3, 7, 12 and 40

Originally posted by divegeester
No. Let's stick to what the author said as referenced by FMF.

So lets get this, you cannot cite a single reference to any one of the alleged hundreds of 'distortions of truth' that you make reference to with regard to restoring the divine name. You cannot tell us on what basis they are as you put it, 'a distortion of truth'. You have not read Jason BeDhunns book and yet you feel compelled to make reference to it in your arguments. Is that the case?

Do you think that shouting from behind FMF is doing you any good?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
So lets get this, you cannot cite a single reference to any one of the alleged hundreds of 'distortions of truth' that you make reference to with regard to restoring the divine name. You cannot tell us on what basis they are as you put it, 'a distortion of truth'. You have not read Jason BeDhunns book and yet you feel compelled to make reference to ...[text shortened]... guments. Is that the case?

Do you think that shouting from behind FMF is doing you nay good?

We've been here before. You repeatedly cite BeDuhn in support of your claim the NWT is the most accurate translation and therefore your teachings are closer to and truer than other Christian churches. Correct? I'm pointing out that I agree with FMFs post where he quotes BeDuhn criticising the NTW for putting the word Jehovah in hundreds of times.

Originally posted by Startreader
Correct. One God, Three Persons, Holy Trinity. Three in One and One in Three.

The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

The parallelism of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is not unique to Matthew’s Gospel, but appears elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., 2 Cor. 13:14, Heb. 9:14), as well as in the writings of the earliest Christians, who clearly understood them in the sense that we do today—that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are three divine persons who are one divine being (God).

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-trinity

Can you tell us how one gets from 'Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.' to 'the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are three divine persons who are one divine being (God)'

because try as I might I cannot see the process of reasoning myself.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
So lets get this, you cannot cite a single reference to any one of the alleged hundreds of 'distortions of truth' that you make reference to with regard to restoring the divine name. You cannot tell us on what basis they are as you put it, 'a distortion of truth'. You have not read Jason BeDhunns book and yet you feel compelled to make reference to ...[text shortened]... guments. Is that the case?

Do you think that shouting from behind FMF is doing you any good?

In what sense do you find Divegeester to be shouting? I see no capital letters, no invective, no attempts to browbeat? Could you perhaps be talking at the mirror? Your own posts, collectively and frequently individually, are fine examples of browbeating though not of shouting.

Why do you say Divegeester shouted from behind FMF? His post merely followed in sequence.

Originally posted by divegeester
We've been here before. You repeatedly cite BeDuhn in support of your claim the NWT is the most accurate translation and therefore your teachings are closer to and truer than other Christian churches. Correct? I'm pointing out that I agree with FMFs post where he quotes BeDuhn criticising the NTW for putting the word Jehovah in hundreds of times.

You have made claims, you will substantiate your claims or retract them . You have claimed that the insertion of the diving name into the New world translation is a distortion of truth, you have failed

1. to provide a single reference of any one of the hundreds of alleged instances that you make reference to
2. you have failed to tell us why a single one of these allegedly hundreds of references that you cannot cite is a distortion of truth

You have cited another reference to support your claims that you have not even read.

If you cannot substantiate your claim why did you make it? do you normally make claims that you cannot substantiate? Do you normally cite references that you have not read?

See when you can substantiate your claims perhaps you will let the forum know because i tell you quite frankly i refuse to battle against your ignorance, it makes you a very tedious man indeed.

Originally posted by Startreader
In what sense do you find Divegeester to be shouting? I see no capital letters, no invective, no attempts to browbeat? Could you perhaps be talking at the mirror? Your own posts, collectively and frequently individually, are fine examples of browbeating though not of shouting.

Why do you say Divegeester shouted from behind FMF? His post merely followed in sequence.

Its a turn of phrase and was not intended to be taken literally,

You may find divesgeester here

http://flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/bigdogmetoo.htm

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Its a turn of phrase and was not intended to be taken literally,

If I could persuade you to be more careful and considerate with your vocabulary and turns of phrase in these forums I would consider it a very good thing for every forum user on RHP, including yourself. Discussions might become much more patient and respectful of each other's views, leading to greater understanding all round.

You have every right to your own beliefs, as does every other person. I can't see that you have the right anywhere to browbeat and effectively bully, which is how you come across, though you may not intend that, although it's actually hard to see how it can be accidental.

Originally posted by Startreader
If I could persuade you to be more careful and considerate with your vocabulary and turns of phrase in these forums I would consider it a very good thing for every forum user on RHP, including yourself. Discussions might become much more patient and respectful of each other's views, leading to greater understanding all round.

You have every right to ...[text shortened]... ss, though you may not intend that, although it's actually hard to see how it can be accidental.

look you have been asked some rather serious questions with regard to your assertions on the trinity, so why don't you practice what you preach and like make reference to them?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

The parallelism of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is not unique to Matthew’s Gospel, but appears elsewhere in the Ne ...[text shortened]... one divine being (God)'

because try as I might I cannot see the process of reasoning myself.

Thank you for pointing out to this forum that I am Catholic, although the discerning will already have guessed that.

I'll be delighted to answer your question, but later, after prayer and consideration, and when the busy day I have ahead of me allows.

Not everyone has the spare time apparently available to you, given the volume and abundance of all your posts everywhere.

Originally posted by Startreader
Thank you for pointing out to this forum that I am Catholic, although the discerning will already have guessed that.

I'll be delighted to answer your question, but later, after prayer and consideration, and when the busy day I have ahead of me allows.

Not everyone has the spare time apparently available to you, given the volume and abundance of all your posts everywhere.

Martha! Martha! 😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

The parallelism of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is not unique to Matthew’s Gospel, but appears elsewhere in the Ne ...[text shortened]... one divine being (God)'

because try as I might I cannot see the process of reasoning myself.

I'm not a trinitarian and never have been, I find is astonishing that after me posting about this for 8 years in threads with you and frequently exchanged between us, that you seem to think I am a trinitarian. Clearly you are either unable or unwilling to read what people post.

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm not a trinitarian and never have been, I find is astonishing that after me posting about this for 8 years in threads with you and frequently exchanged between us, that you seem to think I am a trinitarian. Clearly you are either unable or unwilling to read what people post.

I am unwilling to argue against ignorance and with people who refuse to substantiate their claims.

The post was not directed to you, it was directed to startreader. Please get something correct this morning, anything?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am unwilling to argue against ignorance and with people who refuse to substantiate their claims.

The post was not directed to you, it was directed to startreader. Please get something correct this morning, anything?

It was directed at startreader, my mistake.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am unwilling to argue against ignorance and with people who refuse to substantiate their claims.

The post was not directed to you, it was directed to startreader. Please get something correct this morning, anything?

I support what BeDuhn said in his book about your translation, as pointed out (again) by FMF on the previous page. He is saying that your organisation inserted the word Jehovah hundreds of times to support its doctrinal postion. Do you deny that BeDuhn wrote this?

Originally posted by divegeester
It was directed at startreader, my mistake.

How many fingers am I holding up?