|
|
Originally posted by Debmey at 2004-2-23 01:39 PM:
all Bibles contain letters of Paul.
where all bibles preach satanic st. paul's trinity doctrine? where? simple question really that needs simple HARDfacts from the bible if theres any :bg:
peace |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since when st paul is satanic..??? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by Seraphim at 2004-2-23 03:43 PM:
Since when st paul is satanic..???
st paul became satanic when he twisted jesus' teachin by sayin hes (jesus) god when hes man. jesus never says hes god yet st paul says hes (jesus) god. the bible never teaches bout trinity yet st paul teaches ONE N ONLY ONE GOD is 3 gods in 1 god. hence the satanism in st paul is exposed. :bg:
peace |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by sonny~~ at 26-2-2004 06:28 PM:
st paul became satanic when he twisted jesus' teachin by sayin hes (jesus) god when hes man. jesus never says hes god yet st paul says hes (jesus) god. the bible never teaches bout trinit ...
how did YOU know???U lived at that time?U saw what happened...??U saw or met St Paul??Then how can u claim that he's satanic?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by Seraphim at 2004-2-26 07:40 PM:
how did YOU know???U lived at that time?U saw what happened...??U saw or met St Paul??Then how can u claim that he's satanic??
the bible dont teach trinity right? otherwise u would find the HARDevidences there right?
n jesus never says hes god right? otherwise u would find the HARDevidences in his teachins right?
nonetheless st paul teaches trinity when the bible never teaches it right? n st paul teaches jesus is god when jesus never says hes god right? hence that makes st paul satanic right? over to u mate :bg:
peace |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
can u recommend a bible devoid of paul's doctrine.
otherwise shut up |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mat Kampong This user has been deleted
|
Originally posted by sonny~~ at 23-202-2004 17:17:
where all bibles preach satanic st. paul's trinity doctrine? where?
Trinity in the Bible
References in the Bible to a Trinity of divine beings are vague, at best.
In Matthew 28:19, we find Jesus telling his disciples to go out and preach to all nations. While the "Great Commission" does make mention of the three persons who later become components of the Trinity, the phrase "...baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" is quite clearly an addition to Biblical text - that is, not the actual words of Jesus - as can be seen by two factors:
Firstly, Baptism in the early Church, as discussed by Paul in his letters, was done only in the name of Jesus; and
Secondly, The "Great Commission" found in the first gospel written, that of Mark, bears no mention of Father, Son and/or Holy Ghost - see Mark 16:15.
The only other reference in the Bible to a Trinity can be found in the Epistle of I John 5:7, Biblical scholars of today, however, have admitted that the phrase "...there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one" is definitely a "later addition" to Biblical test, and it is not found in any of today's versions of the Bible.
Therefore, be seen that the concept of a Trinity of divine beings was not an idea put forth by Jesus or any other prophets of God.
This doctrine, now subscribed to by Christians all over the world, is entirely man-made in origin.
And only Allah knows best! Wallahu A'lam bi As-Sawab!
Wasalaamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa BarakatuH.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
salman This user has been deleted
|
|
Apperently Paul wanted position and recognition among the Romans that he modified Jesus's original teachings. This accomodating feature of sacrificing original believes to suit the powers that be can be seen today when christian evangelists like SFE/dumbey sacrificing their believes to suit the Israelis/jews of today no matter how conflicting they be. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by salman at 2004-3-6 11:33 AM:
Apperently Paul wanted position and recognition among the Romans that he modified Jesus's original teachings. This accomodating feature of sacrificing original believes to suit the powers that be can be seen today when christian evangelists like SFE/dumbey sacrificing their believes to suit the Israelis/jews of today no matter how conflicting they be.
concur
bro deb***sfe has nuthin to lose to be jew luver afterall he wanna be white wannabe. - afterall superdonkey bush is hapless pious terrorist cum rapist jews/israeli/zionists' staunchest supporter :bg:
peace
[ Last edited by sonny~~ on 7-3-2004 at 10:32 AM ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well said Sonny,it's nice to see you again here.:solute: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by salman at 6-3-2004 11:33 AM:
Apperently Paul wanted position and recognition among the Romans that he modified Jesus's original teachings. This accomodating feature of sacrificing original believes to suit the power ...
What people think of Paul?
"...it is...a fact of history that St. Paul and his successors added to,..., or imposed upon, or substituted another doctrine for...the plain...teachings of Jesus..."
H.G. Wells (1866-1946)
"The conversion of Paul was no conversion at all: it was Paul who converted the religion that has raised one man above sin and death into a religion that delivered millions of men so completely into their dominion that their own common nature became a horror to them, and the religious life became a denial of life."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by wira_melayu at 21-5-2005 06:04 AM:
What people think of Paul?
"...it is...a fact of history that St. Paul and his successors added to,..., o ...
I believe that is the opinion Wells and Shaw... but may I know why you believe such opinions to be true?
Why do you believe Wells and Shaw, but not Paul? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this bible is so confusing...
erm... correct me if im wrong...
jesus started the bible?
then supposedly died on the cross.
did he finish the bible?
st paul is the one who wrote the new testament is it?
after reading all the posts above,it seems obvious to me,that this st paul wasnt a very holy man at all.instead satan ni disguise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 23-2-2004 03:17 PM
