A FORMAL DEBATE OF THE PROPOSITION "TRINITY IS THE TRUE CHRISTIAN FAITH."

Introduction:

THE BEST PROOF OF EVIDENCE

No other reference could ever be profound, most credible and accurate when questions regarding Christianity be put to the test than the Bible itself which recorded the early life and history of the church whom established by Christ himself before any denominational claims and man made religions.

In this debate, Winnie Ibe Bonilla, a Roman Catholic Faith Defender would like to stand on the affirmative side and wants to prove that Trinity is the True Christian Faith, and on the other hand, Pastor Carl Cortez will refute the stand and will prove that Trinity is not a doctrine of the scriptures but a man made invention and a strange doctrine of the Bible. 

Winnie Ibe Bonilla

HERE IS THE AFFIRMATIVE PRESENTATION of  Winnie Ibe Bonilla:

Is the doctrine of the Trinity the true Christian Faith? Yes and it could be demonstrated historically and is supported by the Bible. Please Allow me to help you understand.

Here is how the Catholic Church defines the doctrine:

Catechism paragraph 253 "The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity". The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God." In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence or nature."

Let us concede that the doctrine of the Trinity is a mystery, hence we cannot fully grasp or understand it. It's not contrary to reason yet cannot be explained with reason alone. Christ revealed to us that there are three persons in ONE GOD. 

Let us read

Matthew 28:19 NASB

[19] "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,"

The Church as the teacher of all nations further defined the Trinity in the council of Nicea.

We believe (I believe) in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (God of God) light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man; was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son), who together with the Father and the Son is to be adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets...."

It is equally true that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is not the Father. The Catholic Church rejects the idea that the Father and the Holy Spirit is also the Son as the Oneness claim. 

There are verses our friends in Oneness use and argue that their faith is true. Does the Bible support the doctrine of Oneness? Sorry but it's actually rooted from gross misunderstanding of the word of God and from their private interpretation of scriptures.

Here is WHY, let us read:

John 1:1-2 NASB

[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [2] He was in the beginning with God."

St. John introduced the Word or the Logos as FROM the beginning. He CLEARLY pointed however that the LOGOS is NOT alone, rather he WAS WITH SOMEONE he called " THE GOD or " ho theos" in Greek. The word "WITH" in Greek infers that there are two separate persons facing each other. St. John described the Logos as DIVINE to sa that he has the same nature as THE FATHER, yet he is NOT the Father. 

The following verse also clear that it was the Word that became flesh AND NOT THE FATHER. St. John called the incarnate Word "only Begotten Son", hence there is RELATIONSHIP not as Oneness describe in their theory.

Please read:

John 1:14 NASB

[14] And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only BEGOTTEN from the Father, full of grace and truth."

The Father is greater than the Son in their relationship but equals as their nature is of the same essence or substance. 

John 10:29-30 NASB

[29] My d Father, who has given them to Me, is GREATER than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. [30] I and the Father are one."

When the Son said," the Father and I ARE ONE" he did not say that they are one person BUT TWO PERSONS as ONE. Other wise he could have said," The Father and I "is" ONE". Moreover, Christ said that the Father is "greater" than him. This truth defines for us CLEARLY that the Father and the Son ( and the Holy Spirit) are not ONE PERSON. We should however clarify that the Son is lesser than the Father in view of the incarnation ( Philippians 2:5-8)and in their relationship. (Father to his Son).

---- end of the presentation ---- 

The presentation was followed by some clarifications addressed to the moderator for the debater to have clear basis and guidelines to a formal debate concerning definition of terms and putting some specific limits to avoid abuses of applying personal interpretations specially the word meanings being used.  (These inquiries should be done first before my opponent presented his affirmative statements.)  

Carl C. Cortez' Clarifications: 

1) "Is Catholic same with Roman Catholic? If not, don't use the term Catholic which means universal but put Roman as to emphasize you're referring to the Roman Catholic for specifics."

Winnie Ibe Bonilla's Response:

"The Catholic Church is the Catholic Church. In all our creeds, catechism, and magisterial documents we call our church Catholic Church."

Carl C. Cortez 

"I beg to dis-agree, Catholic is biblical Roman Catholic is not. Let's maintain it, the written word be the basis here discouraging the attitude of adding God's word. Let's exegete not eisegete.

Carl C. Cortez

2) What is your definition of the word Trinity? Would it be, One God in 3 persons, where all 3 persons are co-equal, co-eternal, co-existent, separate and distinct from each other?

Winnie Ibe Bonilla

"Trinity is ONE GOD 

Three persons

Co-equal, 

Distinct

Same substance or nature.

Please see my definition in my presentation."

Winnie Ibe Bonilla's Clarifications:

1) "Please define your definition of ONENESS."

Carl C. Cortez' Response:

"Oneness is improper when used referring to my belief for it should be directed to God. It should be "the oneness of God" where the word "oneness" is taken from its hebrew word "echad" which is in numeral, numerical, number sense only One and adverb Alone. Only One God (numerical) who isn't bound by time, who is the same one God who was present at all times, past, present and future.

When you use the word Oneness, pls. let's agree also that it refers to the Oneness of God.

NOTE:  Winnie Ibe Bonilla showed it that his reference were based on the Creeds, Catechism, magistrate documents of the Roman Catholics he called it the Catholic Church but NOT the Bible which were already been written and preserved both in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek writings before the existence of the Roman Catholic prior to its establishment during the time of Emperor Constantine of Rome in the 3rd Century AD . 

Carl C. Cortez

CROSS EXAMINATION BASED ON THE AFFIRMATIVE PRESENTATION OF Winnie Ibe

Question # 1
In your presentation, which one defines the Trinity, the Bible or the Catechism book?

Answer to 1st question:

The Catholic Church defined the doctrine of the Trinity. We can read the definition of this doctrine in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In the Catechism we find biblical passages which explain and proves that it is true. Thanks.

Question #2 

Who among all Bible writers mentioned and wrote the word Trinity?

Answer to 2nd question:
No apostles, nor Christ mentioned the word Trinity. However the belief that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God is evident in the Bible, and also in the writings of the early christians. These tells us that this is the authentic christian Faith. The word Trinity was then applied to describe and define this mystery.

Question #3

If no one among all Bible writers even Christ mentioned Trinity, who then was the one who first mentioned Trinity describing it as a mystery?

Answer to 3rd question:

The church founded by Christ defined and proclaims it as authentic belief.

Know that this is the role of the Church. It was given the AUTHORITY to teach ALL NATIONS, and this is true UNTIL the end of time.

Please read;

Matthew 28:18-20 NASB

[18] And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. [19] Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

[18] And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. [20] teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."


In Matthew 18:17-18 Christ gave us the paradigm on how the Church works. This paradigm is seen applied in Acts 15 wherein the Church decided that the practice of circumcision is not required for salvation but the grace of Christ as proclaimed in his gospel.

Having the authority to teach and define which is true faith or orthodox one enables the church to guide the faithful. It's the same reason we have the NT Bible (27 writings from Matthew to Revelation) as opposed to less or more in number. This is a primary example on how the Church speaks for Christ (Luke 10:16) as the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-13)

Through the Church we can know which is the true doctrines.

Please read:

Ephesians 3:10 NASB

[10] so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made KNOWN THROUGH the CHURCH to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places."

Ephesians 4:11-14 NASB

[11] And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, [12] for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; [13] until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. [14] As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;"

The very reason WHY In 1 Timothy 3:15 St. Paul says that the church is the FOUNDATION and pillar of truth.

Who?
Tertullian is the first person to applied the word "trinitas" to the reality of the Trinity. However the Church defined it for us.

Carl Cortez the question should be answered directly, explanations are not needed but during the rebuttal.

Winnie Bonilla Ibe My answer is direct, concise and very short.

you didn't answered my question, moderators should check this.

 the question is who but your answer is what.

 you failed to answer my question directly.

Question #4 

Based on Paul's writing to Timothy in 1 Timothy 3:16. If the mystery of “eusebeia (G2150)” (piety, godliness or holiness) of God has already been revealed, would that still remain a mystery or not?

That is from your point. I said "it's the Church and I elaborated it. Note that at the end of it, I mentioned Tertullian to further satisfy your question.

You should know that the Church is our authority and does not defends on one single person priest or bishop.  

The question is who was the first one who mentioned it, its inventor, the church in the bible never mentioned it, so you again invented now stories out from the bible.

Winnie Bonilla Ibe 

No, it's Christ through the Catholic Church, Tertullian however is the first person to used the word "trinitas" to articulate the Church teaching.

Answer to 4th question:

Here is the text:

1 Timothy 3:16 NASB

[16] By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory."

My comment answer:

If its revealed then it's no more a secret. Or we can say that what is now revealed means he was seen, touched and heard. Yet what is "revealed" in the flesh DOES NOT mean that Christ and his being, or God is no more a mystery. Even when we see people with our very eyes they could still be a mystery or we don't know about them.

Please read this verse to get the context of 1 Timothy 3:16:

1 John 1:1-2 NASB

[1] What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life- [2] and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us-"

Even in ourselves, how our brain works is in fact remains a mystery. To verse you mentioned does not speak about the nature, or oneness of God. 

Context please.

Note: Brain and how it works is invisible yet Christ, God's revelation is visible. Wrong and inappropriate comparison. Christ is the displayed holiness, piety, godliness of God, the "eusebeia" of God revealed as God manifest in the flesh..

Question #5 

What is your understanding of the word “God” tracing back its etymology?

Answer to 5th Question:

"Elohim", "YHWH"  He is self-existing, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient being. God is "simple" as opposed to compound.

Question #6 

How will you CONNECT the Roman Catholic Church carrying its central doctrine invented by Tertulian during the second century AD to the Church established in the Book of Acts founded by the apostles in Jerusalem PRIOR TO Peter’s sermon in Acts 2:38 during 33 AD approximately with a gap about a century?

 Rephrase...

Trinity is the central doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church whom Tertulian (Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus) first mentioned and invented it in the second century of which you also had proven it with your answer to question #3. 

Here's my question #6 How will you connect the Roman Catholic Church which was known by its central doctrine Trinity invented in the second century to the church established in Jerusalem by Peter in the Book of Acts chapter 2?

Answer to 6th Question:

There IS ONLY ONE CATHOLIC CHURCH which Christ built. He built it to last until his coming. Note that there in ONLY ONE CHURCH that existed in the first century which exists up to now. 

This reality is a proof for the Catholic Church as the Church of Christ/God. The same church founded by Christ.

Question #7 

You said that Peter did not established any church, but Christ did. Where in the Book of Acts it's recorded that Christ established the church not Peter? I want you to back up your answer with scriptures to avoid heresy and dissension. .

Answer to 7th Question:

Christ established the Church on Peter and made him as the chief steward of his kingdom. He is prefigured in the OT in the person of Eliakim, much like Jesus Christ to King David.

Moreover, it's clear that Christ used the first person "I" in Matthew 16:18 and Christ did not said," You will build my church". 

Please read:

Isaiah 22:20-22 NASB

[20] "Then it will come about in that day, That I will summon My servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, [21] And I will clothe him with your tunic And tie your sash securely about him. I will entrust him with your authority, And he will become a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. [22] "Then I will set the key of the house of David on his shoulder, When he opens no one will shut, When he shuts no one will open.

Here is the NEW Testament:

Matthew 16:17-19 NASB

[17] And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. [18] I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. [19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."

Jesus is the one who built the Church not Peter, he ONLY acted in behalf and by the authority he received from Christ.

Christ entrusted his flock to Peter.

Please read:

John 21:15-17 NASB

[15] So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Tend My lambs." [16] He said to him again a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Shepherd My sheep." [17] He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Tend My sheep."

Question #8 

You said that it was not Peter who established the church but Christ made the church on Peter prior to Matt. 16:18. Matthew 16:18 was Christ's instructions to Peter to open the keys of the kingdom or to established Christ church here on earth. When Peter preached the gospel of the kingdom of God to the Jews in the book of Acts chapter 2 in verse 38 saying "Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, and you shall received the gift of the Holy ghost." 

Was not Peter established Christ church where the word church was second mentioned after Christ first mentioned it Matthew 16:18 as an instruction to Peter?

Answer to 8th Question:

Christ word is CLEAR," I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH" 

Note that I did not say that Christ established the church PRIOR TO Matt 16:18. To put it on analogy, the church was already conceived but it was born on the Pentecost. 

In Matthew 16:18 Christ said, " I WILL GIVE YOU THE KEYS" that means that Christ promised consistent with " I WILL BUILD my Church", which means in the future. 

The Keys given to Peter is not to BUILD a church, rather it symbolises AUTHORITY. 

In Acts 2:38, there is NO MENTION of St. Peter establishing or building a church. 

Moreover, Christ made use of the term " flock" in reference to his Church. Such as in John 10:16 and in John 21. The fact that Peter preached in Acts 2 does NOT MADE HIM a founder of a church, he Was only following his role as Our Lord commanded him to do. 

Question #9 

What have you understand the meaning of "keys of the kingdom of God or heaven" based not on speculations but the scriptures? Pls. provide biblical references, and stop speculating.

My answer:

Key is symbol of authority.

Please read:

Isaiah 22:21-22 KJVS

[21] And I will CLOTH him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will COMMIT thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. [22] And the KEY of the house of David will I lay UPON HIS SHOULDERS; so he SHALL, and NONE SHALL SHUT; and he shall shut, and none shall open."

My comment:

Any sincere christian who seeks truth could PLAINLY see that KEY is a symbol of authority given to Eliakim as the steward of King David's kingdom.

Christ being the heir of David's kingdom established monarchial kingdom like David's.

Please read:

Luke 1:32-33 KJVS

[32] He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: [33] And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end."

Christ appointed Peter to be the steward of his kingdom/Church.

Matthew 16:18-19 KJVS

[18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Keys is USED TO;

"Bind and loose"
"Open and shut"
This CAN ONLY represent authority.

In the New Testament, like in the OT authority are shared. The authority of the chief steward Eliakim is FROM KING DAVID, the authority of Peter is from Christ the King. Peter is liken to a prime minister while the other apostles are ministers. They too hold keys/authority.

Please read:

Matthew 18:17-18 KJVS

[17] And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.[18] Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Question #10

Where in the Bible or who in the Bible said that God is a Three Person?

Answer to 10th Question:
The Bible tells us the the Father is God, Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God. It also tells us that THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD.

These TRUTH was revealed by God through the Catholic Church based on the Word of God with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

How can we KNOW THE TRUTH and Wisdom of God?

Ephesians 3:10 KJV

[10] To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known BY THE CHURCH the manifold WISDOM of God,"

This is so because of the promise of Christ.

Let us read:

John 16:13-15 KJV

[13] Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. [14] He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. [15] All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you."

While the early acknowledged that The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, the understanding of the mystery of the Holy Trinity was not as clear. This doctrine however REMAINS A MYSTERY.

When there is a question about faith faithful Christians must go to the Church.

Please read:

Matthew 18:15-18 KJV

[15] Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. [16] But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. [17] And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. [18] Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The simplest answer then to your question is: the Church which is the foundation of TRUTH.

Your question is VERY GOOD this time. This allows me to explain our faith.

11th Question:

Since I never read from any books in the Bible that there was even a single author mentioned and wrote that "God is a three person", who then in the history first mentioned the word "God is a three person"?

Answer to 11th Question:
From Catholic ENCYCLOPEDIA;

"In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom (To Autolycus II.15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (On Pudicity 21). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:

"There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P.G., X, 986).

Question #12
The word Three Divine Persons isn't found in the Bible and that nobody amongst all the Bible writers mentioned and wrote it like the word Trinity even Theophilus of Antioch who mentioned trias but not Three Divien Persons and holy trinity, will you agree now that these words Three Divine Persons and Trinity are Roman Catholic inventions? Yes or No and pls support your answer.

Answer to 12th Question:

The dogmatic definition of the TRINITY is By the Catholic Church. No, it's not INVENTION but simply uses the term to DEFINE this reality. 

This is like gravity. When one described or define WHAT is "gravity" it does not follow that the first person who defined it INVENTED GRAVITY. 

 --- end of Cross Examination ---

Carl C. Cortez

REBUTTAL TO Winnie Ibe Cross Examination Answers:

Point # 1)

The catholic (which means universal) church founded in Jerusalem 33 AD never attempted to define the doctrine of the Trinity for it originated and was taken from the Roman Catholic Church’s catechism in the 3rd century AD. Facts supported it that it has no biblical records as to establish the Roman Catholic’s claim where Winnie Ibe failed to provide the proofs as observing the best rule of evidence. This is simply a “eisegesis” and speculations using the passages of the Bible to support their invented man-made theories called Roman Catholic doctrine. Matthew 16:18; Acts 2:47; 1 Tim. 2:15; Gal. 1:8

Point #2) 

Winnie Ibe admitted that never the apostles even Christ mentioned the word Trinity. Christ gave the importance of relying only on the written word of God especially when it comes to divine authority and the source for truth as He was always quoting scriptures and was saying “it is written” and that every word can only be established by 2 0r 3 witnesses. Trinity doctrine never ever came out from the mouth of the Lord Jesus and never had any 2 or 3 witnesses for that doctrine to be established. 

This man-made theory, the invented doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church was an early formulation of the Gnostic teacher Valentinus, Ignatius of Antioch and Justin Martyr in the 1st century to the 2nd century and was first used by Tertullian by the word "trinitas" at the close of the 2nd century, was polished by the council of Nicaea in 325 AD, a doctrine never heard by authentic early Christians during the times of Christ’s disciples and apostles.  Matthew 6:3-7; John 6:63; John 4:16; John 17:17; Deut. 19:15; 2 Cor. 13:1

Point #3)

Winnie Ibe attempted to answer the question with the scriptures which is technically inappropriate for the fact that he already admitted that the doctrine trinity is not found in the Bible for never the apostles or the Lord Jesus Christ was mentioning it as it was a strange word during their time. He admitted again that it was Tertullian, a forerunner of the Nicene doctrine who mentioned it but history recorded that Tertullian did not stated the immanent trinity but using “trinitas” the Latin for “Threeness” emphasized the manifold character of God. 

Winnie Ibe called it the reality of trinity trying to link it to latter development of the doctrine when it was reinforced by the council of Nicaea in 325 AD and became a Nicene Creed, a man-made doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian; www.religionfacts.com/trinity

Point #4)

Winnie Ibe refused to answer the question directly but he’s responding the question with his comment that was illogical and out of place. What has been asked is the “eusebia” or the holiness, the piety of God, where Paul said it was manifested in the flesh. The mystery of God has already been revealed and He was known by the revelation of Jesus Christ NOT the doctrine of man or man-made doctrine trinity!  1 Tim. 3:16;  Ref.: 
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_timothy/3-16.htm

Point #5)

To answer the question, Winnie Ibe should need to present his best proof of presenting biblical and scientific evidences but he only posted “Elohim” and “YHWH” with descriptions not backed up by scriptures. “YHWH” was not the ancient form the tetragrammaton English letter rendition but “YHVH” and this does not mean “God” in English but LORD which first appeared in the KJV1611 in the 16th century AD. Winnie Ibe failed to correlate “Elohim” to trinity (three distinct persons) as he used the pronoun “HE” singular not plural referring to God in the tenets of his man-made doctrine trinity. ww.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Elohim/elohim.html

Point #6)

Winnie Ibe deleted his answers to my number six question. It was not actually Tertullian who first mentioned “trinity”, (the central doctrine of the Roman Catholics that is defined as three persons of the godhead) but “trinitas” the Latin for “Threeness” emphasizing the manifold character of God not the three distinct persons of God of which each person is God where Winnie Ibe said self-existing, eternal, omniscient being. (3 self-existing, eternal, omniscient beings).

 Point #7)
The Kingdom of JESUS built was an everlasting Kingdom and isn’t a literal and physical kingdom that never can anything on earth be compared. Using Eliakim son Hilkiah who was of King Hezekiah’s government officials whose job is to ‘over the household’ or ‘in charge of the palace’ is out of context.

Fact #1
The kingdom JESUS is spiritual not literal or physical, not palace.

Fact #2
Peter’s appointment was divine and he can’t be replaced by anyone unlike Eliakim, only a replacement of Shebnah who was demoted from the office.

Fact #3 
Jesus appointed Peter to establish His Kingdom by giving him all the keys to establish it and these were displayed in the book of Acts of the apostles itself as we follow how Peter fulfilled the command. 

Fact #4
Jesus is the master Builder, the great Planner and the best Architect of His Kingdom and gave Peter all the instructions and master plan of the building. The right to build on the right time and place was already been entrusted to Peter and it was obviously seen recorded in the Book of Acts as we follow how he established the church by all the keys given to him to build. 2 Kings 18:18; 26, 37; 19:2; Isa 36:3, 11, 22; 37:2; Matthew 16:18; Acts 2:38-47

Point #8)
Yes, the church was conceived in Matthew 16:18 where Peter was involved of the plan and was born in the day of Pentecost, the birth of the church where Peter again was the one fulfilling to make it happen. By analogy, Christ is the owner, master planner and founder yet Peter was the foreman, who, like the foreman’s tasks involved managerial; to train, direct, supervise and, if necessary, discipline crews and other workers. Just like a building built after the owner’s plan was constructed, Peter established it and built it through Christ’s instructions with all the necessary keys to build it. The Bible is constant of recording it in details as we will find and follow the “church” in the New Testament as the best keyword. Winnie Ibe presented an out of context references of this subject. Matthew 16:18; Acts 2:38, 39, 41, 42, 47

Point #9)
Winnie Ibe failed again to answer directly my question, but he’s leaving his comments that is not inline and connected to the question by the context where Peter, keys of the kingdom and the church were mentioned. He should supposed to show the instructions of Christ to Peter linking it to how the instructions was fulfilled by Peter himself at the same time. Winnie Ibe is out of context.

Point #10)
Winnie assumes of saying the Bible tells us “the Father is God, Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God” but he failed again to show the scriptures that supported his claims. He even failed to show the scriptures where it says God is a three person or that “God the Father” is a person, and that the Holy Spirit is God and also is a person except Heb. 1:3 where Paul said that “he (Christ) is the express image of His (God/Theos) person. Winnie Ibe boasted again false claims of the Roman Catholic Church inventions and man-made doctrine that never the Bible teaches and mentioned. There can be no TRUTH out from what scriptures has written and has said. Catholic or the universal church birthed in the Jerusalem in 33AD is not the Roman Catholic Church who falsely claim being in the Truth and teaching the Truth for its doctrine weren’t in the scriptures written but warring against the TRUTH! Prov. 30:6; Gal. 1:7-9; Heb. 1:3

Point #11)
Exactly, historical facts obviously showed that the word “trinity” isn’t in the Bible but an invention developed as time travels where it evolves in the minds of men and became a central doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church in the 3rd century AD. This is a clear man made doctrine influenced by the greek philosophy and had its pagan origin tracing it to Egyptian trinity gods (Isis, Horus, Seb) and Hindu trinity gods (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva). 

http://www.sabbathcovenant.com/chr.../TheEgyptianTrinity.htm: www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/hindutrinity.asp

Point #12)
Trinity is not a biblical reality, not taught by the early Christian church recorded in the Bible especially in the Book of Acts including all the epistles of the New Testament. The reality is that it is not Biblical but a Roman Catholic Church man-made invented doctrine.

Trinity was not even mentioned by Tertullian who first mentioned “trinitas” from the Latin, which means “Threeness” emphasized the character of God. He did not even mentioned “the three persons of God” or that each person is God where Winnie Ibe defines God as “He is self-existing, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient being. God is "simple" as opposed to compound” when being analyzed it will goes like this.

1st person of God - God the Father who is self existent, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient being who is not the Holy Spirit and the

2nd person of God - God the Son who is self existent, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient being who is not the God the Son and the

3rd person of God - God the Holy Spirit who is self existent, eternal, omnipotent, omniscient being who is not 1st person of God who is God the Father and God the Son.

This is purely polytheism encouraging idolatry.

Winnie Ibe tried to compare trinity to a gravity. Gravity is real, was proven both by theory and scientifically but trinity is a strange word that never existed, was proven a latter development and a man made doctrine.

This man-made doctrine is really confusing, the reason why its followers started from the 2nd century until now finds it still a mystery. How can the things of God or about God remained a mystery when this mystery has be revealed already? ‘Though Winnie called this doctrine a dogmatic teaching of the Roman Catholics invented in the 4th century AD which is not taught by the early church founded in Jerusalem in 33AD, still it remained debatable even among its adherents up to present where plenty of them departed and renounced this man-made and pagan origin doctrine, a none biblical teaching. Trinity is not a real Christian doctrine but Roman Catholic Church man-made doctrine influenced by paganism.

Carl C. Cortez

 MY CONSTRUCTIVE ARGUMENT OF REFUTING THE DOCTRINE OF TRINITY

INTRODUCTION: TRUE APOLOGETIC
As a defender of truth siding the apostolic apologists throughout history from the Old Testament records down to the early apostolic modalists and monarchic believer's presence of battling against the heresies of their times, scriptural and historical proofs are my best weapon as observing the best rule of evidence to validate truth and facts exposing the lies and deceptions of the enemy who attempted to defame God and stealing His glory, promoting alienated doctrines created after the traditions of men and not of God, thus they failed to rely on the written word which is the truth but on crafty, deceptive inventions of evil men.

GOD’S WORD IS ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN HEAVEN.

THE ONENESS OF GOD

In reference to God, oneness means the state of being absolutely and indivisibly one, or one in numerical value....ONENESS [is used] to mean the doctrine that God is absolutely one in numerical value, that Jesus is the one God, and that God is not a plurality of persons. Thus Oneness is a modern term basically equivalent to modalism [of the ancient philosophers] or modalistic monarchianism” (Bernard, The Oneness of God, pp. 321-322). Both Old Testament and New Testament contain numerous references to God’s oneness.

1) FIRST SHARP SWORD-EDGE:  SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES

a. GOD IS ONE NOT THREE

The Scriptural Meaning of “One”

Any definition of the oneness of God is valid only if it conveys truthful meaning about the God of Scripture. A systematic study of the use of this word in Scripture will reveal the true meaning of God’s oneness. The Holy Scriptures reveal God as He really is and not as He is conceived to be in the vain imaginations and reasoning of pagan philosophers and modern theologians.

The Scriptures clearly reveal the meaning that God attaches to the word “one.” This word is used too numerously to check every usage in the Old Testament and the New Testament. However, we can find prime examples in Scripture to illustrate that the word “one” is used both quantitatively (as a cardinal or ordinal number) and qualitatively (as a characteristic or attribute, or to show unity). We will first investigate the quantitative usage of the word “one” and then investigate its qualitative usage in Scripture.

“One” Used as a Cardinal Number 

“One” is most often used in Scripture as a cardinal number. Cardinal numbers tell us how many units there are in a group. A good example of this usage is found in Deuteronomy 1:23: “...and I took twelve men of you, one [Hebrew echad] of a tribe.” The obvious meaning of “one,” as defined by the context, is that one person (the unit) was to be chosen from each of the twelve tribes (the group). Other examples in Deuteronomy are: “... that fleeing unto one [the unit] of these cities [the group]” (Deut. 4:42); “...the Lord shall choose in one [the unit] of thy tribes [the group]” (Deut. 12:14).

“One” Used as an Ordinal Number 

“One” is also used in Scripture as an ordinal number. An ordinal number denotes order, succession or degree. Ordinal numbers are expressed as “first, second, third,” as opposed to “one, two, three.” “And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first [Hebrew echad] day” (verses 3-5).

Another Old Testament example of the word “one” as an ordinal number is found in Isaiah 41:4: “Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the Lord [YHVH], the first, and with the last; I am He.” A similar example of “one” as an ordinal number is found in Isaiah 48:12: “Hearken unto Me, O Jacob and Israel, My called; I am He; I am the first, I also am the last.” And again in Isaiah 44:6: “Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of hosts; ‘I am the first, and I am the last; and beside Me there is no God.’ “ When God states, “...beside Me there is no God,” He is revealing that He is the only God! Here God Himself defines what He means by the statement, “I am the first, and I am the last.”

The above statement is also found in the New Testament in reference to the glorified Jesus Christ himself: “And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying unto me, ‘Fear not; I am the First and the Last’ “ (Rev. 1:17).

b. ONENESS has its BIBLICAL ROOT WORD “ONE” UNLIKE THE WORD TRI OR THREE

c. The TRUE God is the ONE and only GOD OF ALL THINGS! 

WHOEVER the true God is, He has to be the FATHER and CREATOR of ALL things.

God says He is the ONLY GOD. 

"I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone, that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself" (Isaiah 44:24).

The God of the Bible claims to be the Creator, and He claims to be the ONLY ONE!

As the SOLITARY Deity, He says He has no peers and no counselors. There are no others like Him. Moses declared, "the Lord our God is one Lord,"(Deuteronomy 6:4).

"Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any," (Isaiah 44:8b). "I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God," (Isaiah 44:6b).

God is A SPIRIT!

"Moses spake, and God answered Him by a voice," Exodus 10:19b. Moses and seventy elders of Israel "saw" an apparition of God, which must have been ghost-like: "and there was under His feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in His clearness," (Exodus 24:10).

God is not a man. 

This was a translucent manifestation of an invisible Spirit, not a flesh and bone appearance, because "God is not a man," according to Numbers 24:19 and Job 9:32.

"A cloudy pillar descended, and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the Lord talked with Moses," in Exodus 33:9b.

Then, "the Lord spake with Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to a friend," in Exodus 33:11. Even though God was "face to face" with Moses, Moses did not actually see a face.

"Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me." 

The only physical manifestation was a cloud, for in Exodus 33:20, God said, "thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me, and live."

The cloud obviously did not satisfy Moses, so he said, "Shew me thy glory," (Exodus 33:18) to which God replied, "I will make all my goodness pass before thee," (Exodus 33:22-23).

Was His glory or goodness a body? God agreed to put Moses in a "clift of the rock" and "cover thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen," (Exodus 33:22-23).

"No man hath seen, nor can see..." 

When we take into account that "God is a SPIRIT," (John 4:24), we must conclude that Daniel's vision of the Ancient of Days was an ALLEGORY: a figure - an illustration - of the God who is the "blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen," (I Timothy 6:15b, 16).

At the time Daniel "saw" the "son," the son of man did not even exist. The "Only Begotten of the Father" would be MADE OF A WOMAN only "when the fulness of the time was come," (Galatians 4:4).

Of the forty-four so-called "appearances" of God in the Old Testament, no one in fact ever "saw" God at all!

The overwhelming evidence shows that the Lord God, Father and Holy Spirit of the Old Testament NEVER HAD A BODY AT ALL!

What was "seen" was a wide variety of manifestations of God. Voices, dreams, visions, fire, smoke, clouds, whirlwinds, earthquakes, angels, men, and even ghostlike figures.

None of these forms were actually the fullness of God in a bodily form. They were only temporary, nameless manifestations of the invisible, omnipresent, Holy Spirit who calls Himself our Father.

They saw many things, but they never saw His body. He never had one.

Jesus verified that God is invisible. He told the Pharisees, "Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape," (John 5:37).

"You have never seen His shape."

John declared, "No man hath seen God at any time," (John 1:18a).

It is impossible to believe anyone truly "saw" God, when we are told specifically and repeatedly that God simply cannot be seen. He is invisible!

That brings us to the magnificent miracle that was manifested at the Birth of Jesus Christ.

"The Lord [invisible Spirit] shall go forth as a mighty man," - Jesus Christ!

It was that tiny baby in a Bethlehem stable that Isaiah had referred to when he wrote, "The Lord shall go forth as a mighty man," (Isaiah 42:13).

Jesus Christ was the embodiment of all God had ever said about Himself. "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us," (John 1:14).

God chose not to remain invisible, but to become visible! 

The invisible God had manifested Himself in many forms in the Old Testament, but the highest revelation of God in the Old Testament had been by His Word. It was the Word of God, spoken and written by holy men and prophets, that manifested the most consistent and reliable revelation of the invisible God to the Old Testament world.

d. GOD HAS ONE PERSON, ONE BODY, NOT THREE

If God is a Trinity of three persons, and if Jesus is the fullness of God bodily, then there are three persons in the body of Jesus!

But we know that is not the case. God is not three persons. He is ONE SPIRIT, and that Spirit is the Father, who is (embodiment) in the body of Jesus. The fullness of God is the Father. And HE is in the body of Jesus.

"God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself,"(2 Corinthians 5:19). He was the fullness of God bodily. The Son is in perfect oneness with the Father by virtue of the incarnation. If you have seen Jesus, you have seen the Father. Otherwise, the Father is invisible. But in the flesh, you can see Him.

Jesus Christ is not the second member of the Godhead. He is the man in whom the Father dwells. 

So the oneness of God refers to the Spirit (Father) in the Human Body (Christ) - God in Christ.

God the Father never invented or created a "GOD the Son." That is a blasphemous, heretical misnomer. The phrase "God the Son" NEVER occurs in the Bible.

The Son of God was "made of a woman," (Galatians 4:4), and was "conceived...of the Holy Ghost," (Matthew 1:20).

"Conceived of the Holy Ghost" means "The Holy Ghost is the Father."

Matthew 1:20 shows us that the Holy Ghost is actually the Father, since John said the Son of Man is the "only begotten of the Father," (John 1:14). 

The human body of Jesus was not only conceived by His Holy Spirit Father, but was also a visible shell which actually housed the Father.

Christ is the ONLY permanent, physical - embodiment - of the one Holy Spirit, our Father.

Christ is NOT the second person of the trinity. He is the BODY in which the FATHER dwells!!

Two natures dwell in one body. Spirit and human. Jesus is divine and is human. The divine nature communicates with the human nature, and the human nature communicates with the divine nature, but a dual nature in a single body does not comprise a trinity. He is only ONE GOD [one Spirit] inside ONE (human) BODY! THAT is the TRUE nature of God.

Paul described the mystery to Timothy: "God was manifest in the flesh," (I Timothy 3:16), and to the Colossians, "In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead (Greek: Deity) bodily," (Colossians 2:9).

If the concept seems different from modern teachings, remember John's observation that even the Jews refused to believe that their Father was in this man:

"He came unto His own, and His own received Him not," (John 1:11).

The same God who was always everywhere, can now be manifested somewhere in particular - in the body of Jesus! 

Isaiah prophesied that His name would be "Emmanuel," which means "God with us," (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23).

Jesus is the Father "revelation" - in flesh! 

Whereas God, in the Old Testament, had been revealed through His spoken and written Word, God, in the New Testament, is revealed in flesh.

Hebrews 1:1 says that He "spake in times past unto the fathers by the prophets," but verse 2 says that "in these last days He hath spoken unto us by His Son," and verse 3 tells us that the Son is "the brightness of His glory, and the express image of his person."

The IMAGE of the invisible God 

The Corinthian church was taught that Christ is "the image of God," (II Corinthian 4:4).

The Colossian church was taught that the Son is "the image of the invisible God," (Colossians 1:15).

"It pleased the Father that in him (the Son) should all (the Father's) fulness dwell," (Colossians 1:19). That is why John said "the Word was made flesh."

Jesus Christ is JHVH Savior come in the flesh. In fact, the very meaning of the name "Jesus" is "JHVH Savior."

Jesus explained, "I am come in my Father's name," (John 5:43).

God CREATED a BODY for Himself: Christ! 

The invisible Spirit had planned all along to take on a human form. He planned to come into the world as a man.

"...The only begotten Son... he hath declared Him," (John 1:18b). Webster's Dictionary defines the word "declare" as meaning "to show or reveal."

Christ Jesus, the Son of man, shows and reveals the invisible God.

"He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." 

Philip asked Jesus to "show us the Father." Jesus replied, "Have I been so long time with you and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father," (John 14:8-9).

Unfortunately, the human race has not begun to comprehend the overwhelming reality of our Father's appearance nearly 2000 years ago.

The excitement of it all has been lost in the confusion of who Jesus Christ really is.

John 1:10 tells us that "He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew him not." That could only refer to the Father God.

Most people do not realize that...

Jesus is not a clone of God the Father. 

He is not a duplicate deity. 

He is not YHVH Jr. 

He is not co-equal and co-eternal with the Father.

Jesus is the eternal Spirit (Father) manifested in the Son (Christ)!

Jesus, speaking as a man, insisted that He was NOT equal with the Father when He said, "My Father is greater than I," in I John 14:28.

The Father is greater than the Son! Jesus said it. The Father said, in Isaiah 42:8b, "My Glory will I not give to another." So, the Father and the Son are NOT co-equal or co-eternal.

2) SECOND SHARP SWORD-EDGE, HISTORICAL FACTS

a. Throughout the SCRIPTURES, the doctrine of the TRINITY from “TRINITAS” (latin) used by Tertulian which means “THREENESS” never had been mentioned.

b. Any doctrine that no single witness has testified can’t stand, and therefore cannot be established.

THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD AND THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE TRUTH TAUGHT AND ESTABLISHED IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. IMPORTANT DOCTRINES OF THE BIBLE WHERE THOSE WHICH WERE WRITTEN IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES AND IT HAS BEEN MEDITATED DAILY for God’s purpose of establishing God’s truth among His people.

GOD IS NOT A PERSON BUT HAS A PERSONALITY OF WHICH THE ENTIRE SCRIPTURES EXHIBITED IT BY THE CHARACTERS AND QUALITIES OF HOW HIS PEOPLE KNEW HIM AND WHO AND WHAT GOD IS. GOD IS THE CREATOR, THE ALMIGHTY, A GOOD AND LOVING GOD TO HIS CREATURE.

ANY TEACHINGS THAT DOESN’T CONFORMED TO THIS TRUTH ISN’T FROM GOD BUT FROM THE DEVIL, THE FATHER OF LIES AND AUTHOR OF CONFUSION, who authored all lies and deception for the very purpose of misleading men and alienating them to knowing the TRUE and the ONLY ONE God and promoting polytheism as he hates the ONE God of Israel.

ONE SHARP TWO EDGED-SWORD, the TRUTH from the words of GOD (scriptures) and the FACTS recorded in the history is enough to kill this giant of false teachings Winnie Ibe wanted to boast.

- end of presentation - 

Winnie Ibe Bonilla

Here is my second revised REBUTTAL:

My REBUTTAL:

Cortez argued THE ONENESS of God being numerically ONE, yet he mentioned that this ONE GOD is the Father who is also the Son and who is also the Holy Spirit. He however FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE his theory using the Bible and logic. What he presented are his misunderstanding of biblical text or at least the teaching he received. No single text support his out of context eisigesis. 

In my first question I quoted John 5:36-37 in which Christ claim to have OTHER WITNESS. We know that earlier Christ explained that you cannot be a witness for yourself.

Jesus said:

John 5:31 KJVS

[31] If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true."

It's CLEAR that Jesus made DISTINCTION WITH THE FATHER and himself. IF CHRIST IS ACTUALLY THE FATHER he would be ACTUALLY BEARING WITNESS TO HIMSELF. Verse 5:31 would not be true, yet it's Christ's words then IT MUST BE TRUE. We can then conclude that it's Carl WHO IS WRONG and NOT Jesus.

Moreover, when Jesus said that they never heard nor seen God when he was speaking to them Jews, which means that he was referring to the Father BECAUSE IF JESUS is THE FATHER HIMSELF " materialised" then THE JEWS AT THAT VERY MOMENT SEEN AND HEARD GOD THE FATHER. Christ words has no contradiction! It's Carl Cortez who is confused.

Carl Cortez said:

"GOD HAS ONE PERSON, ONE BODY, NOT THREE

If God is a Trinity of three persons, and if Jesus is the fullness of God bodily, then there are three persons in the body of Jesus! 

My COMMENT:

Carl Cortez DOES NOT UNDERSTAND the Bible verse he is reading, instead he is making HIS OWN UNDERSTANDING as his SCRIPTURES. 

Here is the text:

Colossians 2:9 NASB

[9] For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,"

What does this verse mean? It tells us that THERE IS NO LACKING IN THE DIETY OF CHRIST. He is the INCARNATE GOD which St. John says," "and the word was God". This means that Jesus Christ is one person.

Pastor Cortez said:

"But we know that is not the case. God is not three persons. He is ONE SPIRIT, and that Spirit is the Father, who is (embodiment) in the body of Jesus. The fullness of God is the Father. And HE is in the body of Jesus. "

REPLY:

When Jesus said in John 10:30," the Father and I are one" he made it clear that he is NOT THE FATHER, otherwise he could have said," The Father IS me or " I am the Father". The plural "ARE" 

is refers NOT to one person. Furthermore, there IS NO SINGLE VERSE in the whole Bible nor history of Christianity in the first two hundred years having belief that Jesus Christ is the Father and also the Holy Spirit. 

The Father is in the body of Jesus? Wow!!! Jesus was possessed by his Father! Such a weird doctrine. So Jesus is not the Father because the Father is inside or IN THE BODY OF JESUS. Inversely, Jesus is not the Father as the Father is inside his body.

Third Question:

In John 1:14 and John 1:1-2:

CAN YOU TELL ME WHO BECAME FLESH ( human)? Is it God ( Father) or the Word? 

Cortez answer:

WHAT became flesh is the LOGOS and LOGOS is not a "WHO" but a "WHAT". LOGOS, from the original Greek manuscript means the "concept, the cause, the reason, the plan, the thought, the wisdom, the logic of God". When the LOGOS of God materialized, then Christ JESUS was the product of it,..."

(Septuagint) of John 1:1

“En archee en ho Logos, kai ho Logos en pros ton THEON, kai THEOS en ho Logos.” 

IT WAS THE LOGOS (thought) THAT BECAME FLESH NOT GOD!"

My RESPONSE:

He DENIES THAT THE LOGOS IS another person who is WITH GOD but rather " a plan of God", thus the Logos is not God, nor a WHO. For Cortez the Logos is a mere "WHAT". He however has to accept that THE (same)LOGOS "materialised" and known as Christ. If the Logos that " materialised WAS NOT GOD how can be that Christ is God? Colossians 2:9 affirms it so. Moreover, If Christ was the " materialised LOGOS, yet Cortez denies that THE LOGOS IS GOD, while he believe that Christ is the Father and the Holy Spirit. How can a MERE " WHAT" became a Who? More importantly the WHAT BECAME WHO and it's ALSO THE FATHER AND THE SON AND HOLY SPIRIT! This is simply ABSURD!

It appears that his view that the logos is an idea inside God's mind became a body then God entered the body of the Man Jesus. Note the reversal; God is now INSIDE the "MATERIALIZED" logos. 

St. John made it clear that LOGOS/Word in John 1:1 is a PERSON. 

John 1:2-4NASB

[2] He was in the beginning WITH God. [3] All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. [4] In Him was LIFE, and the life was the Light of men. …"

In 1 John 1:1-3, the apostles gazed, heard and TOUCHED THE LOGOS OR WORD, who is the Son of the Father (John 1:14).

St. John says in Revelation 19:13 

[13] ".. His name is called The Word of God."

My FOURTH QUESTION:

Inferences:

John 17:5 

John 17:24

John 3:16,

John 6:38, 8:29

QUESTION #4

Can you explain HOW COULD a mere thought have its OWN GLORY, called Son and called God? Thanks.

Cortez used an ORDINARY dictionary and claimed that Trinitarian are bias. He failed to understand that word are used in different context. While the dictionary defined words, it does not give us which correct understanding in a different context IN PARTICULAR in the context of the Bible. The word "Cephas" in dictionary we find its meaning as "ROCK" yet in THE NT it refers to a person, that is St. Peter.

Let me respond to his use of Greek. 

St. John is precise in his language when he said, " En archee en ho Logos, kai ho Logos en pros ton Theon, kai Theos en ho Logos".

Now, when it says O THEOS in Greek, it means "THE GOD" in English. When it says TON THEON, it means "THE GOD". The "O" is an article in the nominative case. TON on the other hand is an article in the accusative case. 

In here we notice THE DISTINCTION that " TON THEON is not the Logos as the second " THEOS" lacks the article THE or " Ho". This is SO as to IDENTIFY THE LOGOS being distinct from the Father yet Of the SAME SUBSTANCE. Other translations renders is as," what God is is also the Logos". This is NOT TO DENY the divinity of the Logos at all, in fact it affirms it while it defines that the Father is distinct from the Logos/Son.

Going into Greek does not in anyway help the Oneness stand. Our opponent DENIES that the WORD or Logos is God hence the Logos CANNOT BE the Father, yet according to him THE CORRECT TRANSLATION is," What God was, the Word was" (NEB) What does this mean if Carl Cortez insist on his " Correct English translation??This WOULD IDENTIFY that the " Theos" third phrase in John 1:1 is would ALSO God the Father. This would detrimental to his previous statement. 

He argued that IF the translation "and the Word was God" is correct then it would mean that THERE ARE TWO GODS. Of course he is DEAD WRONG! It only means that there are MORE THAN ONE PERSONS in the one True God. 

His understanding of Greek is a suspect. He thinks that because the word for word arrangement of the third clause of John 1:1 is " God was the Word" in Greek then IT MUST BE translated in that same order in English. In Greek however the Subject does not always appear at the start of the clause, in this case the subject is "the WORD" and the Predicate is " was God". 

Furthermore, the word "pros" or "with" in Greek as in the case of John 1:1 tells us that God (the Father) is not the Logos or the pre-existent Christ as the Father.

My 5th question:

From the verses above (John 17:5, 24 John 8:29, John 6:38) can YOU TELL ME HOW CAN "one" be TOGETHER with himself, and word WITH YOU be understood as "ME" "I" and MYSELF? Thanks.

On question 5:

His answer is DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED to the clear statement of the Bible. 

The "I AM" while it's true THAT GOD IS OMNIPRESENT both in space and time as he is beyond His creation, it has no bearing on his beliefs AT ALL.

While it's true that salvation is already in the mind of God it does not follow that the Son was ONLY in his mind. The Son is distinct from the Father. 

Philippians 2:6-8 NASB

[6] who, although He EXISTED in the FORM of God, did not regard EQUALITY with God a thing to be grasped, [7] but EMPTIED HIMSELF, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. [8] Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."

Christ said that The Father did not left him alone. This "alone" tells us that Jesus is NOT BY HIMSELF rather the Father is WITH him. (John 8:29). The view that the Father assume the role of the office a Son is simply wrong and cannot be reconciled with the Bible. 

Here are the text:

John 17:5 ASV

[5] And now, Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."

(John 17:24 ASV

John 8:29 and John 6:38)

Cortez claims that Christ only existed in God's mind before creation. It means that God is in the mind of God! He then claims that the Logos is NOT ANOTHER GOD! 

However GAVE a statement that contradicts his very words.

He said:

"For I have come down from heaven not to do my WILL BUT to do the WILL of him who sent me." John 6:38 - REFERS TO CHRIST, the LOGOS (logic, reason/cause) of GOD materialized NOT REFERRING TO ANOTHER GOD!

Carl Cortez could not understand my point or he is just ignoring the OBVIOUS. There in the text we read that the Father has will and so is the Son. " not to do my will but THE WILL OF THE ONE WHO SENT ME". Now if there ARE TWO WILLS it follows that the ONENESS belief is false. 

Carl Cortez argues and uses John 8:47-49:

"If you had known Me, you would know My Father as well. From NOW you do KNOW HIM and have SEEN the Father."

My RESPONSE:

In 1 Tim 1:25 St. Paul made a distinction of the Father from the Son and this is very obvious. Jesus WHO BECAME MAN IS our MEDIATOR to his Father. St. Paul never taught that Christ the Son of God is also the Father. Jesus is MEDIATOR to the Father and that alone should tell him that the Son is not the Father. Why Carl Cortez could not see this FACT is primarily because he accepted a false doctrine and embraced it as "gospel truth". He now disregards anything from Scriptures that is contrary to his faith. 

Jesus Christ the Son is the perfect image of the Father. This could be also demonstrated to a Father who has a Son which has the same characteristics of his father, yet the Son is not at the same time the father. Hebrews 1:3 at NO point tells us that the Son is the Father, rather it says that the Son is the radiance and exact imprint of God's nature, the very character, the exact expression of his substance, exact representation of the Father. 

6th question:

You ARE IN DENIAL that Jesus and the Father are two different persons, and also DENY THAT THE LOGOS IS A PERSON, yet YOU ARE SAYING THAT IT WAS THE LOGOS that became Christ, Can you tell me when did Christ started to became GOD?

Cortez ANSWER has no substance and insists that Christ that ONLY EXISTED in God's mind before incarnation because God is omniscient. He argued that the word, "Christ" is never equivalent to "God", yet I never presented or gave any indication that it means "God". In short, he is making a straw man argument.

According to St. Paul in Philippians 2:5-7 Jesus already EXISTING in the FORM of God. He then say that Jesus was EQUAL to his Father yet he EMPTIED himself and took the form of a servant. How can ONE BE EQUAL to himself? It would be even absurd to MAKE COMPARISONS if St. Paul believed that the Son is also the Father. 

Yes, Christ is from everlasting with God. He however entered our time and became man. 

On 7th question:

[Can you tell me the DIFFERENCES OF GOD THE FATHER, the Logos, Christ and of the Holy Spirit? Thanks.]

Carl Cortez clings on to his personal belief that God ONLY TOOK DIFFERENT MODES, the Father as creator, Christ who saves and the Holy Spirit that actively participates in regeneration. Yet these three roles has the same actor at different time. If this is true then God is NOT A TRUE FATHER, nor could be a true SON. 

He patched up multiple verses yet in reality it does NOT give support and credence to his arguments. Nowhere in Philippians 2:10-11 or in Hebrews 13:8 support the idea of Oneness.

My 8th question:

Tell me from Scriptures where does it says that "being a Son of God" is an OFFICE, and or as a role?

My comment:

Carl SIMPLY FAILED TO ANSWER THE Question, he instead ATTACKED the Trinity.

Question # 9:

On Philippians 2:5-9; Can you tell me from this verse if Christ is himself the Father or it only says that Christ is God who is equal with his Father? 

Carl suggests that THE ONE GOD MERELY TOOK DIFFERENT ROLES of being FATHER, Son and the Holy Spirit. It means that there is NO RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEM as He is the same being. His being as God Is his truest form.

Christ before he came to the world IS ALREADY THE ETERNAL SON OF THE ETERNAL FATHER. John 3:16 tells us that the Father SENT HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON TO THE WORLD. Who was sent is not the Father.

12th question:

In John 3:16 can you explain HOW CAN CHRIST JESUS BE THE SAME PERSON TO the Father while it says that God has a SON which BEGOTTEN by Him? Note that He sent His Son to the World, hence Christ was sent prior to becoming flesh.

On Question #12

He argued that THE LOGOS IS ONLY A PLAN OF SALVATION, that plan then materialised. He further argued that God did not sent another God

Cortez also denies that Matthew 28:19 is genuine. The primary reason is because IT DOES NOT AGREE WITH HIS BELIEF. With that I don't know what else in the Bible he rejects.

FACTS on Matthew 28:19 and EARLY Christian writings confirms that the verse is genuine:

1. The Didache(Didache 7:1), which dates to the late 1st Century or very early part of the second century. 

2.Diatesseron (Diatesseron 55:5-7), which dates to the middle of the 2nd Century.

The Shem-Tob's Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Moreover, there is NO GREEK manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew has ever been discovered WHICH DOES NOT CONTAIN Matthew 28:19.

May God enlighten those who are in darkness. God bless.

--- end of rebuttal ---

Carl C. Cortez

INTERPOLATION TO WINNIE BONILLA IBE’S REBUTTAL

Carl C. Cortez 5.12.17

My Interpolation to Winnie B. Ibe’s Rebuttal 

After Winnie Bonilla Ibe edited his rebuttal in finally agreeing to observe the rules of the format debate with a year lapse of presenting 7,413 words (more that twice of the agree number of words allowed), he then rushly fixed it trimming it to whatever he wants resulting to a tumultuos and too confusing results. that I really find it hard to understand and I can't find his rebuttal connecting it to his cross examinations based on my constructive argument presented. 

Point #1

In his first statement, he arrogantly strike directly of labeling me an allegations by an obvious fallacious argument that I failed to demonstrate my theological stand based on scriptures and logic although I was consistent of using the scriptures as my top proof as best evidences applying proper word study and logic.

Mr. Winnie Ibe Bonilla called it theory as to simply accuse me which proved that Mr. Winnie Ibe is not reading and understanding the points I raised. He then accused me of failing to demonstrate the Oneness of God as being numerical ONE although I already showed him the Hebrew definition of “echad”(not mine) which is numerical based also on GOD’s claims that He ALONE, Knew no other, No other God besides Him, Myself… denoting absoluteness and not composite or compound as declared clearly in Deut. 6:4, The Lord God is only ONE LORD not THREE or many!

I agree with Winnie Ibe that there are that distinctions as to roles is concern God was doing in the span of time but NOT that God was with another separate persons which are gods that existed even before creation. Winnie Ibe was confused the reason, he went to throw mud accusing me that I said Christ is the Father but cannot be found in my constructive argument. Christ is the “Masshiach”or God/Father Sent, the Anointed One as JESUS took the role of being the mediator between Man and God, being born of a woman, made under the law. 

Point #2 

Winnie Ibe tried to explain to me his understanding of Col. 2:9 saying that “There is no lacking in the deity of Christ. He is the Incarnate God” quoting John 1:1. 

That isn’t what Paul has said but he said "in Him (JESUS) dwells all the fullness (completeness) of the Godhead or Deity" (of course the attributes of being the creator as Father, Holy, and being the Spirit). 

Paul never mentioned “deity of Christ” in Col. 2:9 much more he never mentioned the word “incarnate” even John 1:1 but this is Winnie Ibe Bonilla’s interpretation that he himself was making his own understanding of the scriptures. 

Point #3

I am not insisting that Christ is the Father the fact that Jesus humanity refers not the divinity. Winnie Ibe Bonilla failed to present proper word study of John 10:30 but showed again his own interpretation that can’t be read and be found in the context of the scripture he’s quoting. Christ was so clear being in the flesh or human claimed that the Father (God) is in him and that he as Christ or in the flesh was not doing the his own will but the Father (God/Spirit) that is in him. If the Father who is God and Spirit is a person, Christ therefore be 2 persons in one body? This is so wrong, and out of context using John 10:30. 

Point #4

Winnie Ibe Bonilla again failed to present best proof of evidences from the scriptures and other extra biblical credible references that the LOGOS mentioned in John 1:1 is another person and another God as he claimed. He failed to disprove that it was the LOGOS not another person or another God that has materialized and became flesh. His shade of gray argument was obvious not found in the scriptures purely was his escape goat just to hide his hallucination of insisting that the LOGOS is another person without shedding light to it but insisting his own understanding that never the scripture and its context has said and explained. 

It was not me who gave the definition of what LOGOS is but credible and reliable dictionaries and encyclopedias which Winnie Ibe Bonilla regarded it as ordinary definition, claiming his own personal definition of the Logos as being special. The LOGOS or the plan/concept of God from the beginning for the redemption of man was executed and materialized in due time season, made of a woman, made under the law (Gal. 4:4). God was simply executing the plan, and God who is the Father and Spirit (John 4:23-24) made for himself a body or flesh to dwell. (Heb. 10:5, Col. 2:9). It was clear, Winnie Ibe Bonilla’s claim that the LOGOS which is by proper definition both theology and psychology as an expressed thought of God or God’s plan/concept is NOT another PERSON but Winnie Ibe Bonilla’s personal interpretation he called special interpretation. 

Point # 5

Winnie Ibe Bonilla mentioned that I used ordinary dictionary that slam his own bias interpretation that he assumed being equivalent to a special dictionary since he never showed any credible references. The LOGOS, the expressed thought of God, cause, reason or God’s beautiful plan of salvation or God’s beautiful plan and concept about redemption of men, when materialized in due time season doesn’t came from mine but most credible dictionaries and encyclopedias has defined. Never I denied that it was Christ when due time came after being born of a woman. The glory was given already to Christ in the foreknowledge of God as far as redemption of men is concern. 

Point # 6

Winnie Ibe Bonilla at this point rushed himself again to allege me saying I ”DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED to the clear statement of the Bible”yet he failed to prove it again. He used the word “I AM” the possessive identifier JESUS was claiming as JESUS was proving before Abraham “HE WAS and IS”, the very word GOD introduce himself to Moses of which never I contested but strongly believed, where it precisely pointed to the DIVINITY of JESUS himself as the creator and the EVERLASTING FATHER (Isa. 9:6), the ALMIGHTY! (Rev. 1:8) not referring to a PERSON but as GOD, the SPIRIT that resides in ALL His creation not limited by time and space.

Winnie Ibe Bonilla supposedly should proved his claims to be true yet he was caught by his accusations he himself was trapped and found guilty of misinterpretations. The context of Philippians 2:6-8 based on the clear thought of Paul refers not the DEITY but the EXTERNAL or OUTWARD appearance Christ had as human in support to what Paul himself has written from his other epistles. The greek for the word FORM is “morphe” that most scholars agreed that it refers to the external or outward appearance of Christ as he was the visible image of God Paul also mentioned in Col. 1:15 rather than referring to the inner nature as most Trinitarians had claimed. 

Christ’s existence in the flesh evidently was the visible FORM of God where through that visibility, Christ demonstrated HUMILITY as in the form of a bond-servant found in the appearance of man not the nature of God being Judge and High above all else, who “emptied”or denied his will but becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." It was HUMILITY Christ has demonstrated in the flesh as the context of Phil. 2:6-8 portrayed not that Christ was Judge or as God.. It was not the DIVINITY of JESUS that died but the HUMANITY of JESUS as Christ.

(to be continued... 1/2)