible recorded Israel as having ONLY ONE GOD "numerically speaking" ... NOT a group or cluster of TWO or THREE separate and distinct "persons" that are essential to make up that ONE GOD ... as you assert the word "echad" means in Deuteronomy 6:4 ...

1Sa 16:18 Then answered one [echad] 0259 of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, [that is] cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the LORD [is] with him. ((HOW MANY PERSONS DOES "ECHAD" IDENTIFY HERE?? ONE))

1Sa 22:20 And one [echad] 0259 of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David. ((HOW MANY PERSONS DOES "ECHAD" IDENTIFY HERE?? ONE))

1Sa 25:14 But one [echad] 0259 of the young men told Abigail, Nabal's wife, saying, Behold, David sent messengers out of the wilderness to salute our master; and he railed on them. ((HOW MANY PERSONS DOES "ECHAD" IDENTIFY HERE?? ONE))

Gen 11:1 And the whole earth was of one [echad] 0259 language, and of one [echad] 0259 speech. ((HOW MANY LANGUAGES DOES "ECHAD" IDENTIFY HERE?? ONE))

Zec 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one [echad] 0259 LORD, and his name one [echad] 0259. ((HOW MANY LORDS DOES "ECHAD" IDENTIFY HERE?? ONE))

Mal 2:10 Have we not all one [echad] 0259 father? hath not one [echad] 0259 God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers? ((HOW MANY PERSONS ...FATHERS ... GODS DOES "ECHAD" IDENTIFY HERE?? ONE))

CASE CLOSED!



Bobby (from original response): However, when it comes to genuine Monotheism, the word "ONE" cannot mean "three co-equal, co-eternal, and co-existent persons" who some how share in a mysterious union of some sort to make up the Godhead.

Steve: ...no 'mystery' about it ... water = liquid, solid, gas .... time= past, present, future... mass=proton,neutron,electron...space=length, width, height...Israel= Priests,Levites, Israelites...God=Elohim=Father, Messiah(Son),Shechinah(Holy Spirit)....

Bobby: I understand about things like ice, water and steam being the same substance in different forms ... NOT three different substances. Likewise, I understand how a man (who is created in the image AND likeness of God) can be a father, a son and a husband without having to be split into three different people. But, why is it that you obviously take the position that a man can do something that God cannot do? Also, man is made up of heart, soul, mind, body, spirit ... but each of these aspects of a man is NOT separate "persons." Here's some things you may want to ponder ... It is my position that many good people make two terrible mistakes ... 1) allowing what they "think" about vague and/or "implied" interpretations given to a handful of very carefully selected Scriptures to become dogmatically held doctrines, which they will vigorously defend, and 2) Promulgating the notion that there is an "unexplanable mystery" surrounding their dogmatically held doctrine that is based on nothing more than what they "think" about a handful of very carefully selected Scriptures, which have been given "implied" interpretations in order to support their dogmatically held doctrine of the three "persons" in the Godhead. God can, does and "IS" working simultaneously, and yet distinctly, at this very moment in untold millions of geographical locations, involving untold millions of people. Yet, He is NOT made up of "parts" OR "persons" like members of a "team" who function co-peratively in a "union" to get the job done. Most people can't even realize it, God can manifest Himself in a cloud or a burning bush, and speak through a thundering voice from Heaven OR through a donkey, but that doesn't turn Him into different "persons." It is important to point out that God is an invisible omnipresent Spirit (singular) who fills the universe and occupies all of eternity from beginning to end and vice versa. He can ... and does ... make His presence known to one person (or many) all over the earth, in one geographical location (or many), in the same expression, manifestation or form (or many), and at the same moment in time (or spread out over milleniums. However, NONE of these scenarios turns God into more than ONE PERSON.

Bobby (from original response): However, if you feel differently about that,

Steve: ...I don't feel anything ... I speak, read, understand Hebrew, am a believer trained in the language for over 45 years ...

Bobby: That's nothing new. There were multitudes who spoke, read and understood Hebrew who did not understand who the Incarnate Christ "really" was.

Bobby (from original response): I will wait to see how much Scriptural evidence you have

Steve: ... the Bible (Tenach in hebrew) = Torah, Prophets and Writings has all the evidence you need ....

Bobby: For someone who claims to be a scholar, you sure don't refer to any specific Scriptures from the Bible to support your authoritative utterings. Give me Book, Chapter and Verse. I want to read it for myself. You should know that I am NOT going to take YOUR WORD for anything.

Bobby (from original response): which uses the number "three" in reference to God, as opposed to the number "one" being used in reference to God. You can never turn three people into ONE "numerically." You might have three people on the same team, living in the same household, working for the same company, etc. But even in those scenarios ... to apply them to a "pluralistic" view of God as being a "shared" union of "three eternal persons" ... would be so polytheistic that I wouldn't have anything to do with it, knowing what I know now.

Steve: ....you're rambling ...

Bobby: No, I just blew your man-made theology completely out of the water.

Bobby (from original response): I will say this, though, there are a whole lot of smooth talking trinitarian ministers out there who are good at playing shell games with the word "one."

Steve: ...I'm not one of them ... my training is Rabbinic ...

Bobby: You are one of them. When push comes to shove you do try to play shell games with the word one [echad] 0259 ... just like you did concerning the ONE LORD GOD of Deuteronomy 6:4

Bobby (from original response): However, some are like Apolos in Acts Chapter 19 who just don't know that they don't know ... yet. Then there are those who know they don't know, but, for whatever reason, will not admit it and do the right thing like Apollos did after Aquila and Priscilla expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

Steve: ...circular reasoning mixed with rhetoric ...

Bobby: Look, Apollos was an honest person who had a real zeal and love for God, but his knowledge was limited to that of only that of John the Baptist's perspective. When he encountered those who understood more about the Bible than he did, he was NOT too good to open his heart and mind and be taught something concering the Scriptures. Having said that, I can understand why someone who believes the man-made theology that you believe would think of that as being circular reasoning mixed with rhetoric.

Bobby (from original response): You are a "person" and I am a "person." You have a spirit and I have a spirit. You have a name and I have a name. However, joined together in a co-equal union, we could become a plurality of "persons" or "spirits" who are one in purpose, mission, etc. But we would never be one numerically, nor would we ever become one "person" or one "spirit."

Steve: ...God doesn't join together ... you and I are separate, of different genetics and essence.

Bobby: Are you telling me that you would never try to use that which God joins together ... a husband and A wife ... to explain your "ONE GOD" theology. Look, Steve, you are the one who embraces the man-made theology that God is actually a group or cluster of two or three separate and distinct "persons". Are you now back peddling from your theology??? YOU ARE NOT GETTING OFF THE HOOK HERE ... I NEED TO HEAR YOUR ANSWERS!

Bobby (from original response): I could never dwell in your body and you could never dwell in mine.

Steve: ... fundamental error made by Nicodemus ... read what Jesus said to him ... you need this ...

Bobby: I have extensively studied what Jesus told Nicodemus. And, I have been born again of water AND of the Spirit. But, you missed my whole point that neither you nor I (each of us being a "person") could dwell "inside" the other. Soooo, I'll have to draw you a picture ...

John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

2 Corinthians 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.


Bobby (from original response): This kind of portrayal of the Godhead does NOT harmonize with the Word of God at all. The distinction is Spirit and flesh in the Godhead NOT "persons."

Steve: ...Persons are distinct in mission ... not in dimensional solidity.

Bobby: What on earth are you talking about??? You either believe there are two or three separate and distinct "persons" each of whom are "fully" God ... giving you two or three Gods ... OR you believe there are two or three separate and distinct "persons" each of whom are essential in order to have the ONE GOD ... giving you a "Godhead" which is like a pie which is cut into two or three equal slices, each of slice being a "part" of the pie.

Bobby (from original response): **IF** and when you answer the following 17 questions and then go the infromation which follows that, from one of my web pages, and Scripturally refute the points in it, I would be more than happy to invest the necessary time to read your presentation(s) and/or continue this dialogue with you.

Steve: ...not necessary for you to continue or not continue subject to my 'qualifications' ... do it for your own salvations sake

Bobby: I've made my calling and election sure. You contacted me. I did NOT contact you. Therefore, since you've thrown the gauntlet down, I'll oblige you in a Bible discussion/debate. But, I'm not going to chase every stick you throw. I value my time as much as you value yours ... if not more so.

Bobby (from original response): Here's the 17 questions. The web page information immediately follows ...

1. How do you define:

Steve: ... God per se is 'undefinable' except as revealed by scriptural exegesis and exegesis of hebrew etymology. Jesus only can reveal the 'Father' to you.

Bobby: And just as there were those who heard Jesus speak, who didn't get it. There are those who read the Bible, who don't get it. And, it's my opinion that it is because they are NOT open, honest and truly desirious of truth in its entirety, but are spiritually arrogant and feel as though their word or indoctrinated belief system is as authoritative as God's Word.

Bobby (from original response): a) "God";

Steve: = Elohim as revealed as YHVH

Bobby: My definition of "God" (upper case "G") would be the Supreme Being ... ONE (numerically speaking) invisible, omni-present, omni-potent, omniscient SPIRIT who is our CREATOR.

Bobby (from original response): b) "Deity";

Steve: = El

Bobby: My definition of "Deity" (upper case "D") would be "God".

Bobby (from original response): c) and the "Godhead"?

Steve: =Elohim

Bobby: My definition of "Godhead" (upper case "G") would be the very essence or complete nature, characteristics and attributes of God ... not just one of them or some of them ... but ALL of them.

Bobby (from original response): 2. How do you define a "person"?

Steve: ... your reasoning is faulty Greek Hellenistic philosophy of existence and unecessary to the understanding of Elohim ... look to the meaning of the hebrew

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 3. How many "persons" are in the Godhead?

Steve: ...Elohim -im = composite unity

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 4. When you refer to "God", are your referring to Almighty God the Father ONLY ..., OR are you referring to more than one separate, individual and distinct "person"?

Steve: ...you are using English terminology to define the Bible written in hebrew ... it is faulty reasoning

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 5. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... are the "persons" to whom you refer, CO-EQUAL, CO-ETERNAL and CO-EXISTENT? If so, how do you define:
a) CO-EQUAL;
b) CO-ETERNAL;
c) and CO-EXISTENT?

Steve: ... redundant question ... you have a problem with 'quantitativeness' as if 'more than' mean't more or less 'power' or more or less 'substance' ... this was the error of the aristotelians. The terms below are interdependent if you are talking about Elohim.

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE


Bobby (from original response): 6. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... How many separate, individual and distinct "persons" are you referring to, and who are they?

Steve: ...your question is not an honest one, and you know it. Again it is redundant.

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 7. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ...Is each "person" FULLY DEITY (God) ... OR is any of the "persons" lesser in DEITY ... or only a "part" of DEITY?

Steve: ...you already know in your heart the answer to this ... but your prideful mind will not let you believe it.

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 8. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... Is it your position that "THEY" are joined together in a "union" sort of like that of the different family members who make up ONE UNIT ... in this case, ONE GOD ... or the Godhead?

Steve: ...is there a difference between physical entities 'joining' and spiritual entities 'joining' ... if there is, than you are confusing the issue... if there isn't you are confusing the entities. Your question is puerile.

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 9. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... How many "Fathers" are in the Godhead?

Steve: ... Isaiah 9:6

Bobby: Isaiah 9:6 refers to the Messiah as THE MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER. However, YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 10. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... How many "LORDS" are in the Godhead? ...

Steve: Deuteron. 6:4

Bobby: Deuteronomy 6:4 very specifically states that the LORD, OUR GOD, IS ONE LORD. However, YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 11. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... How many "Saviours" are in the Godhead? ...

Steve: Jehovah Witnesses employ this tactic ... it is quite weak ... you know the answer. The Ancient Rabbis believed that Messiah would be the Saviour and the One who parted the Red Sea was Israel's Saviour... based on the Torah

Bobby: Isaiah 43:11 says, "I, even I, am the LORD, and beside me there is no saviour. And, Isaiah 44:24 says, "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer (saviour), and he that formed thed from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things, that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself. ... However, YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 12. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... How many "Spirits" are in the Godhead?

Steve: ...one God, three Persons

Bobby: YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 13. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... How many "Spirits" dwelled between the cherubims in the Most Holy Place?

Steve: ...one Spirit

Bobby: You finally answered one??? Well, blow me down! Now, let me ask you whether or not you believe ALL of God dwelled between the cherubims, since you admit only one Spirit dwelled between the cherubims.

Bobby (from original response): 14. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... In what form did Jesus exist prior to the Incarnation?

Steve: ... John 1:1-12

Bobby: You might think you answered the above question, but you certainly didn't. Since you believe one Spirit dwelled between the cherubims, I want to know whether or not you believe Jesus existed in Spirit form prior to the Incarnation. Otherwise, YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 15. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... How far back have you been able to find any documentation which refers to Almighty God as "persons"?"

Steve: ... Almight God = El Shaddai El is plural

Bobby: EL is no more identifying a plurality of "persons" than the word PRESIDENCY does. At any rate, YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 16. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... Are you aware that the terms, "God the Son" ... "God the Holy Spirit ... and "persons" (plural - in reference to God or the Godhead) is NOT found anywhere in the text of the King James Version of the Bible?

Steve: ... neither is the word 'rapture', or 'trinity' and a host of other words ...... but neither is the word 'air' . There is no English in the original manuscripts.

Bobby: I don't need the word "rapture" to believe in being "caught up". Soooo, in the absolute absence of the word "trinity" in the Bible, what word(s) do you believe will do the same thing for the word "trinity" that the words "caught up" (which ARE in the Bible) will do for the word "rapture"??? Otherwise, YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE

Bobby (from original response): 17. If, when you refer to "God", you are referring to "more" than ONE "person" ... Are you aware that, long before the concept of "persons" of God evolved, centuries AFTER Christ, that pagans in ancient Rome worshipped what is known as a "triad" of three gods, which was symbolized by an equilateral triangle?

Steve: ... means nothing ... just because pagans worshiped Three Gods doesn't mean that this notion was inherited. Just because there were pagans who believed in one god eg. Manitou , doesn't mean that this infuenced monotheism in ancient Israel.


Bobby: The man-made theory, known far and wide as the trinitrian doctrine, was officially introduced, defined and became the official doctrine of the "universal" church of pagan Rome, with its Emperor as the head. However, the title was later changed to "Pope". Those who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine, as I do, do NOT embrace this man-made theory, which evolved a couple centuries AFTER Christ. YOU DID NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR ADDRESS THE ISSUE ... THEREFORE, AS IN ANY DEBATE, YOUR DEFAULT IS A FORFEITURE


Steve: Your term "If" in every 'question' is conditional, which means you yourself are not sure of what you actually affirm as monotheistic.


Bobby: Wrong again, Steve. Since I do NOT know for sure what your theology may actually be, I place the word **IF** in the questions to narrow things down, so that you don't any wiggle room to try and side step an issue.


Steve: "more than" precludes quantitativeness which the term 'Elohim' trancends. You are a Gentile who does not understand not only the Hebrew bible, but Hebrew religion. This is the problem when Gentiles get a hold of the Jewish Scriptures and mangle them to death. It is like Occidentals telling Chinese how to interpret Confucian texts, without knowing or understanding completely the Chinese language. Jews merely laugh at Gentiles who do this. Is it any wonder as to why many Jews won't even consider believing in Jesus? The Church father's also are responsible for Christian Antisemitism through their mangling of the texts ... this culminated in the Holocaust of 6 million Jews. I don't think you really know what you really want to believe.


Bobby: I know very well what I believe. I believe the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine. And, not only do I believe and embrace it, I am quite capable of proclaiming AND defending it against all comers.

STEVE DIDN'T TOUCH ANY OF THE FOLLOWING...

http://www.impact-ministry.com/acts2/trinity.html


50 Reasons why the Bible doesn't mention TRINITYor refer to God as PERSONS.