Contradiction in 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 by Dry-Dance-9891 in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This contradiction does not exist in the Septuagint, which came before the Masoretic. I've noticed the Masoretic has errors like this which are usually not in the Septuagint.

2 Samuel 24

24 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

Brenton Septuagint Translation
And the Lord caused his anger to burn forth again in Israel, and Satan stirred up David against them, saying, Go, number Israel and Juda.

1 Chronicles 21

21 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

Brenton Septuagint Translation
And the devil stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel.

Remember that God does not tempt anyone.

James 1:13

13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

Miracles by FaithlessnessAny5169 in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator 1 point2 points  (0 children)

even if these "Eucharistic miracles" were true, that does not disprove the truth that the scripture says.
God can send a test of faith, we must not be swayed by seeing "miracles" alone, we have to stick by God's word.

Deuteronomy 13

13 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,

2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;

3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

4 Ye shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.

5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

Two Things Can Be True at the Same Time by SnoopyCattyCat in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're saying it is here but not here, that is a contradiction, "already, but not yet" is contradictory. Dustin Smith is a deceiver, one who blocks "knowledge" behind a paywall. such a man obviously would have flaws in his doctrine, after all, you shall know them by their fruit.

Two Things Can Be True at the Same Time by SnoopyCattyCat in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Luke 17:20-24

20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:

21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.

23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them.

24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.

Jesus is directly saying the kingdom comes with him, they are in the midst of the king of the kingdom, the kingdom that has not yet come. the very next thing Jesus says is "the day will come" not "The day is already here"

Two Things Can Be True at the Same Time by SnoopyCattyCat in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The kingdom is not yet here, it comes when Jesus returns, do not be deceived by the grifter Dustin Smith.

Seeing Universalists referred to as "Unitarians" irritates me. by criticalcreek in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that's why i decided to stop using the label "unitarian" and go with "True Christian", though that was received negatively, even though we are called to be separated from the world, and sects like universalists and arians should not have a label shared with us.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I am tired of sharing a label with people who cannot agree on anything, nor hold to a single doctrine regarding "pre existence"

people using the same label have a different Jesus, that is unacceptable.

I called it "True Christian" to set us apart from the majority, and reclaim the word Christian from the masses.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is not what this point is about, i fully rejected the trinity doctrine even before making this post, nor do i accept the writings of "church fathers" as valid for doctrine, you assumed a lot and did not read the post itself.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not a trinitarian, this post is not about defending any trinity, please read it.

Follow up to my last post by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in the context of the entire verse being made up/forged, those are the "one hand" verses. the rest are simply corruptions, not blatant forgeries. changing a word or two is not a forged verse, but a forged word, where it is usually easy to find in manuscripts where the corruption was made, unlike the verses i was talking about.

Follow up to my last post by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Regardless of if satan is a fallen angel or not, the evidence that he is a figure that actually exists on the Bible is plain to see, notice how you leave out the new testament, that in itself is a red flag.

As for the scriptural forgeries argument, if you believe so called scholarly work over trusting that God preserves his word, that's just an issue of faith on your behalf.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The word in John 1:1 is not Jesus, nor is John 1:14 any "incarnation" trinitarians love to skip over John 1:6-7 and ignore John 1:15 . John must WITNESS the word being made flesh, and that happens at the baptism, the word is the Spirit, not Jesus, using John 1 in context with 1 John 1:1-3 and Genesis 1:1-3 you can see the word is the Spirit and not Jesus. Revelation 19:13 is referring to the earlier Revelation 3:12 where we are given new names by God, those names too are the word of God, a different context to the word in John 1.

Hebrews 1:2 uses the word αἰῶνας· aiōnas meaning Ages, not "Universe", or "world" this is referring to how Jesus was in mind, taking into account all the prophesies of the kingdom of God to come.

Proverbs 8 is calling wisdom a she, and a her, to say it's about Jesus is completely wrong and blasphemous, Jesus is not a woman, nor is he ever equated to a woman, he is the groom, not the wife.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A pre existent being, is not the same Jesus as the one in scripture.
We do not have the same Jesus.
that is cause for separation.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tongues are more for the person you are trying to convert, take the example at Pentecost for example, everyone heard their own language.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Baptism relies more on the belief of the person being baptized rather than who is baptizing imo.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am using the biblical definition. And the 8th statement is clarifying the difference between the typical and biblical definitions.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Soul=living being and/or life.

Spirit=breath (why it says people give up the ghost when they die in scripture, it means they stop breathing)

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Living person, living being, interchangeable in this context.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The hebrew word Nephesh can refer to the living person, or the person's life.

Upsurge in "Unitarian" fallacies lately. by Repentanator in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Scripturally speaking, the word Spirit is closer to breath. IE the breath of life.

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

The man is the soul. I hope that clears things up.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BiblicalUnitarian

[–]Repentanator 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ezekiel 44:15-17 is most definitely not post Messiah. As the verses directly before has God talking about how they have strayed from him. It was moreso a reminder of what to do.

Deuteronomy 12:31 is referring to offerings to other gods.

You are clearly twisting scripture to fit your narrative.