The only reference I see that you have given in response to my question is a NIV study encyclopedia. Is that what you are referring to as Christ's own Gospel? Rather than ranting, please show some patience. Take me by the hand and guide me to your source. Remember, for he who knocks, the door shall be opened...
Willy he already answered you that the word "trinity" is not in the Bible. He also said that the "Trinity" is spoken about in the Bible from the Old to the New testaments, not as a word, but the concept or understanding, that is why the word is used. (Something tells me I just wasted time typing and that 2 or 3 will come back to me trying to take apart what I just wrote... oh well. 2+2 still equals 4 in my book, so don't tell me it is 97)
@debunked - still waiting to find out about these mysterious 'gospels' he references. Now, he could a) provide reference to same, or b) say that he misspoke, or c) continue to spew vitriol in an effort to divert. Options a & b would, it seems to me, be the most appropriate if we are to have a civil discussion. Then we could get on to a discussion of Arius, Alexander of Alexandria, Constantine and the Council of Nicea, where the doctrine of the Trinity was formally adopted by the church.
It is not possible to have a civil discussion with someone that keeps asking the same question over and over again when they do not get an answer they like or agree with. A question as we asked. An answer provided. This happened several times. I'm getting kinda bored. Maybe its time to unsubscribe from this thread and others where you continually seek to bait me for what reason? God only knows. Probably the same reason that every yahoo that comes along and wanders in here does. It's getting quite old. What really bothers you guys more? The fact that I actually have the ability to think for myself, or that I will not take the bait?
I think he is purposely trying to pretend he didn't get an answer. Maybe he is stuck on semantics and no one else can tell???
Let's look at this exchange in sequence and see who is playing semantics. Mia states, " the term 'Trinity' post dates the 'Bible' and no, it is NOT mentioned in the 'Bible'. It IS however mentioned in the 'Gospels' of Jesus Christ himself." I ask, "What are you calling the 'Gospels' of Jesus Christ himself?" Mia responds, "'Gospel' is the 'Gospel'. It is not the 'Bible'. Two different books." Now, this response dismays me, since it flies in the face of any commonly accepted use of the term "Gospel". I provide two sources defining the term "Gospel" and ask, "Can you please direct me to where I can find the 'Gospel' you are talking about?" (Please note, at this point the only reference Mia has been able to provide is a link to a long scholarly dissertation on the term trinity in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia - a passage that does not make any reference to alternative definitions of the term "Gospel", let alone anything to support Mia's assertion that the "Bible' and the "Gospels" are "two different books.") In response, Mia highlights the word "generally" (actually "shouts" it) in my referenced quotation defining the term "gospel". This only reinforces the idea that there must be some alternative use of the term "Gospel" - one beyond the admitedly narrow definition I had provided. So, I ask Mia to define his terms - "What is the meaning of the term "Gospel"? Where can one find this definition?" At this point Mia asks that the thread be brought back on topic, and suggests I should be banned - a rather strong response I thought. Given that the assertion of some alternative form of "Gospel" still stands undefended and unsupported, I again ask, " What definition of 'Gospel' are you using?" In response Mia talks about the bible (Old and New Testaments), and his own beliefs, but the only reference he makes to my question about "Gospels" is, "I believe that concept is derived later in Christs Gospels..." Again, this suggests that there is some alternative use of the term "Gospels" being used, even though repeated attempts to clarify Mia's use of the term have been unsuccessful. So, I ask again, "Yet, I don't know what other 'book' you might be reffering to, and you have yet to answer that question." At this point debunked comes in to state, "he already answered you that the word 'trinity' is not in the Bible." But this, of course, does not answer the question about this use of the term "Gospel". Now, I will admit that I am not all that familiar with the Apocrypha. For instance, there are at least 28 "books" mentioned in scripture that do not appear in the Bible, including the Book of Jasher, Book of Enoch, Book of Jehu, etc. There are also the documents known as the Nag Hammadi Library which contains a number of Gnostic writings, including The Gospel of Truth, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Philip, the Gospel of the Egyptians and the Gospel of Mary. In the beginning, it was quite possible that Mia was using any one of these sources for his assertion that the trinity, "IS however mentioned in the 'Gospels' of Jesus Christ himself." Were that the case, this could have been a very interesting discussion indeed! Instead, based on the lack of thoughtful discourse, I conclude the original claims made by Mia are totally unsupported, and quite likely nothing more than an ill thought out opinion being proclaimed as fact. Further, I find that the ranting, insulting tirades that flowed in response to legitimate questions can only reflect on the character of the author, and perhaps his defenders? I will allow either you, debunked, or you, Mia to have the last word, since I think the point has been well made by now.
I think its just a duplicate account of one of the many people here I have on ignore. The calling card and attention to off topic drivel is uncanny at best. I mean what else could it be? When I asked if he was stoned I ended up with an infraction... I only asked because my stoner friends tend to ask me the same question over and over again too. Maybe its one of the mods kids?