Zakuska Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) Amos 410 I have sent among you the pestilence after the manner of Egypt: your young men have I slain with the sword, and have taken away your horses; and I have made the stink of your camps to come up unto your nostrils: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the LORD.11 I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the LORD.Here YHWH (or God) declares that some God other them himself destroyed Sodom and Gommorrah.This gives much support for the 2 YHWH reading of...Genesis 19:2424 Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven, Let the Game of Twister begin...! Edited September 2, 2011 by Zakuska
BCSpace Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Not a fair question for trinitarians Zak. To them, "God" is an abstraction that permeates the Father and the Son (and the HG).
Zakuska Posted September 2, 2011 Author Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) Not a fair question for trinitarians Zak. To them, "God" is an abstraction that permeates the Father and the Son (and the HG).Its even less fair for Evanglicals that pester us to death with...Isaiah 43:1010 Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. Does he know of any other Gods or not? Becuase he just confessed that He didn't destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. Edited September 2, 2011 by Zakuska
BCSpace Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Its even less fair for Evanglicals that pester us to death with...Isaiah 43:10But if they were smart, they would see that the context of the Isa 40-45 set is "Gods created for them to worship".
ebeddoulos Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 But if they were smart, they would see that the context of the Isa 40-45 set is "Gods created for them to worship".You are absolutely correct of course. Still, that is one B I G if.
Rob Bowman Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Zakuska,You wrote:Amos 410 I have sent among you the pestilence after the manner of Egypt: your young men have I slain with the sword, and have taken away your horses; and I have made the stink of your camps to come up unto your nostrils: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the LORD.11 I have overthrown some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and ye were as a firebrand plucked out of the burning: yet have ye not returned unto me, saith the LORD.Here YHWH (or God) declares that some God other them himself destroyed Sodom and Gommorrah.This gives much support for the 2 YHWH reading of...Genesis 19:2424 Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven, Let the Game of Twister begin...!Perhaps you are unaware of the fact that Trinitarians commonly cite Genesis 19:24 as an example of an OT text that hints at the plurality of divine persons bearing the name Yahweh. This is indeed an "interesting verse for Trinitarians," but not one which requires us to "play Twister." The same may be said for Amos 4:10-11.
Rob Bowman Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 BCSpace,You wrote:Not a fair question for trinitarians Zak. To them, "God" is an abstraction that permeates the Father and the Son (and the HG).I am going to start a new thread about this statement.
Zakuska Posted September 2, 2011 Author Posted September 2, 2011 Perhaps you are unaware of the fact that Trinitarians commonly cite Genesis 19:24 as an example of an OT text that hints at the plurality of divine persons bearing the name Yahweh. Yes Im very aware of that Rob.
Nemesis Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Is this a thread about trinitarianism or is it an anti-trinitarianism thread? Lets make sure the tone of this thread is kept in the spirit of the board or we will shut it down.Nemesis
Zakuska Posted September 2, 2011 Author Posted September 2, 2011 Not Anit-Trinitarian It would just be intresting to watch Trinitarians try and wiggle out of this one.
Calm Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) Not Anit-Trinitarian It would just be intresting to watch Trinitarians try and wiggle out of this one.FWIW, my POVis that, Zak, the assumption that Trinitarians will only be able to "try and wiggle out" and that this is entertainment to you rather than address the issue with rational thought and discourse seems to have the tone of "anti-Trinitarianism" to me. This may not be your intent, but your challenge comes across like you are on the playground telling them their snowballs will never take out your fort, not attempting to promote understanding or even civil disagreement.If I was a Trinitarian, even if I had the best answer in the world, I wouldn't respond, wouldn't think it was worth the effort. Edited September 2, 2011 by calmoriah 1
Zakuska Posted September 2, 2011 Author Posted September 2, 2011 FWIW, my POVis that, Zak, the assumption that Trinitarians will only be able to "try and wiggle out" and that this is entertainment to you rather than address the issue with rational thought and discourse seems to have the tone of "anti-Trinitarianism" to me. This may not be your intent, but your challenge comes across like you are on the playground telling them their snowballs will never take out your fort, not attempting to promote understanding or even civil disagreement.If I was a Trinitarian, even if I had the best answer in the world, I wouldn't respond, wouldn't think it was worth the effort.Well I see your point... maybe this thread was a
Calm Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 Well I see your point... maybe this thread was a You are a good man, Zak, I know you get excited about scriptures and such and sometimes even positive comments may throw people who don't know how you talk, I think this took it just too far in this case.
Zakuska Posted September 2, 2011 Author Posted September 2, 2011 You are a good man, Zak, I know you get excited about scriptures and such and sometimes even positive comments may throw people who don't know how you talk, I think this took it just too far in this case.Thanks Cal. I just get too wound up sometimes posting on other boards where you are always on the defensive.
BCSpace Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 Is this a thread about trinitarianism or is it an anti-trinitarianism threadThe LDS Church itself is antitrinitarian. Not people themselves, but the creed.
saemo Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 (edited) FWIW, my POVis that, Zak, the assumption that Trinitarians will only be able to "try and wiggle out" and that this is entertainment to you rather than address the issue with rational thought and discourse seems to have the tone of "anti-Trinitarianism" to me. This may not be your intent, but your challenge comes across like you are on the playground telling them their snowballs will never take out your fort, not attempting to promote understanding or even civil disagreement.If I was a Trinitarian, even if I had the best answer in the world, I wouldn't respond, wouldn't think it was worth the effort.Mocking the God who Christians worship doesn't do much for the "LDS are Christians" mantra, I will say that. Edited September 3, 2011 by saemo 1
Flyonthewall Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 Mocking the God who Christians worship doesn't do much for the "LDS are Christians" mantra, I will say that.Catholics and Protestants alike, mocking Jesus the Christ, whom LDS worship, does nothing for their self proclaimation of being Christian either.
ldsfaqs Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 Mocking the God who Christians worship doesn't do much for the "LDS are Christians" mantra, I will say that.It's mocking the ideology that is clearly non-Biblical. That is all.You must also understand that LDS are beaten over the head all the time on these subjects, thus it's not unreasonable for their to be a little emotion "back at them" in relation to their claims and theology.
Calm Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 You must also understand that LDS are beaten over the head all the time on these subjects, thus it's not unreasonable for their to be a little emotion "back at them" in relation to their claims and theology.Not unreasonable but a lot of aggression is reasonable but still undesirable (it is reasonable for a parent to want to beat up a kid who has beaten up their own child, but most of us would say it was inappropriate), but it does perpetuate the cycle in my opinion and tends to drive away those who do not mock and make an effort at civil discourse from what I've seen (such posters have often stated in telling why they are posting less or not at all that it is due to being tired of the mocking of their own sacred beliefs).
BCSpace Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 Mocking the God who Christians worship doesn't do much for the "LDS are Christians" mantra, I will say that.It's mocking the ideology that is clearly non-Biblical. That is all.That is correct. For example, last I checked, JS-H 1:19 is still scripture.
etana Posted September 4, 2011 Posted September 4, 2011 Mocking the God who Christians worship doesn't do much for the "LDS are Christians" mantra, I will say that.agreed.
Recommended Posts