The Trinity

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I don't know why some people consider this heretical. The Biblical record implies that God worked the conception ie that it wasn't a natural conception. This gives rise to whether born of a woman means the same thing as being born. I believe it is reasonable to consider "born of a woman" to mean the whole process of fertilization, getation and birth.

Jesus went on to say the least in the Kingdom was greater than John and Jesus is a mainstay of the Kingdom.

Only two remark that, with varying genealogies in them. Mark and John however skip the births, and even the accounts of the finding of the disciples varies in John compared to the other synoptic.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Only two remark that, with varying genealogies in them. Mark and John however skip the births, and even the accounts of the finding of the disciples varies in John compared to the other synoptic.

Hi, Frank

I haven't posted on this thread for a while, so I don't know how "Muffled"s post relates to what you just said. Never mind -- I'm not interested. I am interested in genealogy, though. Matthew provides a genealogy of Jesus that descends from Joseph and his father Jacob, of the royal Davidic line. Mark, on the other hand, provides one that descends from Joseph and his father Heli, which descends of from David through Nathan (completely non-royal). Mary, according to early Christian tradition, was the daughter of Anna and Joachim -- neither of whose ancestry is known, but who definitely had a Cohenic connection.

In the first chapter of Romans, Paul describes Jesus as

Rom 1
[3] Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

also,

2 Tim 2
[8] Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

John 7
[42] Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?

Jeremiah cursed the Solomonic line:

Jer 22
[30] Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.

If Joseph's line through Jacob, therefore, were his NATURAL line, Jesus would not have been a legitimate heir to the throne. On the other hand, if Joseph did not have an ADOPTED line through Jacob (and hence through Solomon & the kings), his messiahship could have been open to question. Because of this, I believe that Jacob was Joseph's ADOPTIVE father, Heli was Joseph's NATURAL father, and Joseph was Jesus' NATURAL father -- howbeit by miraculous means.

 

[OmoJesude]

The Doctrine of Trinity is not a complex,the word Trinity is implied in the scriptures and like other Doctrines.It was first declared by the Father and the founder of the Church,Christ Jesus 1. at His baptism,Christ was present,Holy Spirit descended,and God spoke! 2. when Christ Jesus was giving the last instruction to His elected disciples,He declared the three names,Father ,Son,Holy Spirit.Latter Apostel John by the Holy Spirit throwned more light.So,what is the big deal?why do you have two,three names and you answer when your father's name is pronounced,you are three persons in one,you have body,soul and spirit,we are tripatite,3in 1 you are! So,Trinity is God in 3 offices,He is God He changes not,He manifested through Christ functionally,His Spirit is also at work.

 

[Shermana]

Matthew 28:19's divine formula is most likely an interpolation, and was originally just "In my name", as stated before numerous times.

 

[sojourner]

This is post #2045 in a thread devoted to wrapping our minds around what is too big for us to fully comprehend. No one has yet to definitively show that God cannot be one God, yet three Persons. No one has yet to definitively show that posing God as a trinity is in any way fallacious or dangerous. the thread's been active for nearly 4 years, and the original poster is banned. One really has to begin to wonder: What's the point???!!!

 

[OmoJesude]

This is post #2045 in a thread devoted to wrapping our minds around what is too big for us to fully comprehend. No one has yet to definitively show that God cannot be one God, yet three Persons. No one has yet to definitively show that posing God as a trinity is in any way fallacious or dangerous. the thread's been active for nearly 4 years, and the original poster is banned. One really has to begin to wonder: What's the point???!!!

It is a very simple thing,you have a father,you bear his name as surname that you may be called becos you carry his gene in your body.
Jesus Christ has same essence with God ,He is Jesus Christ ,Son of God,He operates by the Spirit of God in Him.God ,Spirit,Son ,thesame God and one God in three offices.

 

[Shermana]

Matthew 28:19's divine formula is most likely an interpolation, and was originally just "In my name", as stated before numerous times.

It is a very simple thing,you have a father,you bear his name as surname that you may be called becos you carry his gene in your body.
Jesus Christ has same essence with God ,He is Jesus Christ ,Son of God,He operates by the Spirit of God in Him.God ,Spirit,Son ,thesame God and one God in three offices.

Why does Jesus have the "Same essence" but not the Angels? Aren't they all "Elohim"?

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Why does Jesus have the "Same essence" but not the Angels? Aren't they all "Elohim"?

Hi, Shermana

I knew I'd find you if I went bar-crawling. You just can't stay out of a doctrinal donnybrook, can you? After you're through rubbing the low-lifes in their own vomit here, please come back home. We have some good, honest scriptural debates waiting for you on the table.

L'hitra'ot

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Hi, Frank

I haven't posted on this thread for a while, so I don't know how "Muffled"s post relates to what you just said. Never mind -- I'm not interested. I am interested in genealogy, though. Matthew provides a genealogy of Jesus that descends from Joseph and his father Jacob, of the royal Davidic line. Mark, on the other hand, provides one that descends from Joseph and his father Heli, which descends of from David through Nathan (completely non-royal). Mary, according to early Christian tradition, was the daughter of Anna and Joachim -- neither of whose ancestry is known, but who definitely had a Cohenic connection.

In the first chapter of Romans, Paul describes Jesus as

Rom 1
[3] Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

also,

2 Tim 2
[8] Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

John 7
[42] Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?

Jeremiah cursed the Solomonic line:

Jer 22
[30] Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.

If Joseph's line through Jacob, therefore, were his NATURAL line, Jesus would not have been a legitimate heir to the throne. On the other hand, if Joseph did not have an ADOPTED line through Jacob (and hence through Solomon & the kings), his messiahship could have been open to question. Because of this, I believe that Jacob was Joseph's ADOPTIVE father, Heli was Joseph's NATURAL father, and Joseph was Jesus' NATURAL father -- howbeit by miraculous means.

I'm surprised that Jeremiah would go so far to curse the Solomon line, given what the Prophet Nathan had said to David Concerning that line.

 

[sojourner]

It is a very simple thing,you have a father,you bear his name as surname that you may be called becos you carry his gene in your body.
Jesus Christ has same essence with God ,He is Jesus Christ ,Son of God,He operates by the Spirit of God in Him.God ,Spirit,Son ,thesame God and one God in three offices.

That's not what the doctrine states. The doctrine states that they are one being, not "sharing the same 'essence'."

I simply don't understand why people have such a problem with that concept.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

I'm surprised that Jeremiah would go so far to curse the Solomon line, given what the Prophet Nathan had said to David Concerning that line.

If you want to search out the matter, you're welcome to it. For me, I'm satisfied that one line was natural and the other adopted. I can't say which was which, because the scriptures don't say. I have heard objections by Jews that Jesus could not have been the legitimate Messiah because he descended from the kingly line (because of Jeremiah's curse). On the other hand, I'm sure there would be objections if he had NOT descended from that line. The second line through Natan ben David makes both arguments moot.

Concerning Joseph's line, Trinitarians say Joseph adopted Jesus; but that Jesus was in fact God's natural son. Adoptionists (including me) say the reverse: that he is Joseph's natural son, but God's adopted son. As ridiculous as this sounds, seeing that God is not flesh and blood, let us take the Trinitarian line for a moment: If Jesus were God's natural son, then Paul would have said that Jesus was descended from God in the flesh, not from David. It's so absurd: Jesus was a human being; so he had yDNA -- essentially the same yDNA as his brothers James and Jude, who were, like Jesus, of the seed of David.

Here's a curious situation, which I have never heard talked about here. After Jesus ascended into heaven, his brother James became the acknowledged leader of the church. When James died, Jude took his place. This Davidic line, the δεσπόσυνοι, would have served as NATURAL messiahs in Jesus' "kingdom" if he indeed wanted to establish that sort of kingdom. As it turned out, the δεσπόσυνοι were all eliminated, one by one, some say deliberately so just such a kingdom would not come about. The fact that the church CHOSE James, then Jude, as their leader, however, strongly suggests that the church reckoned Jesus' Messianic legitimacy to have come through Joseph. If his legitimacy were purely through the "Holy Spirit", then Peter, Jesus' SPIRITUAL heir, would have gotten the top spot.

 

[sojourner]

If you want to search out the matter, you're welcome to it. For me, I'm satisfied that one line was natural and the other adopted. I can't say which was which, because the scriptures don't say. I have heard objections by Jews that Jesus could not have been the legitimate Messiah because he descended from the kingly line (because of Jeremiah's curse). On the other hand, I'm sure there would be objections if he had NOT descended from that line. The second line through Natan ben David makes both arguments moot.

Concerning Joseph's line, Trinitarians say Joseph adopted Jesus; but that Jesus was in fact God's natural son. Adoptionists (including me) say the reverse: that he is Joseph's natural son, but God's adopted son. As ridiculous as this sounds, seeing that God is not flesh and blood, let us take the Trinitarian line for a moment: If Jesus were God's natural son, then Paul would have said that Jesus was descended from God in the flesh, not from David. It's so absurd: Jesus was a human being; so he had yDNA -- essentially the same yDNA as his brothers James and Jude, who were, like Jesus, of the seed of David.

Here's a curious situation, which I have never heard talked about here. After Jesus ascended into heaven, his brother James became the acknowledged leader of the church. When James died, Jude took his place. This Davidic line, the δεσπόσυνοι, would have served as NATURAL messiahs in Jesus' "kingdom" if he indeed wanted to establish that sort of kingdom. As it turned out, the δεσπόσυνοι were all eliminated, one by one, some say deliberately so just such a kingdom would not come about. The fact that the church CHOSE James, then Jude, as their leader, however, strongly suggests that the church reckoned Jesus' Messianic legitimacy to have come through Joseph. If his legitimacy were purely through the "Holy Spirit", then Peter, Jesus' SPIRITUAL heir, would have gotten the top spot.

Here's something interesting to chew on: The bible consistently contraindicates primogeniture, or the passing of authority to the eldest son. Isaac was not the eldest son of Abraham, and Jacob was not the eldest son of Isaac. Nor was Joseph the eldest son of Jacob. Nor did Joseph bless the eldest at the end of Genesis. In Matthew's genealogy, we find three women listed: Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth. Tamar was raped and, therefore, unclean. Rahab was a prostitute. Ruth was a foreigner. Three candidates that make Jesus' lineage "questionable" from a bloodline POV. The lineages are theologically, not historically-driven.

 

[kjw47]

The Doctrine of Trinity is not a complex,the word Trinity is implied in the scriptures and like other Doctrines.It was first declared by the Father and the founder of the Church,Christ Jesus 1. at His baptism,Christ was present,Holy Spirit descended,and God spoke! 2. when Christ Jesus was giving the last instruction to His elected disciples,He declared the three names,Father ,Son,Holy Spirit.Latter Apostel John by the Holy Spirit throwned more light.So,what is the big deal?why do you have two,three names and you answer when your father's name is pronounced,you are three persons in one,you have body,soul and spirit,we are tripatite,3in 1 you are! So,Trinity is God in 3 offices,He is God He changes not,He manifested through Christ functionally,His Spirit is also at work.

If God changes not--- The Israelites including Moses, David, Elijah, Daniel, Job, etc all served the true almighty God--every Israelite who ever served the true almighty God served YHWH( Jehovah) a single being God---- Jesus serves him as well-John 20:17. rev 3:12, 1 cor 15:24-28)--- You were correct God changes not--He is still YHWH( Jehovah) a single being God--- the great apostasy made up a trinity god and confused the world into 32,000 different religions claiming to be Christian, but this is their reality-2 cor 11:12-15) the trinity translators made many errors to fit their false teachings in their translations.

 

[sojourner]

If God changes not--- The Israelites including Moses, David, Elijah, Daniel, Job, etc all served the true almighty God--every Israelite who ever served the true almighty God served YHWH( Jehovah) a single being God---- Jesus serves him as well-John 20:17. rev 3:12, 1 cor 15:24-28)--- You were correct God changes not--He is still YHWH( Jehovah) a single being God--- the great apostasy made up a trinity god and confused the world into 32,000 different religions claiming to be Christian, but this is their reality-2 cor 11:12-15) the trinity translators made many errors to fit their false teachings in their translations.

Nothing about God has changed. The word (which became flesh -- which was God) was with God in the beginning.

There was no "great apostasy," just as there was not a parousia in the first generation of the church. The church has always had diverse manifestations and and opinions. Since God is multifaceted, the church must, likewise, be multifaceted.

 

[icebuddy]

Icebuddy, you're simply repeating yourself and not even attempting to address my counter-arguments and links that I've provided and shown you each time

i dont think you responded to all my points ether... As for Web pages, I am not here for you to redirect me to some web page. There are 1000's upon 1000's of web pages with Anti-everything including anti-WTBS, anti-JW, anti-whatever you believe and more. Im here to talk/type to you reasons that I see from scripture on why I believe as well as others. To sit behind my desk and list web pages is a waste of my time. I have to work and I have to do this on my free time. For someone to say its all been hashed out in my prior posts is absurd to me... Why you might say? Well, because I could simply say, its been all hashed out when your belief was deemed a heretic 1000's of years ago...

"The Rock" in Cor 10:4, if anything that verse demonstrates Philo's Logos Theology by indicating that Jesus was the vehicle doing God's work

Jesus is not just a vehicle, he is Gods Eternal Word made flesh. Ask yourself a few simple questions: How do you view the angel of the Lord in the OT? Then see that he was Worshiped, Called Jehovah, talked as God, and not just thought of as a vehicle by all the OT prophets.(They Treated him as Jehovah)

and the title of the Book of Revelation was given much later, it actually has several different titles, and you're blatantly ignoring what verse 1:1 specifically says.

Im not ignoring anything, Im the only one looking at it and seeing whats going on. Its like Jesus coming with a loud shout, with the voice of an arch-angel. When we read the whole bible we see that Jesus will becoming with angels and in every case Jesus doesnt do the shouting, his angel that are with him shout. Yet JW people and alike will continue to this day to say that Jesus is the one with the voice of the arch angel.(Making Jesus and Archangel) All of this and Jesus is the Word of God, the voice of God... Yet you dont see Jesus as God because he has his voice or his Word or even his Trumpet... Talk about wild thinking... Im a Free Thinking Person who has prayerfully opened my heart to the Holy Spirit who guides believers into all of Gods truths. (Not Web Sites)

And Revelation 22:13 is not Jesus talking!

I would say that too if I believed as you do... But it is clear to me that Jesus is the one coming and is Gods image and Gods word. When God Almighty comes, you will see Jesus as his Image that we can see and worship... If we were reading a novel and in it it said

Behold I am Coming soon, and I will give those what they deserve. I am a bad dude, they refer to me as the Alpha Dog. Blessed are those who wait and stay good to me, but woe to the dogs outside that dont. For, I Big John have sent you a message ahead of time. Dont forget, Im coming. Come Big John

Would you then see someone else speaking as Alpha Dog then Bad John? The only reason you believe Jesus isnt talking at Rev 22:13 when we read Alpha and Omega is because you have already said in your heart that Jesus is NOT GOD and in your mind only God is called ALPHA and OMEGA. Even though all through scriptures (Gods Word) we read that Jesus is God Visible Image, expressing God fully, to see Jesus is to see God, and Gods Eternal Word... What I might ask is who do you think we are going to see upon this return?

So is this what you believe at Rev 1:1: That The Father gave Jesus something, in whom then passes it along to an angel, who then passes it to John?

Each of these issues I've been over with you, rather than trying to argue against them, you simply repeat your initial assertions each time!

You also keep saying the same things, are you not? Im trying to show you in many different angels (like above), you can say things, but the truth will be found out. Keep Knocking and you will get an answer.

I also said that "Just as" does not mean "Exactly in the same manner", otherwise you are expected to be merciful "just as" God is.

All you are doing is playing word games in my opinion. Your using English variants to fudge here and there. Dont believe me or the WTBS or who ever... Ask Jesus and the Holy Spirit will show you

I am not denying Jesus worship, I am saying that other beings are worshiped too. To honor Jesus "just as" God is worshiped does not mean that they are the same being.

Thats the difference between Oneness Pentecostals(one being) and Trinitarian's(3 Beings)

a simple challenge. We ask God to arbitrate with a result in the very near future, which of us is speaking the Truth and which of us is pushing lies.

Not following you completely on this. Explain more

Aren't you interested in saving my soul?

I cant save you, only Jesus can. But, I know he loves you and He cares and so do I.

Basically, if you don't want to actually address what I said

First off, what specific thing do you want me to address? I saw a post of a bunch of thoughts, but I cant argue ones thoughts...

 

[icebuddy]

The Israelite teachers were looking for the messiah to be their king--not God. The greek word proskenau had 4 meanings from greek to English--1) worship to God, 2) obeisance to a king, plus 2 others-- so in usage for the messiah--obeisance is the correct usage.

Do what you want, but when Im worshiping God, i would be worshiping his Image that he gave to us.(Jesus) To try to separate the two (Father/Son) at your time of worship is crazy. To you Father, Everything... But to you Jesus, just a little less... (CRAZY to me) In Shermana's last post to me, he said he worships Jesus... I wonder His thought vs Yours or are we playing word games here...

The trinity translators erred to fit Catholicism council false teachings--many errors occurred in their translations. carried into every trinity based religion on this earth.

What ever you believe, and I'm NOT Catholic... God used them as a vehicle for his word and to preserve his word for many years that we even have a bible to look at today. Many Catholics are with Jesus today that loved him...

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Here's something interesting to chew on: The bible consistently contraindicates primogeniture, or the passing of authority to the eldest son. Isaac was not the eldest son of Abraham, and Jacob was not the eldest son of Isaac. Nor was Joseph the eldest son of Jacob. Nor did Joseph bless the eldest at the end of Genesis. In Matthew's genealogy, we find three women listed: Tamar, Rahab, and Ruth. Tamar was raped and, therefore, unclean. Rahab was a prostitute. Ruth was a foreigner. Three candidates that make Jesus' lineage "questionable" from a bloodline POV. The lineages are theologically, not historically-driven.

Your facts are correct, but I don't see how you come to your conclusion.

 

[sojourner]

Your facts are correct, but I don't see how you come to your conclusion.

Can you be more specific about your confusion?

 

[Shermana]

i dont think you responded to all my points ether...

Which ones.

As for Web pages, I am not here for you to redirect me to some web page. There are 1000's upon 1000's of web pages with Anti-everything including anti-WTBS, anti-JW, anti-whatever you believe and more.

So you're saying I'm not allowed to use web pages to back up what I'm saying?

Im here to talk/type to you reasons that I see from scripture on why I believe as well as others.

That's great, I'm here to type about my reasons too, and to show that I'm far from alone on these issues and that if you simply dismiss and brush off my views, it doesn't work like that. I actually have reason to brush off yours that are backed with scholarly reasons/

To sit behind my desk and list web pages is a waste of my time. I have to work and I have to do this on my free time.

Translation: You don't want to use sources to back your claims or to debunk mine.

For someone to say its all been hashed out in my prior posts is absurd to me...

Maybe because I've been over all these issues with you several times and you come back on each thread like I've never backed up my case before.

Why you might say? Well, because I could simply say, its been all hashed out when your belief was deemed a heretic 1000's of years ago...

Nothing remotely comparable. Deemed a heretic by who? Your own beliefs were deemed heretical 500 years ago.

Jesus is not just a vehicle, he is Gods Eternal Word made flesh. Ask yourself a few simple questions: How do you view the angel of the Lord in the OT? Then see that he was Worshiped, Called Jehovah, talked as God, and not just thought of as a vehicle by all the OT prophets.(They Treated him as Jehovah)

The Angel of the LORD may in fact be the Incarnation of the Logos. Being the messenger who speaks for Him, (The "Word") it is appropriate to address Him as if one was addressing the One who sent him. They are still not the same being.

Im not ignoring anything, Im the only one looking at it and seeing whats going on.

No you aren't.

Its like Jesus coming with a loud shout, with the voice of an arch-angel. When we read the whole bible we see that Jesus will becoming with angels and in every case Jesus doesnt do the shouting, his angel that are with him shout. Yet JW people and alike will continue to this day to say that Jesus is the one with the voice of the arch angel.(Making Jesus and Archangel) All of this and Jesus is the Word of God, the voice of God... Yet you dont see Jesus as God because he has his voice or his Word or even his Trumpet... Talk about wild thinking... Im a Free Thinking Person who has prayerfully opened my heart to the Holy Spirit who guides believers into all of Gods truths. (Not Web Sites)

Jesus having Angels does not mean he isn't among the beings called "gods". You most certainly do not have the Spirit guiding you. The Spirit guides TRUE believers. Not just everyone who claims to be one. And I'll risk eternal damnation with that assertion. I also believe those who falsely assert to have the Spirit guiding them are blaspheming it. But that's another subject.

I would say that too if I believed as you do... But it is clear to me that Jesus is the one coming and is Gods image and Gods word. When God Almighty comes, you will see Jesus as his Image that we can see and worship... If we were reading a novel and in it it said

I will worship Yeshu when he arrives in the flesh just as I would worship King David. It says the Disciples themselves will be bowed down to by the gentiles in Revelation.

Would you then see someone else speaking as Alpha Dog then Bad John? The only reason you believe Jesus isnt talking at Rev 22:13 when we read Alpha and Omega is because you have already said in your heart that Jesus is NOT GOD and in your mind only God is called ALPHA and OMEGA.

This is what I'm talking about when you brush aside my links clearly backing my view and then say that it's just me personally. Maybe it's you who wants to believe it's Jesus because you already said in your heart. Basically your tactic is to handwave away the links and reasons and make it a personal issue. I can do that too.

Even though all through scriptures (Gods Word) we read that Jesus is God Visible Image, expressing God fully, to see Jesus is to see God, and Gods Eternal Word... What I might ask is who do you think we are going to see upon this return?

We are going to see Yeshu, as the Messenger, and he's going to show Trinitarians and Modalists that they are blasphemously wrong, especially the Anitmonians.

So is this what you believe at Rev 1:1: That The Father gave Jesus something, in whom then passes it along to an angel, who then passes it to John?

That is correct.

You also keep saying the same things, are you not? Im trying to show you in many different angels (like above), you can say things, but the truth will be found out. Keep Knocking and you will get an answer.

I have gotten an answer. You just think you have.

All you are doing is playing word games in my opinion. Your using English variants to fudge here and there. Dont believe me or the WTBS or who ever... Ask Jesus and the Holy Spirit will show you

All you are doing is completely ignoring my reasons and calling it word games and fudging when it's you who isn't even going by a discussion on the Greek.

Thats the difference between Oneness Pentecostals(one being) and Trinitarian's(3 Beings)

No, Trinitarians believe it's one being in "3 persons", almost the same thing but a bit different.

Not following you completely on this. Explain more

When I deal with people who fallaciously brush aside my arguments and insist they are right and I am wrong or claim the Spirit or double down on their assertions and don't acknowledge my points, I ask them to join me in a prayer for the one preaching heresy to be put in a position where they can't do so. I do believe it works.

I cant save you, only Jesus can. But, I know he loves you and He cares and so do I.

He sure does. He even makes known to me certain things but that's another story!

First off, what specific thing do you want me to address? I saw a post of a bunch of thoughts, but I cant argue ones thoughts..

For example, look how you completely brushed aside my arguments on why Jesus isn't the one speaking in Rev 23:13. You accuse me of playing "Word games" when I point out your interpretation is not right. You are not debating, you are dismissing and denying and handwaving.

 

[kjw47]

Do what you want, but when Im worshiping God, i would be worshiping his Image that he gave to us.(Jesus) To try to separate the two (Father/Son) at your time of worship is crazy. To you Father, Everything... But to you Jesus, just a little less... (CRAZY to me) In Shermana's last post to me, he said he worships Jesus... I wonder His thought vs Yours or are we playing word games here...



What ever you believe, and I'm NOT Catholic... God used them as a vehicle for his word and to preserve his word for many years that we even have a bible to look at today. Many Catholics are with Jesus today that loved him...

It takes more than one thinking they have love-- these have bet their lives that they had love for Jesus-Matt 7:21-23-- but in reality did not--because Jesus taught ones proof of love for him was to listen to him--that would take--learning every truth from Jesus, applying those truths in their everyday lives--sharing Jesus: truths== so one can love, do all kinds of wonderful works in Jesus name, but if they did not listen to his truths--they lose.
But still trinity translations are filled with errors contradicting Jesus' truths--How can one learn Gods will and worship him in spirit and truth out of error teachings?