FORMAL DEBATE WITH YANDEX ANCHETA

SEEKERS OF GOD's DESIRE FB Forum (Faith debate Group)

= ONE ON ONE FORMAL DEBATE =

TOPIC: 

"GOD IS A TRIUNE GOD IN THREE DISTINCT PERSONS BUT NO ABSOLUTE SEPARATION"

SOURCES: BIBLE (All versions), other Theological references, Encyclopedias and Dictionary for definition of terms.

TIME FRAME: Max of 1 month
Started : August 15, 2018
End : September 15, 2018

AFFIRMATIVE Side:
Yandex Zysev Ancheta - Triune God

NEGATIVE Side:
Ptr. Carl Cortez - Oneness Doctrine (UPC)

MODERATOR:
Christine Marie Reluya Cajeta

ADMINS:
Ptr John Reyes Zervoulakos (inactive)
Bro Johnny Dela Cruz (inactive)
Bro Gabriel Liongson (Yandex constituent)
Bro Rafe Arthur Maverick (Yandex constituent)
Bro Julius Catipol #Julius (inactive)
Bro Jojo Loro (Yandex constituent)

FORMAL DEBATE FORMAT
Part I :
OPENING PRAYER: (Moderator)

PART II:
PRESENTATION:
(Stand/Proofs of claims - regarding the Topic)
max 1500 words - min 500 words.
a.) Affirmative
b.) Negative

PART III:
CROSS-EXAM:
(max 15 Questions min 10 Questions)
a.) Affirmative
b.) Negative

PART IV:
REBUTTALS:
(One by One from Debaters Answer 1-15 max 300 words - min 100 words/Answer )
a.) Affirmative
b.) Negative.

PART V:
CONCLUSION:
(max 100 words - min 50 words)
a.) Affirmative
b.) Negative

PART VI:
EVALUATION:
--- Moderators verdict regarding the FLOW OF DEBATE and DEBATERS ATTITUDE.
--- Presentation of Records of DEBATERS VIOLATIONS.
--- ARGUMENT WISE will be declared by the members/readers.

PART VII:
CLOSING REMARKS:
By: Ptr. John Reyes Zervoulakos - Forum's Senior Administrator.

PART VIII:
OPEN FORUM:
--- Members are allowed to give their POINT OF VIEW regarding the Formal Debate or POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE FEEDBACKS about the performance of the Debaters and the Moderator.
--- Members were allowed in this part to ASK QUESTIONS to the Debaters.

GUIDELINES:
(As requested by the Negative Side Ptr Carl Cortez.)

Observe proper rule of Bible interpretations known as Hermeneutics. Meaning, no personal interpretations allowed.

FORMAL DEBATE RULES:
1.) The FORMAT OF DEBATE is CONSTANT and must STRICTLY BE FOLLOWED and FINISH even if ONE OF THE DEBATER cannot continue the Formal Debate for whatever reasons such as VOLUNTARY QUIT or TECHNICALLY DECLARED LOOSER by obtaining the maximum violation of ten(10). Only the RULES OF DEBATE can be revise as requested or suggested by the Debaters before they will START the Debate.
--- The TOPIC -- Must be agreed/confirmed with evidence by both parties. (required screen shot and must be documented and keep by the Moderator for record purposes.
--- Source/Sources -- Depends to the topic as agreed by both parties as stipulated above.
--- Time frame -- Optional only, if agreed by both parties or what has been stipulated by the Moderator. Failure to obey is +1 violation of this Rule.

2.) During the Formal Debate, the Debaters CAN QUIT without imposing violation IF the Debater's Opponent would agree that there would be a replacement in his behalf that would continue what he started.

3.)In the case of REPLACEMENT OF DEBATER, everything that has been PRESENTED or GIVEN by the PREVIOUS DEBATER cannot be change, added or omitted by the NEW Debater who replaced in his behalf. Everything that has been started should be continued until the Formal Debate will finish.

4.) Once the Formal Debate STARTS, revisions of the Rules by only ONE PARTY, is strictly NOT ALLOWED, unless BOTH PARTIES requested for revisions. Only then it will be heard and granted by the Moderator.

5.) Professional Debaters must observe good manners. Direct and Indirect Adhom are STRICTLY NOT ALLOWED against each other and towards the Moderator. The Moderator will give REMINDERS for the 1st offense, WARNING for the 2nd offense and LAST WARNING for the 3rd offense, before imposing or giving +1 violation of this PARTICULAR RULE ONLY.

6.) Debaters complaint against each others statement must be with evidence submitted to the Moderator. Only Debaters complaint will be entertain inside the FD Thread. Members complaint will be entertain in a separate Complaint FD Thread posted separately by the Moderator.

7.) Debaters are NOT allowed to Argue with each other and to the Moderators decision. The Debaters were OBLIGED to follow INSTRUCTION from The Moderator. The Moderator has the power to impose +1 in every violation of this particular rule or NO RECORD OF COMPLIANCE from the Debaters.

8.) Debaters can APPEAL for the MODERATOR's DECISION or INSTRUCTION but requires FORMAL LETTER address to the ADMINISTRATORS, state your complaint, date, and evidence (screenshot). It will be Formally submitted to the (office) GC of the Administrators for discussions and votation.

9.) Any statement from the Debaters will be considered null and void UNLESS confirmed by the opposite party with evidence (screenshot).

10.) Debaters MUST inform the Moderator/Admins when they are going to continue the FD once they are both/other party is NOT AVAILABLE. They can use this privilege anytime they want until the end or once the FD is finish.

11.) Presentation -- Max of 1500 words min of 500 words. (checked/counted/approved by the Moderator if the Presentation is related to the Topic. If NOT, it is necessary to change or revise it and recorded +1 violation of this Rule.

12.) Cross-exam -- valid only IF the Question came from the Opponent's PRESENTATION.

a.) ---- Questions should be at the BOTTOM of the comment.
---- On TOP of it, is the opponent's statement from his PRESENTATION copy pasted for reference where the question came from.

b.) The Question must be constructed with the ff words to be invoke transparently such as;
What, When, Where, How, Why etc.

c.) The Debaters MAY NOT answer the question and raise CLARIFICATION or OBJECTION to the Moderator once the Debater found the question NOT APPROPRIATE for him/her to answer the Question BUT must explain"WHY" or WITH JUSTIFICATION.

d.) If the question's answer is YES or NO, you have to say the word "YES or NO" FIRST before you state WHY, ONLY if being asked to explain WHY.

3.) Clarifications or OBJECTIONS to the questions and answers of both Debaters should be raise directly to the Moderator. The Debaters are NOT allowed to make an argument with each other during the CROSS-EXAM. All they have to do is to ASK and ANSWER.

14.) Initial Summary of word count must be presented by the Moderators anytime it is needed/requested by Debaters and everytime the Debater committed a violation. Maximum of Ten (10) violations and the Debater will be declared TECHNICALLY LOOSER or UNPROFESSIONAL DEBATER.

15.) Rebuttals-- One by One every Q/A of the Debater.
Format in one comment:
-- On top (Question)
-- Middle (Answer)
-- Bottom (Rebuttals)
Max of 300 words min of 100 words/Answer of your Opponent.

16.) Edited comments are NOT allowed UNLESS requested by the Debaters and allowed by the opposite party. +1 violation of this Rule everytime the Debater has an EDITED COMMENT.

17.) Comments and suggestion is highly appreciated for the improvement of the quality of service rendered by the Group Admins.

Thank you...and God Bless...

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

PRESENTATIONS

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

AFFIRMATIVE PRESENTATION
- Yandex Zesyv Ancheta -

"God is a Triune God in Three Distinct Persons but no Absolute Separation"

Opening Salvo (affirmative)

Knowing the Triune God as He is revealed in the Word of God requires a DYNAMIC INTERACTION among the Word of God.

In Latin, the word TRIUNE is used for the Trinity. Tri means “Three"; and Une means “One"; hence, TRIUNE means “three-one,” being both "Three and One" we simply say “the three-one God,” that is, “the Triune God.” According to the pure revelation of the Bible, God is Triune; He is the Triune God.

Why does the One God has the aspect of being Three?

To answer this question we have to find out from the THEOLOGY IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE TO THE THEOLOGY IN THE LATIN LANGUAGE because the studies and records of the CHURCH FATHERS were all in Greek. From around A.D. 100 to the formation of the papal system at the end of the sixth century, this period of four to five hundred years was called THE PERIOD OF COUNCILS in church history. Theological studies during this period continued to be WRITTEN IN GREEK. 

After the establishment of the Catholic Church with its headquarters in the city of Rome, where Latin was used most prevailingly, theological studies entered the SECOND STAGE---the stage of the LATIN LANGUAGE From the seventh century to the sixteenth century, theological literature was written chiefly in Latin. Even during the Reformation, Martin Luther still used Latin in his writings, although he was German. Therefore, Latin also occupies quite an important position in theological research. 

The first time the N.T clearly speaks of the divine Trinity is in Matthew 28:19. In that verse the Lord commanded the disciples, saying, “Go therefore and disciple all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” This verse clearly mentions the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. 

Although the Triune God was revealed in the Old Testament, it was not until the Lord Jesus, who is God(Rom 9:5), passed through four crucial steps—incarnation, human living, crucifixion, and resurrection—that He spoke to His disciples before ascending to heaven, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and disciple all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:18-19). 

Therefore, Triune God having the aspect of One and the aspect of Three is presented in the Holy Word. 

The aspect of ONE - Isaiah 45:5 

"I am the Lord...there *is no God besides Me". 

It does not say "there is no God besides Us". 

The aspect of THREE - Gen 1:26 that God is Triune. If you say that God is One, how can He refer to Himself using pronouns "Us" and "Our"? 

These persons of the Holy Trinity are not separable individuals. Each involves the others; the coming of each is the coming of the others. Thus, the coming of the Spirit must have involved the coming of the Son & the Father. 

In Robert Govett's word, a famous British Theologian said, this is to accept the TRUTH IN ITS TWOFOLDNESS. 

In the words of A.W. Tozer who received two honorary doctoral degrees, this is to see the truth, like a bird, has TWO WINGS and to confess that many of doctrinal divisions among the churches are the result of a blind and stubborn insistence that the TRUTH HAS BUT ONE WING. 

The follower of Christ is called upon to embrace all truths and every truth. That is, he or she must open their hearts to God's truth, and having done so he must be prepared to ACCEPT ALL TRUTHS & REJECT NONE. Where one truth seems to contradict another, the wise christian will not make his choice between them but will believe both and wait for the day of Christ to resolve what appears to be their differences....We may believe all that God has revealed, however self-contradictory it may appear to be, because ALL TRUTHS MEET AND HARMONIZE IN THE TRUTH(Christ), AND THE TRUTH MAKES FREE. 

In Greek theology, the word HUPOSTASIS (singular). Hupo means “underneath” and stasis means “a supporting substance”; hupostasis, therefore, means “a supporting substance erected underneath.”

For example, the three legs of a three-legged table are the HUPOSTASES (plural) of the table. In Paul's Epistles this word is rendered as “confidence” or “assurance” (cf. 2 Cor. 9:4; Heb. 3:14), referring to something on which one can stand firmly.

The Triune God has three HUPOSTASES three substantial, dependable supports—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These three—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit—are the three supports of the Triune God.

Another Greek word that is used is PROSPA which is equivalent to the Latin word, PERSONAE from which the English word person is derived. However, most people today are not clear about the meanings of these terms. This is why Philip Schaff, a church historian, was in favor of using the Greek word HUPOSTASES supporting substances, instead of the other terms. 

Hupostases refers to the aspect of the Divine Trinity's being THREE. Nevertheless, the Divine Trinity is one in His essence. The Greek word for essence is OUSIA denoting the essence of the substance. In Latin it is ESSENTIA, equivalent to the English word ESSENCE. The Triune God has THREE HUPOSTASES but only ONE OUSIA.

By saying God has ONE ESSENCE(ousia)and THREE PERSONS(hupostases) it is meant that He has one "what"and three "who's". The Three Who's (person) each share the same What (essence). So God is one in essence with a plurality of persons. Each person is different, yet they share a common nature. They are different yet the same, the same yet different. Perhaps the best expression we can give is that while their Personalities are never identical, their presence always is. 

The Father, Son and Spirit are One God, not three Gods, They are DISTINCT in FUNCTION & In PERSON let us read: Eph 4:6 

"One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you" 

I would call your attention to "and in you" God the Father is in you and in us all. Then we go to Col 1:27 

"Christ in you is the hope of glory" 

Christ is the hope of glory, who is right now in you and in us. God the Father is in you and Christ the Son is also in you. Now turn to John 14:17, 

"The Spirit of truth...shall be in you" 

The Spirit is also in you. It is so clear that the Father is in us, the Son is in us, and the Spirit is also in us. 

Then according to your experience, how many God are in you? One or three? According to letters, it seems there are three, but according to our experience, there is One. This is because the F, S, &HS are one. 

The Oneness of the Three in the Godhead share is not just a common purpose nor is it merely a shared nature. It is a oneness of MUTUAL INDWELLING.

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

NEGATIVE PRESENTATION

- Carl Cortez -

MY NEGATIVE STATEMENT IN REFUTE TO THE PROPOSITION

“GOD IS A TRIUNE GOD IN THREE DISTINCT PERSONS BUT NO ABSOLUTE SEPARATION”

INTRODUCTION

Precious stones or anything that has great value aren’t exposed anywhere and visible to everyone’s eye, or easy-hand-pick thing. It is hidden beneath as being preserved that only those who’ll exert their effort, time, energy even resources be rewarded of finding it or of course if been blessed/guided by the Blesser who determines the hearts and motives of men. 

TRUTH Jesus said should be known first. You have to dig it and find it with patience and resourcefulness. Until you’ll know it, then the guarantee as reward for the seekers of course is to truly be set free from any form of lies and deceits. 

The problem of many today is the lack of discipline in handling the scriptures in proper manner and attitude. These people who lack the proper knowledge’ attempts in interpreting the scriptures is easily be dappled prone to word corruptions unknowingly being ignorant to truth but becoming or catalysts and haulers of mendacities. These lackadaisical people who care not in applying the discipline of proper word study often caught relying with their assumptions, laying their personal opinions and private interpretations or siding on the works of others that the Bible itself strictly prohibiting of doing so. (2 Pet. 1:20,21) This attitude is contrary to the Bereans (Acts 17:11) and Paul’s strict counsel to Timothy in response to the Greek philosophers of their times. 

“Study earnestly to present yourself approved to God, a workman that does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing (Strong's: dissecting correctly) the Word of Truth.” 

2 Tim. 2:15

This is the very essence and nature of hermeneutics, apologetics, and proper exegesis.

In the light of the TRUTH, I’ll draw from my side the two edged-sword enough to cut down the head of falsehood, spurious man-made/invented doctrines never the Bible taught or were written but being developed profusely during the dark ages, the time of Roman Catholic corruptions repudiating their ways with its papal doctrines and hierarchy, the time were Christians strove to re-create a pure Christianity, void of these “dark” Roman Catholic ways who even corrupted the Holy writ eventually deviated from the TRUTH thus misled many. The only way to expurgate and expose this darkness is what JESUS had taught more than 2,000 years ago, as to KNOW THE TRUTH, the only way for real truth seekers to be set FREE from lies and deceits of the enemy.

1) THE TRUTH ABOUT ETYMOLOGY OF WORDS (the origin of a word and the historical development of its meaning.)

A. “GOD” OR “G-D” USED IN THE ENGLISH BIBLE

Akin to classical terminology (לֹאֱ) “EL”or (אֱלֹהִ֔ים ) “El-ohim”, relative to the word commonly been used the time an English Bible version were first been released such as KJV1611 and the Douay-Rheims Version (both were published during the 16th century AD), the English word “GOD” has been the transliterations of the Bible to the ONE who is known to be the “strong one of authority” or the “mighty one”, who is the supreme or the powerful of ALL. This word has been the common term in epochs of old referred to the “Holy One” of Israel, the mighty one being etched, written and highly feted in the Bible, especially the Torah and the Tanakh. 

With many other titles or scanty names that distinguished the characteristics or the attributes being witnessed of HIM by all the living that He had dealt and communicated with especially HIS chosen people. The “strong one of authority” or “mighty one” been attributed to accordingly for each titles ascribed to HIM or as how HE revealed Himself to them in a specific time which is not limited to three or distributed to three different and distinct (separate) being, but to same absolute “strong one of authority” or the “mighty one” not “mighty two or three”. 

They knew HIM in the language they spoke that also traced back their lineage and race, the Hebrew that originated from Eber, the great grandson of Noah’s son, Shem. They called HIM the following attributions in Semitic (shemitic) root: “El”, the root word for Elah, Elohim, El-shaddai, El Elyon, El Gibor, El Olam etc. “El” is a combination of two Hebrew consonants “aleph" and "lamed” where its pictograph showed a blend of two characters, a bull/ox head and a staff which means power/might and authority, thus the English word Almighty/Mighty of All or the Supreme of All derived from. This has been the reference equivalent to the English word GOD.

TRUTH ESTABLISHED

The equivalent English word “GOD” or “G-D” -the “strong one of authority” or the “mighty one” from its original gist or etymology as digging up the truth in the study of origin of words of its ancient Hebrew pictographs itself. Never had it suggested a concept of three beings or more but to an absolute one who alone is mighty progressively been shown in different dispensations of time and generations as the writer themselves showed a strong evidence by the pictograph works.

Origin of the English word “God” when used, points not to three or more beings or even 3 persons but one that when the Greek word “Theos” was translated to its English corresponding meaning “God”, it really mean the same of its etymology in Hebrew “EL/El-ohim” as the “strong one in authority” or the “mighty one”, not mighty two, not mighty three nor a band of the mighty.

B. TRINITY or TRIUNE GOD MAN-MADE INVENTION 

The word Trinity and Triune God originated not from the Holy writ but latter development from Rome influenced by the Greek pagan philosophers that translated the Bible to Latin, originated from Europe not from Jerusalem or from the followers of the apostles of Christ. – Online Etymology Dictionary

TRUTH ESTABLISHED 

The original Bible consisting the Torah, Books of the prophets, Psalms, Poets, etc. were written in Hebrew and were translated in Greek in the 300-200BC known as the Septuagint. These materials were read even during the times of Christ available in the synagogues. These are not written in Latin. The Latin version of the Bible translated by the Roman Catholics depicted as erroneous was the Latin Vulgate. This translation corrupted the Hebrew and Greek scriptures placing all their pagan-root doctrine such as the Trinity or Triune God, a copy of the Egyptian, Buddhism and Hinduism gods including the beads where they chanted their prayers in repetitions. This has been known as the era of “dark ages”.

-The word Trinity or Triune cannot be found in the scriptures of the Bible, however, by tracing the origin of the word it is clear that this doctrine never has been a doctrine of the Bible taught in the OT or by the disciples and apostles including Christ himself but a man-made concept started in the early century by the root of pagan gods making God not absolute one but a compound three then adopted by the Roman Catholics in the late 2nd century and was formally accepted and recognized in Nicea Council 325 AD.

C. The Matthew 28:19 Issue of Catholic Corruption and Attempt of Insertion.

Eusebius of Ceasaria/Pamphili, called the “father of church history” in 260 – 340 AD who was then ex-communicated from the Catholic after withdrawing himself from the Council of Nicea (the council that invented the Doctrine of Trinity), as always quoted parts of Matthew especially as what we now know chapter 28:19. 

“…baptizing them in my name…” The words Father, Son and Holy ghost were strange words during his time and was later successfully been placed in the new Bible translations including the KJV in the 16th century AD.

This truth has been confirmed by credible history books.

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: 

As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism… "The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition."

Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: 

"It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but...a later liturgical addition."

Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295: 

"The testimony for the wide distribution of the simple baptismal formula [in the Name of Jesus] down into the second century is so overwhelming that even in Matthew 28:19, the Trinitarian formula was later inserted."

TRUTH ESTABLISHED 

The words Father, Son and Holy ghost were not part of the original manuscript and was clearly catholic invention. That also includes how they manipulated of proving this lie to become true as to strengthen their doctrine never the Bible taught even once.

D. Exposing the Errors of Substituting the One “GOD” (mighty one) to Triune God denoting 3 Persons in the Godhead.

Never the Bible referred God as a person but the “I AM” who is present at all times, “the mighty one”, Spirit that fills all places, a singular intellectual being referred as a Father to HIS creation in the gender of masculine for this specific attribution. No one among all its 40 writers mentioned it but it only surfaced after the doctrine Trinity was developed in the 2nd, formally invented in the 3rd Century AD.

The Hebrew word for person is “adam” (םאָדָ) and its corresponding Greek word is “prosopon” (/prəˈsoʊ) which was being confused by Hypostasis (Greek: ὑπόστασις) - the underlying state or underlying substance and is the fundamental reality that supports all else. In Neoplatonism the hypostasis of the soul, the intellect (nous) and "the one" was addressed by Plotinus.

TRUTH ESTABLISHED 

In the attempt of the Trinitarians as adherents of the doctrine Trinity or Triune God, even its forerunner the Roman Catholics encountered the difficulty of knowing God based on the Greek philosophies finding the Cappadocean Fathers who standardized the formula "three hypostases in one ousia" and the Council of Chalcedon, where even today, they still at their best finding to solve the mystery of their false and man-made fallacy or as it remained a mystery or unsolved heresy. 

Here’s a quote from William Franklin Graham Jr. (19th century) who copied a statement from St. Augustine of Hippo way back in the 3rd Century AD. 

“.. trinity is a mystery… but if you’ll reject it… you’ll lost your soul…” 

The Bible mentioned only once the word person which could be both be translated to “hypostasis” or “prosopon” when referring to the godhead where Paul of Tarsus, a philosopher revealed JESUS as the person (“hypostasis/prosopon”) of God. Heb. 1:3. 

Christ is the person “hypostasis” of GOD (strong one of authority/mighty one) Col. 2:9-10 

Christ is the person “prosopon” of GOD (strong one of authority/mighty one). 1 Cor. 15:45 

CHRIST JESUS is the “hypostasis” and the “prosopon” of GOD who was prophesied the perfect “image and likeness of man” in Gen. 1:26 when God (mighty one) planned it after the counsel of his own will (Eph.1:11) known to be the "logos" of God (expressed thought of God - John 1:14) materialized in due time (Gal. 4:4). 

The union of God and man called “hypostatic union” is JESUS Christ, 1 Tim. 3:16. 

Trinity or Triune God is a hoax, a man-made doctrine and a big LIE!

----------------------------------- end ------------------------------------- 

total # of words = 1,500 

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

CROSS-EXAMINATIONS 

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

AFFIRMATIVE SIDE

- Yandex Zysev Ancheta -

QUESTION #1:

Sabi ni Mr Carl Cortez,

"Akin to classical terminology (לֹאֱ) “EL”or (אֱלֹהִ֔ים ) “El-ohim”, relative to the word commonly been used the time an English Bible version were first been released such as KJV1611 and the Douay-Rheims Version (both were published during the 16th century AD), the English word “GOD” 

Question:

Is the word ELOHIM a plural or a singular form of God in Hebrew word?

ANSWER TO Q#1

The word “Elohim” refers to the majesty of God, the plural form denoting to the totality of GOD’s attributes from its root form El with its original meaning “strong ONE of authority” or “mighty one”

Elohim is the infinite, all-powerful God who shows by His works that He is the creator, sustainer, and supreme judge of the world and many other titles or attributes due to HIM.

QUESTION #2: 

Base on screen shot Mr Carl Cortez you said, you will refute my Three Distinct Persons stand but not Separated, right? 

If there were no DISTINCTIONS among the Three of the Divine Trinity to Whom the Lord Jesus offered Himself without blemish in Heb 9:14 which stated

"How much more will the blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit OFFERED HIMSELF without blemish TO GOD, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God?"

ANSWER TO Q#2

Based on the screenshot you took from other thread not part of my presentation in this thread, I already refuted your stand which is of course not mine “God is a Triune God in Three Distinct Persons no Absolute Separation” encapsulated in my negative arguments presented that you need to destroy. 

There were no words mentioned in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation (1) Divine Trinity (2) DISTINCTIONS among the Three including Heb. 9:14. 

Heb. 9:14 Paul said that JESUS (being the Christ or the God manifest in the flesh (1 Tim. 2:5. 3:16) offered Himself without blemish to God (El-ohim/Theos, mighty one). 

THEREFORE, the assumption of the man-made theory “Distinctions of the Divine Trinity” are false and can’t be applied in this text for it is God (El-ohim/Theos) HIMSELF, the mighty one whom also is the one who manifest in the flesh in the person of Christ who did this things as fulfilling the law about redemption.

QUESTION #3:

If there were no DISTINCTION AMONG THE THREE how could the Father forsake the Son in Matt 27:46?

"My God My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

ANSWER TO Q#3 

First of all, as to be clear, there were no DISTINCTION AMONG THE THREE persons in the DIVINE TRINITY in Matthew 27:46 for Matthew never mentioned it in his letter, and never did I mention that as well in my negative presentation. Here it is.

“And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” 

The Father who is GOD (mighty one (Mal. 2:10)) literally have not forsaken the Son (Christ/man (1 Tim. 2:5)) for GOD (mighty one) Himself was in Christ, reconciling the world … unto Himself.” (2 Cor. 5:19). 

So, this statement Christ uttered, quoted from Psa. 22:1 as a fulfillment as well, denotes not another distinction of Christ to GOD (mighty one) whom called the Father the fact that GOD (mighty one), the Father was in Christ. This is not to be taken in a literal sense that the Son was really forsaken of the Father, rather, representational or figurative as depicting the state of a sinner. The words thus understood are rather to be referred to the wicked Jews or as representing all the sinners than to Christ. This is an exclamation indicative of the obstinate wickedness of his crucifiers, who steeled their hearts against every operation of the Spirit and power of GOD (mighty one). 

Through the whole scriptures, GOD (mighty one) is represented as doing those things which, in the course of his providence, he only permits to be done; THEREFORE, the words, to whom “hast thou left or given me up or why have you forsaken me”, are only a form of expression for, "How astonishing is the wickedness of those persons into whose hands I am fallen!" It speaks a sense consistent with itself, and with the dignity of the Son of God. 

QUESTION #4:

Eto statement ni Mr Carl, 

"TRUTH ESTABLISHED

The words Father, Son and Holy ghost were not part of the original manuscript and was clearly catholic invention"

Question:

Are you telling in this debate that the Word of God in general & Matt 28:19 in particular is fallible?

ANSWER TO Q#4

My presentations showed the proof that Matthew 28:19 of what most Bible translations were written of today emphasizing the titles Father, Son and Holy ghost was clearly a Catholic invention as to emphasize their man-made invented doctrine Trinity or Triune God. 

The original manuscripts which were inspired by God written by its original writers were of course infallible but as how men attempted to transliterate and translate the scriptures, the problem occurs of which biases, corruptions, insertions and deletion are expected, thus making their works and claims fallible. 

I am not speculating but here are my credible references. 

PROOFS 

Historical Criticism 

A. The Matthew 28:19 Issue of Catholic Corruption and Attempt of Insertion. 

EUSEBIUS EXISTENCE 

Eusebius of Ceasaria/Pamphili, called the “father of church history” in 260 – 340 AD who was then ex-communicated from the Catholic after withdrawing himself from the Council of Nicea (the council that invented the Doctrine of Trinity), as always quoted parts of Matthew especially as what we now know chapter 28:19. 

“…baptizing them in my name…” The words Father, Son and Holy ghost were strange words during his time and was later successfully been placed in the new Bible translations including the KJV in the 16th century AD. 

"The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius: 

Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." That "Name" is Jesus. 

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015: 

"The Trinity.-...is not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs,...The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (c AD 180),...(The term Trinity) not found in Scripture..." "The chief Trinitarian text in the NT is the baptismal formula in Mt 28:19...This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the NT, has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion into the saying. Finally, Eusebius's form of the (ancient) text ("in my name" rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church's teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit:..." 

B. THE CATHOLIC HISTORIANS THEMSELVES ADMITTED 

Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger: 

He makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19. "The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome." The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original Church that started in Jerusalem around AD 33. It was rather as the evidence proves a later invention of Roman Catholicism completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts. 

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states: 

"It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus,"..." 

The Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C. 1923, New Testament Studies Number 5:

The Lord's Command To Baptize An Historical Critical Investigation. By Bernard Henry Cuneo page 27. "The passages in Acts and the Letters of St. Paul. These passages seem to point to the earliest form as baptism in the name of the Lord." Also we find. "Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded his disciples to baptize in the trine form? Had Christ given such a command, it is urged, the Apostolic Church would have followed him, and we should have some trace of this obedience in the New Testament. No such trace can be found. The only explanation of this silence, according to the anti-traditional view, is this the short christological (Jesus Name) formula was (the) original, and the longer trine formula was a later development." 

C. MORE EVIDENCES FROM HISTORY CHANGING JESUS NAME TO TITLES FATHER, SON AND HOLY GHOST 

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: 

"Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61...Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula...is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas... the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed..." page 435. 

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism," says: 

"Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus." 

New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19: 

"Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity..." 

and many others... 

QUESTION #5

In his A#1 Mr Carl stated that Elohim is the PLURAL FORM of God's attributes.

"The word “Elohim” refers to the majesty of God, the plural form denoting to the totality of GOD’s attributes"

Question:

What then is the singular form of elohim?

ANSWER TO Q#5

The word "Elohim" reveals not a single attribute GOD (mighty one) had rather it showed HIM ONE not two or three, the ONE in authority who isn't just mighty BUT also the:

creator, 

sustainer, 

supreme judge of the world 

and many other attributes due to HIM not them. 

The root word is "EL" "aleph" and "lamed" Hebrew characters which means "the strong one in authority" or "the mighty one" referring to a single attribute considered to be a singular form. 

QUESTION #6 

In his A#3 Mr Carl Cortez mentioned that what the Lord stated in Matt Mat 27:46 is representational or figurative 

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is, My God, My God, 

why have You forsaken Me? 

Question: 

Are you telling me that 1Pet 3:18 is also figurative and representational? 

"For Christ also has suffered once for sins, the righteous on behalf of the unrighteous, that He might bring you to God, on the One hand being put to death in the flesh, on the other hand made alive in the Spirit" 

ANSWER TO Q#6 

Yes, 1 Peter 3:18 clearly exhibited CHRIST the representation and the figure of the sinners and the whole world. 

1) Christ was an obvious representation or demonstration of God’s love that while men has in no way can save themselves from their sins, Christ died for them (Rom. 8:5) as the law requires 

That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities (not His), and bare our sicknesses (not His). (Matt. 8:17) 

at the same time; 

2) As CHRIST represented the SINNERS and to be sin, he is not a literal sinner but CHRIST became the figure of a SINNER. When he took the sins of all, became the symbol of the sins of the whole world 

JESUS represented sinners to God. His sacrifices, his shame, his sorrows, his sufferings and pains, even his death which were not abstract but realistic, the representational act of GOD through Christ to bring men unto himself. 

“For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Cor. 5:21) 

And he is the propitiation (resolution) for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2 

“But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Rom. 5:8 

“To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.” 2 Cor. 5:19 

There were no distinct three persons of the divine trinity involved being mentioned but clearly, it showed GOD (mighty one), the Father who was in Christ (the body, tabernacle He created for Him) doing it all alone to bring men unto Himself in the ministry of reconciliation. 

QUESTION #7:

"Since never the Bible said from Genesis to Revelation that there were distinctions of the three Divine Trinity that were uniting themselves together to fulfill their plans to save mankind but there was only One God (mighty one) who planned and executed it"

Question:

Why then there is a DESIGNATION as the Father chose the believers before the foundation of the world(Eph 1:3-4), as the Son redeemed us in time((Eph 1:5-7), and the Spirit sealed them after they believed in the Son (Eph 1:13) if the Absolute One doing it all alone to bring men unto Himself in the ministry of reconciliation? 

ANSWER TO Q#7

Eph. 1:3-4 “even as He hath CHOSEN US (foreplan of GOD (mighty one)) in Him before the foundation of the world…”

Eph. 1:5-7 “having PREDESTINED (foreplan of GOD (mighty one)) us to be His own adopted children by Jesus Christ…”

Eph. 1:13 “ In Christ ye also trusted after ye heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation, in Whom also after ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.” 

The context of Paul’s writing to the Ephesians concerning chapter 1 verses 3-13 was about the PREDESTINATION plan of God of adoption, the Father to the believers of Christ where Paul referred himself and his audience, the believers as the heirs of the promise of salvation. 

“In Christ also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will.” V. 11 

The word DESIGNATION (label, title, description, term) indicative to the believers as REDEEMED has been precisely understood when due time came where I agree with what you’ve said; “the Son redeemed us in time”. Redemption took place after the blood was purged in compliance to the requirements of the law “when there is no shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins,” at the perfect time. Lev. 17:11, Heb. 9:22 

“…in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace,” v. 7 

The believers mentioned by Paul including himself in Eph. 1:13 were sealed with the promise of the Holy ghost AFTER they knew and heard the word of truth, the gospel of Salvation through Christ NOT before it. 

“And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. Eph. 1:13 NLT 

THEREFORE, The word DESIGNATION (label, title, description, term) indicative to the believers as REDEEMED has nothing to do or never it questioned to what I said; 

“Since never the Bible said from Genesis to Revelation that there were distinctions of the three Divine Trinity that were uniting themselves together to fulfill their plans to save mankind but there was only One God (mighty one) who planned and executed it" 

for the fact that, the word PREDESTINATION justifies it, that GOD the ‘strong one in authority” or the absolute “mighty one” in his foreknowledge or omniscience had the plan of having the Son which was the LOGOS or the “reason, thought of God” for redemption before the existence of time in His mind. It materialized in its proper time when He had made it known to Paul as he understood it, the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure He had purposed in Himself. 

“He hath made known unto us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He hath purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in Him.” V. 8-9 

“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,..” Gal. 4:4 

QUESTION #8: 

If the DESIGNATION of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit has nothing to do with the DISTINCTION among the Three of the Godhead but rather a INDICATIVE to the believers as REDEEMED and nothing to do or never it questioned to what he said according to Mr Carl Cortez then there would be no need for Paul to say that the FATHER CHOSE US IN HIM, there would also be no need to say IN WHOM WE HAVE REDEMPTION and there would also be no need for Paul to say YOU WERE SEALED and much more there would be no need for John to say "abide both in the Son and in the Father"(2John 1:9) right? 

Question: 

Without the DISTINCTION AMONG THE THREE, how can we approach the IMMORTAL ONE WHO DWELL IN UNAPPROACHABLE LIGHT(1Tim 6:16) 

ANSWER TO Q#8 

There was no “DESIGNATION of the Father, Son & Holy spirit” as label, title, description, term or as three distinct or different persons mentioned by Paul in his letter to the Philippians but pure assumptions, an obvious attempt of inserting the strange false and man-made doctrine invented only century or two after Paul. 

There was, and is, and shall be only ONE GOD being consistent as the mighty one called the FATHER (Mal. 2:10) not becoming mighty two or three or multiplying himself as time goes by where in the original Greek manuscript of Paul's writing he mentioned in the Greek “Theos” referring GOD (mighty one) who PREDESTINED the believers to be REDEEMED through His plan (LOGOS - part of his foreplan) of the SON, that materialized only AFTER due time came. All of Christ’s believers such Paul the saints in his time were sealed with the promise of the Holy ghost. 

This GOD (mighty one) whom called the Father (Mal. 2:10) was in CHRIST, the Son who was the tabernacle He created for Him to purchase the church with His blood. Acts 2:28. 

By this TRUTH, we, like Paul and the saints during his time can approach the IMMORTAL ONE WHO DWELL IN UNAPPROACHABLE LIGHT without the aid the of the false and made-made theory invented doctrine - 3 distinct persons in the divine Trinity as assumed deceptively. 

Here is again the context of Paul’s 1st letter to Timothy chapter 6 verses 13-16 regarding GOD, the mighty in CHRIST whom also is the ONE returning, not 3 distinct persons Triune God but JESUS who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords (concerning his humanity); 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 (concerning his divinity). 

“I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall shew, 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.” 

QUESTION #9:

In his A#8 Mr Carl Cortez said that 

"Paul approached God through Christ" 

Question:

If God and Christ has NO DISTINCTION, could you please define in the light of the Scriptures, the word DISTINCTION and kindly give a classic example of it.

ANSWER TO Q#9

GOD (mighty one) and Christ has NO DISTINCTIONS as far as the man-made doctrine 3 DISTINCT persons of GOD in the Divine Trinity is concern, where from answer to Q#8 I said: 

“By this TRUTH, we, like Paul and the saints during his time can approach the IMMORTAL ONE WHO DWELL IN UNAPPROACHABLE LIGHT without the aid the of the false and made-made theory invented doctrine, 3 distinct persons in the divine Trinity as assumed deceptively.”

“Distinction” as Merriam Webster Dictionary clearly defines it as “the act of perceiving someone or something as being not the same and often treating as separate or different : the distinguishing of a difference.” 

When the word “distinction” is applied to roles GOD (mighty one) was doing in different, separate, or being not the same dispensation of time, it is incontestable BUT when it is applied to the invented and man-made doctrine, this can be truly disputable and indubitable.

QUESTION #10:

Sab ni Mr Carl Cortez

"GOD (mighty one) and Christ has NO DISTINCTIONS"

Question:

If God is absolutely One and No DISTINCTION among the Father, Son & Spirit, can we say then that the blood shed on the cross is the blood of Jesus the Father or Can we say that eternal redemption was accomplished by the blood of Jesus the Father?

ANSWER TO Q#10

God is absolute ONE as clearly described by His men whom He guided to wrote the Holy Scriptures as the “strong ONE in authority” or “mighty ONE” who personally worked in DISTINCT dispensation of times. 

When GOD whom called the Father was in Christ (1 Cor. 5:19), it was Christ, the man (1 Tim. 2:5) that died not GOD or Father. It was Christ being the Son of God, performing the perfect sacrificing, shedding the perfect blood for the atonement of sins and for eternal redemption; 

THEREFORE, we cannot say that eternal redemption was accomplished by the blood of JESUS - in the role of the Father BUT JESUS - in the role as Christ or the “Ha-masshiac” or the Son of God, the anointed ONE 

QUESTION #11:

"THEREFORE, we cannot say that eternal redemption was accomplished by the blood of JESUS - in the role of the Father BUT JESUS - in the role as Christ or the “Hamashiach” or the Son of God, the anointed ONE."

Question:

If ETERNAL REDEMPTION was accomplished NOT by the BLOOD OF JESUS why Heb 9:12 & Heb 12:24 tells us that THROUGH HIS OWN BLOOD we obtained ETERNAL REDEMPTION 

"And not through the blood of goats and calves but through His own blood, entered once for all into the Holy of Holies, obtaining an ETERNAL REDEMPTION"

ANSWER TO Q#11

Eternal Redemption was accomplished by the BLOOD of JESUS and NONE ELSE. 

Not just Heb. 9:12 and Heb. 12:24 but the law, prophecies even poetry points to it. 

QUESTION #12:

In your A#2: 

"To be précised, never the Bible said from Genesis to Revelation that there were distinctions of the three Divine Trinity that were uniting themselves together to fulfil their plans to save mankind but there was only One God (mighty one) who planned and executed it"

Question:

If the Bible never said about the DISTINCTION AMONG THE THREE OF THE DIVINE TRINITY how can He refer to Himself using pronouns "Us" and "Our" in Gen 1:26? In the O.T & why In John 14:16 the Three have their respective pronouns "I , He and He" in the N.T?

ANSWER TO Q#12

The Bible had already spoken and what has been written is final and complete. Prov. 30:6; 2 Tim. 3:16-17. It clearly testifies to ONLY ONE not to three, making the false man-made invented doctrine "three distinct persons in divine trinity" UNNECESSARY and NONSENSE. 

"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about me." (John 5:39). 

GOD (mighty one) had already declared of Himself that He ALONE is GOD, the LORD and NONE ELSE. 

"I am the LORD, and there is no other; there is no GOD (mighty one) but Me. I will equip you for battle, though you have not known Me, so that all may know, from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting, that there is none but Me. I am the LORD, and there is no other." Isa. 45:5-6 

The pronouns "Us" and "Our" as GOD (mighty one) had spoken, do not of course referred to Himself but whoever was present during the time He executed His plan or foretelling of His will to be accomplished. All Bible writers never attempted to speculate either, the fact that no one among them witnessed that GOD (mighty one) had spoken to another GOD, 

THEREFORE; to say that the pronouns "us" and "our" are to conclude that GOD is more than ONE or that He was talking to the invented term another GODKIND is purely speculations, assumptions and PSEUDO man-made inventions. 

GOD IS THE TRUTH and MAN is a LIAR! 

QUESTION #13:

In your A#6 you said that Matt 27:46 as well as 1Pet 3:18 is representational and figurative.

Question:

The "flesh" that has being put to death in 1Pet 3:18 is it LITERAL or FIGURATIVE?

ANSWER TO Q#13

My answer to Q#6 clearly explained that CHRIST died in behalf of the sinners. Christ has nothing to pay for his sins for he sinned not. Christ is not the sinner BUT he represented men in lieu, instead or in BEHALF of their sin or the sins of the world. What was representational was the SINS that he took off by himself which is not his.

“For Christ died for sins once and for all, a good man on BEHALF OF SINNERS, in order to lead you to God. He was put to death physically, but made alive spiritually,” 1 Pet. 3:18 

“…while WE were yet SINNERS, CHRIST died for US.” Rom. 5:18 

To the question was, the FLESH that was put to death in 1 Pet. 3:18 literal or figurative? The answer is clear. The FLESH of CHRIST was literally his earthly body, the perfect sacrifice for sins through his blood. For the life of the FLESH is in the BLOOD (Lev. 17:11). What was representational was not his FLESH but the SINS that he TOOK in BEHALF of the SINNERS.

QUESTION #14: 

In your A#11 you said that ETERNAL REDEMPTION was accomplished solely by the blood of Jesus,

Question:

Where was the Father when the Son incarnated as a Man or when the Son stoop down in the bridge of time?

ANSWER TO Q#14

GOD (mighty one, called the Father) was in Christ when GOD (mighty one) manifest in the flesh. 

“To wit, that GOD was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.” 1 Cor. 5:19

“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: GOD (mighty one)was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.” 1 Tim. 3:16 

QUESTION #15:

Your A#14 is this

"GOD (mighty one, called the Father) was in Christ when GOD (mighty one) manifest in the flesh"

Question:

If there were no distinction why the Lord told to the disciples that He would pray to the Father in John 14:16?

ANSWER TO Q #15

There is that DISTINCTIONS of the roles Father and Christ, GOD (mighty one) was performing in dealing with His creation especially man in DISTINCT or separate dispensation of times, but NEVER are there 3 DISTINCT persons of the assumption Divine Trinity for GOD ALONE is mighty, the strong ONE in authority, not two or three doing it all. 

JESUS as performing the CHRIST or being in the flesh as called “Hamashiach”, the anointed one, called the Son of GOD taught his disciples to FOLLOW his dealings and examples as to FULFILL all righteousness (Matt. 3:15) not as to become GOD but to be justified in the faith (Rom. 5:1) by BELIEVING in him whom he said has sent Him, GOD (mighty one), the Father (John 6:29). 

---------------------------------- Oo -------------------------------------

NEGATIVE SIDE

- Carl Cortez - 

QUESTION #1:

Yandex Zysev Ancheta from your statements

"Opening Salvo (affirmative)

Knowing the Triune God as He is revealed in the Word of God requires a DYNAMIC INTERACTION among the Word of God."

If the word Triune God can’t be found written or had not been taught in the scriptures by men of God moved by His Spirit where dynamic interactions among the scriptures where already there as they read it and wrote the other. If not the men of GOD, WHO then said that the Triune God was revealed in it as you emphasize saying you know?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #1

Although Trinity cannot be found in the Bible, the FACTS that these word describe are definitely REVEALED IN THE BIBLE(Matt 28:19).

Theophilus of Antioch(A.D. 115-188), one of the early church fathers, was the first to use the word TRINITY in his writings. The word TRIUNE GOD also began to be used at about the same time. Thus, both TRINITY & TRIUNE were brought into CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY.

QUESTION #2:

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

From the Tenets of the doctrine of Trinity or Triune God who believes in the “one God in three persons” (same with what Theophilus of Antioch invented). 

Namely:

God the Father, - who is not God the Son and God the Holy Spirit 

God the Son – who is not God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, and 

God he Holy Spirit – who is not God the Father and God the Son. 

Each of these persons has their own will, personality and they each perform different or separate roles. While distinct from one another in these regards, in all else they are stated to be “co-equal”, “co-eternal”, “co-existent” and “each is God, whole and entire”. 

Do you agree on this or you rejected it?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #2

We agree on terminology but we don't agree from the TRADITIONAL TEACHING OF TRINITY. 

The persons of the Holy Trinity are not separable individuals. Each involves the others; the coming of each is the coming of the others 

"I do nothing from Myself, but as My Father has taught Me, I speak these things and He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone"(John 8:28-29) 

Thus, the coming of the Spirit must have involved the coming of the Son(Luke 1:35) 

QUESTION #3:

Yandex Zysev Ancheta this will be based on facts in history as you mentioned Theophilus of Antioch.

As you used the word “Trinity or Triune God” and wants to establish it, are you aware that there were already existing pagan gods (the Israelites or the One God believers rejected) represented by Trinity or Triune God before Christ came that might influence the doctrine of its successors where Theophilus of Antioch was also known born as a pagan?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #3

I'm not aware of it but what I firmly believed is that the Divine Trinity are directly according to the REVELATION OF THE PURE WORD OF GOD either directly indicated or indirectly implied.

QUESTION #4

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

You mentioned the Greeks doing their study from 100 AD to sixth century AD which were mentioned by Catholics yet you rejected the Catholic Trinity. 

Are you aware also that the Greeks had plenty of gods as portrayed by its philosophers?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #4

Chicken feathers are not good to eat. However, without feathers the chicken cannot survive. When you buy a chicken, you must first examine the feathers. If the feathers are scraggly it will not be a good one. Eventually, however NO ONE WILL EAT THE CHICKEN FEATHERS.

In like manner, When it comes to Greek Mythology I am little bit aware of it but our focus is on the enjoyment of the Triune God who can dispense Himself into His chosen people not to the Greek gods portrayed by its philosophers. 

Again, the Bible is our Unique Standard not the CREEDS NOT THE COUNCIL.

QUESTION #5

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

If TRINITY doctrine are chicken feathers invented by the Catholics since that wasn't a meat found written in the Bible, why are you eating it?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #5

Who say so? 🙂

Early teachings concerning Trinity may be classified into three main categories:

Conscious Tritheism

Implies Tritheism

Subconscious Tritheism 

Again, my standard is the Bible. Catholics Trinity are UNSCRIPTURAL and we are not agree to it. 

QUESTION #6

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

Here's from your affirmative presentation you said, 

"Why does the One God has the aspect of being Three?

To answer this question we have to find out from the THEOLOGY IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE TO THE THEOLOGY IN THE LATIN LANGUAGE because the studies and records of the CHURCH FATHERS were all in Greek. From around A.D. 100 to the formation of the papal system at the end of the sixth century, this period of four to five hundred years was called THE PERIOD OF COUNCILS in church history. Theological studies during this period continued to be WRITTEN IN GREEK."

Why quote them to establish your doctrine TRINITY eventually you also rejected?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #6

What we firmly believed is the Triune God mentioned in the Bible Mr Carl Cortez. All the PAST TRUTHS of God form the FOUNDATION of the Truths Today. We know that God's truth are CUMULATIVE; later truths do not negate earlier ones. What we see today are the cumulative revelations of God.

QUESTION #7

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

Do your Triune God, namely:

God the Father, 

God the Son, and 

God the Holy Spirit

Co-existed, co-equal and co-eternal simultaneously or at the same time? 

YES or NO.

ANSWER TO QUESTION #7 

YES, at the same time. 

QUESTION #8

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

From your answer to Q#6 you claimed that your Triune God namely: 

God the Father

God the Son 

God the Holy Spirit

who co-existed, co-equally and co-eternally at the same time. you said: 

"What we firmly believed is the Triune God mentioned in the Bible Mr Carl Cortez..." . 

WHERE in the scriptures your Triune God was mentioned as what you already had claimed. Please show me single verse and that is enough. 

ANSWER TO QUESTION #8 

"Go therefore and disciple all the nations, baptizing them into the NAME of the FATHER and of the SON and of the HOLY SPIRIT"(Matt 28:19) 

There is One Name for the Divine Trinity. These name is the sum total of the Divine Being. 

This verse indicates to us that God is TRIUNE; notice, however, that NAME IS SINGULAR. 

The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit Three Distinct but the Name is One. 

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all"(2Cor 13:14) 

Notice, the Three are present in this verse. 

The love of God is the source, since God is the origin 

The grace of the Lord is the course of the love of God, since the Lord is the expression of God; 

and the fellowship of the Spirit is the impartation of the grace of the Lord with the love of God, since the Spirit is the transmission of the Lord with God, for our experience and enjoyment of the Triune God—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

QUESTION #9:
Yandex Zysev Ancheta

You said YES, that your Triune God namely: 

God the Father, 

God the Son, 

God the Holy Spirit 

co-existed co-equally and co-eternally at the same time. 

HOW could your three persons Triune God think, plan, act, and performed their actions DISTINCTIVELY yet NOT SEPARATELY at the same time?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #9

Joh 14:10 - Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak from Myself, but the Father who abides in Me does His works. 

This verse UNVEILS that the relationship between the Father and the Son is one of INTERPENETRATION & MUTUAL INDWELLING. Thus, each in the GODHEAD interpenetrates and coinheres (nananahanan sa isa't isa) the others, that is, each is permanently one with the others. 

And the mutual inbeing & interpenetration reveals the fact that the TRIUNE GOD is INSEPARABLY & UNIQUELY ONE and also PRESERVE the DISTINCTION within the Godhead. 

It was further revealed by the Lord in John 16:13-15 

Joh 16:13 - But when He, the Spirit of reality, comes, He will guide you into all the reality; for He will not speak from Himself, but what He hears He will speak; and He will declare to you the things that are coming. 

Joh 16:14 - He will glorify Me, for He will receive of Mine and will declare it to you. 

Joh 16:15 - All that the Father has is Mine; for this reason I have said that He receives of Mine and will declare it to you. 

These verses unveil the INNER RELATIONSHIP of INTERPENETRATION that exists between the Father, Son & Spirit. 

Firstly, the Spirit’s speaking is “not…from himself….” That is, the speaking source of the Spirit within the Godhead is from the Son and the Father, which reveals the interpenetration of the Three. 

Secondly, the Spirit’s taking is described as “he shall take of mine….” That is, the taking position of the Spirit within the Godhead is out of the Son and the Father, which reveals the interpenetration of the Three. 

Thirdly, the interpenetration of the Father, Son, and Spirit is also revealed by the inner nature of the Spirit’s hearing. The Lord’s words concerning the Spirit, “What things soever he shall hear …” refer to a hearing within the Godhead. 

QUESTION #10:

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

WHAT are the three (3) respective specific name of your Triune God namely: 

God the Father,

God the Son and

God the Holy Spirit

hom you claimed interpenetrating each other being distinct from each other yet not separate from each other as to justify your own interpretations of the Godhead the Bible never mentioned?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #10

In my A#8 I mention it already that There is One Name for the Divine Trinity(Matt 28:19).These name is the sum total of the Divine Being.

This verse indicates to us that God is TRIUNE; notice, however, that NAME IS SINGULAR. The name denotes the person. Hence, to baptize people into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is to baptize people into the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. 

Furthermore, in Col 1:19 Paul says, the FULLNESS OF THE GODHEAD dwells in Christ. Therefore, the name of the Triune God is Jesus Christ. 

QUESTION #11

Yandex Zysev Ancheta 

You said that your TRIUNE GOD are three (3) persons. 

Can you provide me references from the Bible (Biblia-Greek) in VERBATIM the word "person" or "persons" referring to the GODHEAD?

ANSWER TO QUESTION #11

PERSONAE came the word Persons and the Greek word OUSIA became the word essence.

By saying God has ONE ESSENCE(ousia)

and 

THREE PERSONS (hupostases PLURAL) 

"For in Him dwells all the fullness of the GODHEAD bodily" (Col 2:9) 

THEOTES the Greek word for GODHEAD. 

QUESTION #12

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

"Personae" is plural of "persona" which is Latin in form from its Greek word "prosopon" which refers to the mask or the theater image or role. 

"Hypostasis" is the singular for "hypostases/hupostases" plural which refers to an existence. 

"Adamu/Adamah" is the Hebrew for the english word "person" which means from the ground. 

The Greek word "ousia" in latin "substancia" means "essence in English but doesn't refer to the word person. 

EITHER WAYS, "persona/e, hypostasis/es, adamah as referring to the English word person as applying to your Triune God doctrine "three persons in the divine Trinity of the One God" 

Here is my question: 

How can a One God become 3 persons or 3 personae, or 3 hupostases or 3 "Adamah" but not separate from each other? 

ANSWER TO QUESTION #12

This is HOW GOD is revealed in the Bible. We cannot question God why He revealed Himself in such a way. But this how He reveals Himself in the divine revelation. 

God is mysterious yet very experienceable. 

He is One God. 1 cor 8:4

And this One God is Triune - the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Mt 28:19. 2 Cor 13:14.

The Father is God. 1 cor 8:6

Jesus Christ is God. Rom 9:5

The Spirit is God. Acts 5:4,3 

Are there three Gods? 

They are DISTINCTLY THREE yet never separated into three, because in essence, life, and being, God is ONE. 

The Triune God coexist (exist at the same time) and coinhere (dwell in one another) eternally without succession. 

QUESTION #13 (a question of precision and credibility)

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

You clearly showed to me where you took your doctrine Trinity or Triune God and also CONFIRMED from your answer to my question #1 that: 

(a) the word Trinity and Triune God wasn’t mentioned or can’t be found in the Bible but first mentioned by Theophilus of Antioch its inventor in the 1st century AD; 

(b) and introduced by the Catholic as you cited in your affirmative argument “saying from around A.D. 100 to the formation of the papal system at the end of the sixth century”,

(c) citing as well as your reference “THE PERIOD OF COUNCILS in church history.” 

(d) that it was in Latin translation of the Bible from Greek your doctrine Trinity or Triune God came from, and 

(e) from your answers to my question #8 you said, “later truths do not negate earlier ones. “ meaning, what you claimed later truths of the Trinity do not contradicts or refutes the earlier one like the Traditional Trinity doctrine you cited as your reference for your Triune God belief. 

You also CONFIRMED that these three whom you called Triune God namely: 

God the Father 

God the Son 

God the Holy Spirit 

co-existed co-equally, co-eternally, dwells in one another at the same time meaning joined together in one body only, and they are inseparable all the time, 

BUT you turned to DIS-AGREE later that your Triune God namely:  

God the Father 

God the Son 

And God the Holy Spirit 

Has their own will, personality and performing different or separate roles. 

You turned to DIS-AGREE as well the traditional trinity definition of the members of your Holy Trinity or Triune God: 

God the Father, - is not God the Son and God the Holy Spirit 

God the Son – is not God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, 

God the Holy Spirit – is not God the Father and God the Son. 

Here is my QUESTION: 

HOW will you now RECONCILE and JUSTIFY the chaos seen in your presentations and cross examination that you even said in your answer to my question #10, that JESUS Christ is the only name of God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit or your Triune God who are inseparable yet three distinct persons? 

(attached are the proofs) 

ANSWER TO QUESTION #13

There is NO CHAOS in every answer that I give. You only need to understand Mr Carl Cortez that the truth in the Bible is PROGRESSIVE.

It is true that i mentioned Theophilus, the formation of papal system and the period of councils and much more i do mentioned and fully agree that the name of the TRIUNE GOD is Jesus Christ(Col 2:9). Well hindi ko dinedeny yan Moderator Christine Marie Reluya Cajeta. 

The truths as revealed in the Scriptures have been lost, missed, misunderstood, misinterpreted, and wrongly taught. Therefore, there is a need to recover and rediscover it. God's Truth IS PROGRESSIVE. Since the TRUTH IS PROGRESSIVE, therefore, CHANGES ARE NOT SHAMEFUL THING. The extent to which we see the many revelations in the Bible is the extent to which we will change.

Like what Jesus said in John 14:6 " I am the way, the truth and the life" so without the way there is no going, without the truth there is no knowing and without the life there is no living.

We know that God's truths are CUMULATIVE. All the past truths of God form the foundation of the truths today. Among them were men like: 

Edward Cronin

Anthony Norris Groves 

John Nelson Darby 

William Kelly 

G.H Pember 

C.H Mackintosh 

C.H Spurgeon 

Charles Stanley 

George Cutting 

B.W Newton 

Robert Govett 

Dwight L.Moody & 

J.G Bellet 

We are gone higher not by ourselves but by standing on the shoulders of all the foregoing teachers. We thank God for those who have gone before us. 

We are standing on the shoulders of John Nelson Darby. Darby stood on the shoulders of Count Von Zinzendorf, and Zinzendorf stoon on the shoulder of Martin Luther. 

We are not boasting that we have seen the picture of God's Eternal Purpose, for we are standing on others' shoulders to see this vision. We thank God for this. 

QUESTION #14

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

Based on your answer of my Q#13 you justified all the contrasts of your affirmative presentation and answers to cross exam saying the word "there is no chaos" though there are as you have been required to reconcile all your statements like you said, 

that the “later truths do not negate earlier ones. “ meaning, what you claimed later truths of the Trinity do not contradicts or refutes the earlier one like the Traditional Trinity doctrine you cited as your reference for your Triune God belief but you did DIS-AGREE or indirectly REFUTING/REJECTING their teachings. 

This is truly confusing as it seems. Let me ask you now, HOW do you understand really the meaning of the word "PERSON" as referring to your Triune God? 

(Please satisfy me with your answers citing your references the definitions from the Bible and reliable definitions from Dictionaries NOT from your own understanding or personal ideas.)

ANSWER TO QUESTION #14

When I say "later truths do not negate earlier ones" i'm referring to RECOVERED TRUTHS.

When it comes to the person of God. The Bible shows us that God in whom we believe is a person, and as a person He is quiet marvelous because He is not a PSYCHIC BEING 

"The first man is out of the earth, earthly; the second man is out of the heaven"(1Cor 15:47) 

The Father refers to Himself as "I" 

& 

The Son also refers to Himself as "I" 

"I" denotes a person. In John 14:10 I am in the Father and the Father is in Me" 

So God is a person with personality, He has love, mercy, kindness and even angel Mr Carl Cortez. He has the entire range of emotions. Therefore, our God is not a conceptual object rather, a living person. (REFERENCE 1)

HERE IS MY LAST AND FINAL QUESTION #15:

Can’t the established TRUTH about GOD (mighty one) be known without the aid of the LATIN translations of the Septuagint fashioned by the Greek philosophers, that was brought to Rome , the formulation of the new word TRIUNE God or TRINITY invention, the basis of your belief now, which was the very heart or your assumed cumulative new revelation TRIUNE God?

(Here’s a quotation from your presentation)

“In Latin, the word TRIUNE is used for the Trinity. Tri means “Three"; and Une means “One"; hence, TRIUNE means “three-one,” being both "Three and One" we simply say “the three-one God,” that is, “the Triune God.” According to the pure revelation of the Bible, God is Triune; He is the Triune God.

Why does the One God has the aspect of being Three?

To answer this question we have to find out from the THEOLOGY IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE TO THE THEOLOGY IN THE LATIN LANGUAGE because the studies and records of the CHURCH FATHERS were all in Greek. From around A.D. 100 to the formation of the papal system at the end of the sixth century, this period of four to five hundred years was called THE PERIOD OF COUNCILS in church history. Theological studies during this period continued to be WRITTEN IN GREEK.

After the establishment of the Catholic Church with its headquarters in the city of Rome, where Latin was used most prevailingly, theological studies entered the SECOND STAGE---the stage of the LATIN LANGUAGE From the seventh century to the sixteenth century, theological literature was written chiefly in Latin. Even during the Reformation, Martin Luther still used Latin in his writings, although he was German. Therefore, Latin also occupies quite an important position in theological research.”

ANSWER TO QUESTION #15

The TRUTH concerning One God with Three Distinct Persons cannot be understand properly without knowing the STUDIES CONCERNING THE TRIUNE GOD IN THEOLOGY THROUGHOUT THE AGES & the ORIGINAL TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE such as SEPTUAGINT & VULGATE. After the passing away of the apostles, there were the so-called church fathers in the church history who expounded the Biblical Truths and studied extensively the writing of the apostles as well as the contents of the Old Testament and had high theological attainments. Due to their research the term TRINITY was coined. Theological studies during this period continued to be written in greek.

During reformation, Latin language occupies an important position in theological research where the Latin was used prevailingly in the stage of Latin language.

The very God upon whom the entire universe is focused is not a single God; He is TRIUNE. Both the Old & New Testaments use PLURAL PRONOUNS in referring to the Triune God. In Genesis 1:26 here the PLURAL PRONOUNS "Us" & "Ours" are used. Then in John 14:23 Jesus said, "We will come to Him and make an abode with Him" who are the "WE"? So our God is Triune. It is not invented like what your are trying to postulate Mr Carl Cortez

Again, though the Bible does not have the TRIUNE or TRINITY as a TERM but it has a TRINITY or TRIUNE GOD as FACT. The Lord said that its not easy to understand His person 

Supposed the Bible only revealed God as God the creator, not the Triune God. If there were no Father, and no Son, and no Spirit, how could God dispense Himself into us? 

We are fallen, and we have the problems of sin, the world, and Satan. How could these things be taken away? There was the need of someone to condemn sin, to judge the world, and to cast out Satan. In the divine dispensing, THIS SOMEONE IS THE SON(jesus). The Son was sent by the Father to condemn sin, to judge the world, and to cast out Satan through His death on the cross. In order to die on the cross, He needed to put on humanity. How could God without blood and flesh be crucified on the cross to shed blood for the forgiveness of sins? It would be impossible. So the Son had to put on blood and flesh so that He could go to the cross and die in a physical way (Heb. 2:14). He put on humanity so that He could shed human blood to wash away our sins. He judged the world, and He cast out Satan (John 12:31).

Furthermore, if God were only God, how could He enter into us? In order to enter into us, God must be the life-giving Spirit(1Cor 15:45)The Spirit is the holy breath for us to take in (John 20:22).

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

REBUTTALS

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

AFFIRMATIVE SIDE

- Yandex Zysev Ancheta -

Q#1.

Sabi ni Mr Carl Cortez,

"Akin to classical terminology (לֹאֱ) “EL”or (אֱלֹהִ֔ים ) “El-ohim”, relative to the word commonly been used the time an English Bible version were first been released such as KJV1611 and the Douay-Rheims Version (both were published during the 16th century AD), the English word “GOD” 

Question:

Is the word ELOHIM a plural or a singular form of God in Hebrew word?

A#1.

The word “Elohim” refers to the majesty of God, the plural form denoting to the totality of GOD’s attributes from its root form El with its original meaning “strong ONE of authority” or “mighty one”

Rebuttal: 

The TRUTH is the word ELOHIM though it is PLURAL OF HEBREW WORD of God but IT IS NOT God's attributes but rather implies the DIVINE TRINITY it was FURTHER DEVELOP in Gen 1:26, 3:22 & 11:17 all mention God using the PLURAL PRONOUNS "Us" & "Our" showing that GOD IS UNI-PLURAL. In Isaiah 6:8 "Whom shall I send? Who will go for Us?" I is in singular, but Us is in plural.

Q#2:

If there were no DISTINCTIONS among the Three of the Divine Trinity to Whom the Lord Jesus offered Himself without blemish in Heb 9:14 which stated

"How much more will the blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit OFFERED HIMSELF without blemish TO GOD, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God?"

A#2: 

To be précised, never the Bible said from Genesis to Revelation that there were distinctions of the three Divine Trinity that were uniting themselves together to fulfil their plans to save mankind but there was only One God (mighty one) who planned and executed it. 

When God (mighty one) manifest in the flesh, Christ then was known whom was His body, the tabernacle God prepared for Himself in fulfilling His plan to be the Redeemer and Savior in order for Him (mighty one) to purchase the church through His blood. 

Rebuttal:

Obviously DISTINCTION was there between the Father and the Son in Heb 9:14, because the Son offered Himself to God. So you cannot simply say 

"Never the Bible said from Genesis to Revelation that there were distinction from the Three"

Q#3. 

If there were no DISTINCTION AMONG THE THREE how could the Father forsake the Son in Matt 27:46?

"My God My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

A #3 

Since never the Bible said from Genesis to Revelation that there were distinctions of the three Divine Trinity that were uniting themselves together to fulfill their plans to save mankind but there was only One God (mighty one) who planned and executed it, 

Rebuttal:

Again, how come that there were no distinction when it is very clear ni Matt 27:46 that the First forsook the Second?

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

Moderator's Reprimand #1

Yandex Zysev Ancheta hindi nakaabot sa minimum word na 100 ang Rebuttal no.1

Paki type ON TOP "Part IV AFFIRMATIVE REBUTTALS (capslock) for record purposes kahit pa sa pinaka dulo meron ng nakasulat na (Rebuttals).

This serves as LAST WARNING for violating Rule no.15.

Kindly edit and SEND IT again.

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

Q #4

Eto statement ni Mr Carl, 

"TRUTH ESTABLISHED

The words Father, Son and Holy ghost were not part of the original manuscript and was clearly catholic invention"

Question:

Are you telling in this debate that the Word of God in general & Matt 28:19 in particular is fallible?

A#4.

My presentations showed the proof that Matthew 28:19 of what most Bible translations were written of today emphasizing the titles Father, Son and Holy ghost was clearly a Catholic invention as to emphasize their man-made invented doctrine Trinity or Triune God. 

The original manuscripts which were inspired by God written by its original writers were of course infallible but as how men attempted to transliterate and translate the scriptures, the problem occurs of which biases, corruptions, insertions and deletion are expected, thus making their works and claims fallible. 

I am not speculating but here are my credible references.

PROOFS 

Historical Criticism

A. The Matthew 28:19 Issue of Catholic Corruption and Attempt of Insertion. 

EUSEBIUS EXISTENCE

Eusebius of Caesarea/Pamphili, called the “father of church history” in 260 – 340 AD who was then ex-communicated from the Catholic after withdrawing himself from the Council of Nicea (the council that invented the Doctrine of Trinity), as always quoted parts of Matthew especially as what we now know chapter 28:19. 

“…baptizing them in my name…” The words Father, Son and Holy ghost were strange words during his time and was later successfully been placed in the new Bible translations including the KJV in the 16th century AD. 

"The Demonstratio Evangelica" by Eusebius:

Eusebius was the Church historian and Bishop of Caesarea. On page 152 Eusebius quotes the early book of Matthew that he had in his library in Caesarea. According to this eyewitness of an unaltered Book of Matthew that could have been the original book or the first copy of the original of Matthew. Eusebius informs us of Jesus' actual words to his disciples in the original text of Matthew 28:19: "With one word and voice He said to His disciples: "Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." That "Name" is Jesus.

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible 1963, page 1015:

"The Trinity.-...is not demonstrable by logic or by Scriptural proofs,...The term Trias was first used by Theophilus of Antioch (c AD 180),...(The term Trinity) not found in Scripture..." "The chief Trinitarian text in the NT is the baptismal formula in Mt 28:19...This late post-resurrection saying, not found in any other Gospel or anywhere else in the NT, has been viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew. It has also been pointed out that the idea of making disciples is continued in teaching them, so that the intervening reference to baptism with its Trinitarian formula was perhaps a later insertion into the saying. Finally, Eusebius's form of the (ancient) text ("in my name" rather than in the name of the Trinity) has had certain advocates. (Although the Trinitarian formula is now found in the modern-day book of Matthew), this does not guarantee its source in the historical teaching of Jesus. It is doubtless better to view the (Trinitarian) formula as derived from early (Catholic) Christian, perhaps Syrian or Palestinian, baptismal usage (cf Didache 7:1-4), and as a brief summary of the (Catholic) Church's teaching about God, Christ, and the Spirit:..."

B. THE CATHOLIC HISTORIANS THEMSELVES ADMITTED

Catholic Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

He makes this confession as to the origin of the chief Trinity text of Matthew 28:19. "The basic form of our (Matthew 28:19 Trinitarian) profession of faith took shape during the course of the second and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of baptism. So far as its place of origin is concerned, the text (Matthew 28:19) came from the city of Rome." The Trinity baptism and text of Matthew 28:19 therefore did not originate from the original Church that started in Jerusalem around AD 33. It was rather as the evidence proves a later invention of Roman Catholicism completely fabricated. Very few know about these historical facts.

The Jerusalem Bible, a scholarly Catholic work, states:

"It may be that this formula, (Triune Matthew 28:19) so far as the fullness of its expression is concerned, is a reflection of the (Man-made) liturgical usage established later in the primitive (Catholic) community. It will be remembered that Acts speaks of baptizing "in the name of Jesus,"..."

The Catholic University of America in Washington, D. C. 1923, New Testament Studies Number 5:

The Lord's Command To Baptize An Historical Critical Investigation. By Bernard Henry Cuneo page 27. "The passages in Acts and the Letters of St. Paul. These passages seem to point to the earliest form as baptism in the name of the Lord." Also we find. "Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded his disciples to baptize in the trine form? Had Christ given such a command, it is urged, the Apostolic Church would have followed him, and we should have some trace of this obedience in the New Testament. No such trace can be found. The only explanation of this silence, according to the anti-traditional view, is this the short christological (Jesus Name) formula was (the) original, and the longer trine formula was a later development."

C. MORE EVIDENCES FROM HISTORY CHANGING JESUS NAME TO TITLES FATHER, SON AND HOLY GHOST

The Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge:

"Jesus, however, cannot have given His disciples this Trinitarian order of baptism after His resurrection; for the New Testament knows only one baptism in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:43; 19:5; Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 1:13-15), which still occurs even in the second and third centuries, while the Trinitarian formula occurs only in Matt. 28:19, and then only again (in the) Didache 7:1 and Justin, Apol. 1:61...Finally, the distinctly liturgical character of the formula...is strange; it was not the way of Jesus to make such formulas... the formal authenticity of Matt. 28:19 must be disputed..." page 435.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism," says:

"Matthew 28:19 in particular only canonizes a later ecclesiastical situation, that its universalism is contrary to the facts of early Christian history, and its Trinitarian formula (is) foreign to the mouth of Jesus."

New Revised Standard Version says this about Matthew 28:19:

"Modern critics claim this formula is falsely ascribed to Jesus and that it represents later (Catholic) church tradition, for nowhere in the book of Acts (or any other book of the Bible) is baptism performed with the name of the Trinity..."

and many others...

Rebuttal:

According to Mr Carl Cortez, Matt 28:19 were not part of the original manuscript. He wants to destroy this passage just to justify his ABSOLUTE ONENESS BELIEF. 

The authority of the Bible is UNDISPUTED. Everything that is contrary to the Bible is wrong. It is true that the church undergo to the tunnel of dark history, Bibles were destroyed everywhere, the church was under persecution and it was not easy to make copies of the Bible, but this does not mean that there is a problem with INSPIRATIONAL ITSELF.

"All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2Tim 3:16)

It is nit-picking for someone to attack the Bible on account of this kind of error like what Mr Carl stated.

Q#5.

In his A#1 Mr Carl stated that Elohim is the PLURAL FORM of God's attributes.

"The word “Elohim” refers to the majesty of God, the plural form denoting to the totality of GOD’s attributes"

Question:

What then is the singular form of elohim?

A#5

The word "Elohim" reveals not a single attribute GOD (mighty one) had rather it showed HIM ONE not two or three, the ONE in authority who isn't just mighty BUT also the:

creator, 

sustainer, 

supreme judge of the world

and many other attributes due to HIM not them. 

The root word is "EL" "aleph" and "lamed" Hebrew characters which means "the strong one in authority" or "the mighty one" referring to a single attribute considered to be a singular form.

Rebuttal:

If ELOHIM is the PLURAL form of the word God in Hebrew, ELOAH is the SINGULAR form of ELOHIM. Eloah denotes that God is the Mighty One to be worshiped. 

Elohim does not refer to the ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. Elohim is a PLURAL NOUN in Hebrew, implying the Divine Trinity(Gen 1:26)

God's ATTRIBUTES refer to His characteristics, such as God is Love(1John 4:16), God is Light (1John 1:5). God has many attributes, including mercy and kindness, as well as power, strength and might. 

Therefore, ELOHIM the Triune God is not attributes but rather the Triune God is a constitution of all His attributes. The totality of all DIVINE ATTRIBUTES is God's inward essence. This inward essence needs an expression. The expression of the inward essence of God is His image, and this image is EMBODIED in Christ(Col 2:9). 

In our speaking concerning this matter we need to be careful, if we are not we may use these term in a WRONG WAY like what Mr Carl did inspite that he is a Dr of Divinity.

Q#6.

In his A#3 Mr Carl Cortez mentioned that what the Lord stated in Matt Mat 27:46 is representational or figurative

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is, My God, My God, 

why have You forsaken Me?

Question:

Are you telling me that 1Pet 3:18 is also figurative and representational? Why?

"For Christ also has suffered once for sins, the righteous on behalf of the unrighteous, that He might bring you to God, on the One hand being put to death in the flesh, on the other hand made alive in the Spirit"

A#6

Yes, 1 Peter 3:18 clearly exhibited CHRIST the representation and the figure of the sinners and the whole world.

Rebuttal:

1Pet 3:18 tells us that though Christ is our substitute the crucifixion put Christ to death ONLY IN HIS FLESH which He received through His incarnation(John 1:14) so its not only FIGURATIVE but also a LITERAL ONE because the FLESH HAS BEEN PUT TO DEATH but made ALIVE IN THE SPIRIT. 

It is therefore wrong to say that the death of Christ is figurative and representational. On the one hand, Christ was put to death in the flesh; that is, He was crucified crucified on the cross in the flesh. On the other hand Christ was made alive in the Spirit.

In Rom 1:3-4 according to the flesh, He is the seed of David, a man; according to the Spirit of holiness He is the Son of God. So the Dr of Divinity is absolutely wrong to say that 1Pet 3:18 is figurative and representational because when the Lord was buried in the tomb, it was His flesh, His humanity that died.

Q#7.

Mr Carl stated in his A#3 that 

"Since never the Bible said from Genesis to Revelation that there were distinctions of the three Divine Trinity that were uniting themselves together to fulfill their plans to save mankind but there was only One God (mighty one) who planned and executed it"

Question:

Why then there is a DESIGNATION as the Father chose the believers before the foundation of the world(Eph 1:3-4), as the Son redeemed us in time((Eph 1:5-7), and the Spirit sealed them after they believed in the Son (Eph 1:13)?

A#7

Eph. 1:3-4 “even as He hath CHOSEN US (foreplan of GOD (mighty one)) in Him before the foundation of the world…”

Eph. 1:5-7 “having PREDESTINED (foreplan of GOD (mighty one)) us to be His own adopted children by Jesus Christ…”

Eph. 1:13 “ In Christ ye also trusted after ye heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation, in Whom also after ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.”

The context of Paul’s writing to the Ephesians concerning chapter 1 verses 3-13 was about the PREDESTINATION plan of God of adoption, the Father to the believers of Christ where Paul referred himself and his audience, the believers as the heirs of the promise of salvation. 

“In Christ also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will.” V. 11

The word DESIGNATION (label, title, description, term) indicative to the believers as REDEEMED has been precisely understood when due time came where I agree with what you’ve said; “the Son redeemed us in time”. Redemption took place after the blood was purged in compliance to the requirements of the law “when there is no shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins,” at the perfect time. Lev. 17:11, Heb. 9:22 

Rebuttal:

A#7 is off the mark. It is not a question of the believers being predestined o but rather the distinction among the Three which clearly presented in the Holy Word

1.The Father chose the believers before the foundation of the world

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ, even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blemish before Him in love"(Eph 1:3-4)

2.The Son redeemed them in time

"Predestinating us unto sonship through Jesus Christ to Himself,according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory, with which He graced us in the beloved; in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of offenses, according to the riches of His grace"(Eph 1:5-7)

3.And the Spirit sealed them after they believed in the Son 

"In whom you also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation, in Him also believing, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of the promise"(Eph 1:13)

Sino ang Pumili? Ang Ama

Sino ang Nagtubos? Ang Anak

Sino ang nag tatak? Ang Espiritu

Makikita ba ang DISTINCTION NG TATLO? The Answer is YES. Hindi kailangang paikut ikutin tulad ng style ni Mr Carl Cortez mahabang sagot but off the mark.

Q#8.

If the DESIGNATION of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit has nothing to do with the DISTINCTION among the Three of the Godhead but rather a INDICATIVE to the believers as REDEEMED and nothing to do or never it questioned to what he said according to Mr Carl Cortez then there would be no need for Paul to say that the FATHER CHOSE US IN HIM, there would also be no need to say IN WHOM WE HAVE REDEMPTION and there would also be no need for Paul to say YOU WERE SEALED and much more there would be no need for John to say 

"abide both in the Son and in the Father"(2John 1:9) right? 

Question:

Without the DISTINCTION AMONG THE THREE, how can we approach the IMMORTAL ONE WHO DWELL IN UNAPPROACHABLE LIGHT(1Tim 6:16).

A#8

There was no “DESIGNATION of the Father, Son & Holy spirit” as label, title, description, term or as three distinct or different persons mentioned by Paul in his letter to the Philippians but pure assumptions, an obvious attempt of inserting the strange false and man-made doctrine invented only century or two after Paul. 

There was, and is, and shall be only ONE GOD being consistent as the mighty one called the FATHER (Mal. 2:10) not becoming mighty two or three

Rebuttal:

Mr Carl Cortez you cannot just simply say that "there was no distinction". If there were no distinction there would be no need for John to say, 

"abide both in the Son and in the Father"(2John 1:9)

Was this speculation and assumption? Definitely not! Tpos bigla ka na lang lulundag sa Mal 2:10 ng hindi mo nalalaman ang kontexto ng talata.

"Have we not all One Father? Hath not one God created us?(Mal 2:10)

The Fatherhood mentioned in Mal 2:10 refers only to the Israelites. The people of the world are not allowed to participate in this sonship and since we are not Israelites in the flesh, the rights bestowed on the Israelites as the sons of God do not involve us.

"The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi"(1:1)

Kaya hindi mo basta pwedeng gamitin yang Mal 2:10 as an excuse to justify your ABSOLUTE ONENESS BELIEF. In the first place wala sa Mal 2:10 ang tanong ko nsa 1Tim 6:16. 

The word "we" in Mal 2:10 does not refer to all the people in the world. This made clear by looking at what follows: "why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our father" God's covenanted people were the Israelites, not any other people.

Q#9.

In his A#8 Mr Carl Cortez said that 

"Paul approached God through Christ" 

Question:

If God and Christ has NO DISTINCTION, could you please define in the light of the Scriptures, the word DISTINCTION and kindly give a classic example of it.

A#9

GOD (mighty one) and Christ has NO DISTINCTIONS as far as the man-made doctrine 3 DISTINCT persons of GOD in the Divine Trinity.

Rebuttal #9

The reason why Mr Carl Cortez stated that 

"God(mighty one) and Christ has no distinction" 

it is because MODALISTS claims that the Father ended with the Son's coming. He believed the manifestation of this One God was divided into THREE PERIODS.

For the MODALISTS, In the O.T He(Father) decreed the law and manifested Himself as the Father; that was the period of the Father in which there was only the Father without the Son or the Spirit.

Then in His incarnation He manifested Himself as the Son; that was the period of the Son and the Father was over.

Finally, in the inspiring of the apostles He manifested Himself as the Holy Spirit; that was the period of the Spirit and the Son was over.

So para kay Mr Carl the period of the Father was over yet, In his A#8 Mr Carl said that we can approached the unapproachable God through Christ and yet in his A#9 he stated that there were no distinction among the Father and the Son. What a sharp contradiction!

The truth is the Father the Son and the Spirit are COEXISTING FROM ETERNITY PAST TO ETERNITY FUTURE. The Bible strongly indicates that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are always COEXISTENT. In Gen 1:1-2 shows us that the Father created then in v.2 the Spirit of God was brooding. So the Father was there and the Spirit was also there.

Ephesians 3:14-17, the apostle Paul’s prayer for the believers to experience the Triune God.

"For this I bow my knees unto the Father

Of whom every family in the heavens and on earth is named

That He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit into the inner man

That Christ may make His home in your hearts through faith, that you being rooted and grounded in love"(Eph 3:14-17)

This portion of the Word shows that 

the Father hears the prayer, 

the Spirit strengthens the saints, 

and the Son—Christ—makes His home in our hearts. 

By this we can also see clearly that all Three coexist simultaneously.

Therefore, we do not believe that the Father ceased to exist and was replaced by the Son like what Mr Carl Cortez trying to postulate, then after another period of time the Son was replaced by the Spirit. We believe that the Three—Father, Son, and Spirit—are eternal and co-existent.

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

Moderator's Reprimand #2

I removed All present ADMINS. Ako bilang CREATOR ng FORUM ang natitirang ADMIN nalang dito.

Nag QUIT akong mag MODERATE simply because ang AFFIRMATIVE ay walang TIWALA sa akin na mag moderate.

Una pinagbibintangan ang mga Admins na may ginawang pagmamanipula kuno kaya di sya maka send ng REBUTTALS gayong nakapagtatakang nakakapagsent naman sya ng kanyang mga comment?

Pagkatapos Kung magbackread na proved ko lalo ang kawalan nya ng tiwala sa akin sa simula palang ng debate patunay Jan ang screenshot sa baba.

This FORMAL DEBATE THREAD has no MODERATOR now since nag QUIT na ako. But I PURPOSELY REMOVED all present admins simply because hindi ko na sila gusto dahil na rin sa mga pangyayari. Ayokong makipagplastikan dahil diko yan ugali.

Kung talagang di takot ang DALAWANG PARTIDO bakit di sila magpatuloy ng WALANG MODERATOR at sundin nila pareho ang RULES?

Kailangang TAPUSIN ang Rebuttals ng AFFIRMATIVE at ng makapaglatag naman ang NEGATIVE ng kanyang REBUTTALS.

For the record this is the 1st time na e TURN OFF COMMENTING ko ito para MAGLINIS ng makita ng mga READERS ng malinaw ang bawat argument ng mga DEBATERS. Pagkatapos Kung maglinis saka ko ito ibabalik o e TURN ON COMMENTING.

Salamat.

Mariin kung pinabubulaanan ang kasinungalingan ni Yandex Zysev Ancheta na NAG TURN OFF COMMENTING ako dito DURING the DEBATE.. Ngayon ko pa lang ito gagawin para makapaglinis ako at ng makita ng lahat kung sino sa kanilang dalawa ang may hindi tinapos.

For the record, this is the 1st time that I will turn off commenting.

Carl Cortez bilang nag-iisang ADMIN sa forum na ito, I suggest ilatag mo ang REBUTTALS mo kung tapos ka ng mag type KUNG AYAW ni Yandex Zysev Anchetana magpatuloy sa kanyang REBUTTALS. 

Hindi magandang pinipilit ang isang tao sa ayaw nyang gawin.

Pagkatapos mong mailatag at makompleto ang FORMAT ng DEBATE, I believed na mas mauunawaan ng mga readers ang mga naging argumento ng bawat isa. 

Hindi ko e INSIST ang sarili ko at magpatuloy na mag MODERATE kung walang tiwala sa akin ang isang Debatista. BIAS ang ganon at isang malaking kabastosan ang di pagsunod sa Rules gayong sumang-ayon kang sumalang sa FORMAL DEBATE. 

I do confirmed too na kaya ako hindi available kanina dahil may nilakad ako for franchising namin sa seven eleven store. And it is also true that I am in a Psychological stress sa mga siblings ko na hindi pa BORN AGAIN CHRISTIANS at diko minasama ang ginawang pagmentioned ni Ptr Carl Cortez nyan dito. 

For the record parehong ang dalawang debatista ay nakakachat ko sa messenger. Ang hindi ko gusto kay Carl Cortez ay sinasabi ko kay Yandex at ang diko gusto kay Yandex ay sinasabi ko kay Carl both in their personalities and way or arguments in debate. 

God is my witness WALA AKONG KINAKAMPIHAN sa kanila dalawa dahil kahit kumampi ako sa isa man sa kanila, it is the READERS WHO WILL DECIDE AT THE END of the Debate kung sino ang sa tingin nila ang syang mas sumunod sa Rules of Debate at nagpaka professional at ang may MATIBAY NA STAND. 

Salamat sa mga nag basa. God bless and Good night...😇

Yandex Zysev Ancheta Sinabi ko yan dahil sinabihan ka ni Carl Cortez na mag continue ka sa REBUTTALS mo. Pero di mo ginagawa INSTEAD nakikipagtalayang kalye ka sa lahat ng mga readers dito. Kaya Angkop lang ang sinabi ko na Kung ayaw mo eh... di ka dapat pilitin. 

Basahin mo ulit ang statement ko sa taas at h'wag Kang bulag sa salitang "KUNG".

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

REBUTTALS

---------------------------------- oOo -------------------------------------

NEGATIVE SIDE
- Carl Cortez -

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #1

Q #1.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta from your statements

"Opening Salvo (affirmative)

Knowing the Triune God as He is revealed in the Word of God requires a DYNAMIC INTERACTION among the Word of God."

If the word Triune God can’t be found written or had not been taught in the scriptures by men of God moved by His Spirit where dynamic interactions among the scriptures where already there as they read it and wrote the other. If not the men of GOD, WHO then said that the Triune God was revealed in it as you emphasize saying you know?

A#1

Although Trinity cannot be found in the Bible, the FACTS that these word describe are definitely REVEALED IN THE BIBLE(Matt 28:19).

Theophilus of Antioch(A.D. 115-188), one of the early church fathers, was the first to use the word TRINITY in his writings. The word TRIUNE GOD also began to be used at about the same time. Thus, both TRINITY & TRIUNE were brought into CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY.

==============================================

My opponent agreed that the doctrine Triune God he embraced really can't be found in the Bible or it had been taught in the Bible. The next statement he said contradicted his first statement. as saying "FACTS that these word (Triune God) described are definitely REVEALED IN THE BIBLE quoting Matthew 28:19. 

- How can my opponent proved a word which he admitted can't be found in the Bible or taught in the Bible yet called it a FACT? Never even the passage he used showed a fact or evidence that the word Triune God existed or have been mentioned in Matthew 28:19.

My opponent mentioned Theophilus of Antioch and exposing the truth that it was him who first mentioned the word TRINITY in his writings evidently not from the characters and writers of the Bible;and the word TRIUNE GOD also began to be used at about the same time. It was Theophilus of Antioch whom being born a pagan with his pagan parents as the record of history revealed who brought this invented doctrine bringing it to what my opponent assumed Christian Theology.

In Paul’s time he warned all the believers in Galatia this words saying, 

".. and are turning to a different gospel …which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!" Gal. 1:6-7

So, cursed are those who accepted and believed a doctrine that departed from the truth and not part of the gospel of Jesus Christ such as the pagan doctrine by origin triune god or trinity.

# of words - 293

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #2

Q #2.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

From the Tenets of the doctrine of Trinity or Triune God who believes in the “one God in three persons” (same with what Theophilus of Antioch invented). 

. 

Namely; 

God the Father, - who is not God the Son and God the Holy Spirit 

God the Son – who is not God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, and 

God he Holy Spirit – who is not God the Father and God the Son. 

Each of these persons has their own will, personality and they each perform different or separate roles. While distinct from one another in these regards, in all else they are stated to be “co-equal”, “co-eternal”, “co-existent” and “each is God, whole and entire”. 

Do you agree on this or you rejected it?

A#2

We agree on terminology but we don't agree from the TRADITIONAL TEACHING OF TRINITY.

The persons of the Holy Trinity are not separable individuals. Each involves the others; the coming of each is the coming of the others

"I do nothing from Myself, but as My Father has taught Me, I speak these things and He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone"(John 8:28-29)

Thus, the coming of the Spirit must have involved the coming of the Son(Luke 1:35)

=====================================

In my opponent's answer to my question #2, he clearly raised his belief of agreeing the terminology Triune God/Trinity invented and first mentioned by Theophilus of Antioch eventually doubted it claiming he only agreed in the terminology but denying how it was described and defined in the first century. 

It is now then clear that what he held in his hands are hybrid doctrine that keeps on evolving itself, not fixed or not being established yet that is contrary to written word of God that is already fixed, settled, established and no longer can be changed in Psa. 119:89-96; . 

My opponent said that his Holy Trinity are not separate individuals yet each involves the others and the coming of each is coming of the others. What he was saying involves the others and each coming of the others is of the activity or activities taken where these 3 individuals were bonded or fastened together but still they are 3 individuals. Look how crazy my opponent’s doctrine is. 

a) the word individual (adjective) itself is defined as 

1. single; separate, discrete, independent, solo

2. of or for a particular person.

b) my opponent affirmed that his triune god who are 3 individuals doesn’t have 3 wills, 3 personalities, and are performing different roles or tasks, rather a mixed up of 3 substances as he used the plural form of substance “hypostases” that can’t be found in the Scriptures as well.

This doctrine is totally crazy and is contradicting that tried to explain a separate individual but not separate. 3 particular persons/individuals yet having only one mind, one personality, all 3 performed together at the same time, being helpless without the aid of another, but are bonded or glued together. This contradicting in itself hybrid doctrine is totally stupidly senseless. 

# of words - 299

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #3

Q #3.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta 

this will be based on facts in history as you mentioned Theophilus of Antioch. 

As you used the word “Trinity or Triune God” and wants to establish it, are you aware that there were already existing pagan gods (the Israelites or the One God believers rejected) represented by Trinity or Triune God before Christ came that might influence the doctrine of its successors where Theophilus of Antioch was also known born as a pagan?

A#3. 

I'm not aware of it but what I firmly believed is that the Divine Trinity are directly according to the REVELATION OF THE PURE WORD OF GOD either directly indicated or indirectly implied.

======================================

IN MY OPPONENT’S ANSWERS TO MY Q#3 clearly reveals that he is only aware and admitted it that his man-made doctrine which isn’t biblical was not written in the Bible or taught in the Bible, which it was only mentioned or introduced first by Theophilus of Antioch in the 1st century AD, 

but he is not aware:

1. that Theophilus was born a PAGAN of course same with his Greek parents who served and worship many gods who was not the God of Israel who ALONE is mighty. 

2. that there were already trinity gods being worship by pagans before Christ came such as the following:

a. Sumeria

Trinity – Anu, Enlil and Ea gods. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods” ( The Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology, 1994, pp. 54-55)

b. Babylonia

“three persons in one god”— mythology, and the use of the equilateral triangle, also, as an emblem of such trinity in unity” (Thomas Dennis Rock, The Mystical Woman and the Cities of the Nations, 1867, pp. 22-23).

c. India

the triangle as a symbol of the Deity . . . The three gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva (Sinclair, pp. 382-383).

d. Greece

‘All things are three, and thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of the gods; …these compose the number of the Trinity’ ” (Arthur Weigall, Paganism in Our Christianity, 1928, pp. 197-198).

e. Egypt

‘All gods are three: Amun, Re and Ptah, (Simson Najovits, Egypt, Trunk of the Tree, Vol. 2, 2004, pp. 83-84).

TRUTH

The Bible already had said that people shall perish for the lack of knowledge in fact it was GOD the mighty one who already said “because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject you.” My opponents crazy doctrine truly isn’t from the Bible but by PAGAN influence. 

# of words - 300

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #4

Q #4.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

You mentioned the Greeks doing their study from 100 AD to sixth century AD which were mentioned by Catholics yet you rejected the Catholic Trinity. Are you aware also that the Greeks had plenty of gods as portrayed by its philosophers?

A#4

Chicken feathers are not good to eat. However, without feathers the chicken cannot survive. When you buy a chicken, you must first examine the feathers. If the feathers are scraggly it will not be a good one. Eventually, however NO ONE WILL EAT THE CHICKEN FEATHERS.

In like manner, When it comes to Greek Mythology I am little bit aware of it but our focus is on the enjoyment of the Triune God who can dispense Himself into His chosen people not to the Greek gods portrayed by its philosophers. 

Again, the Bible is our Unique Standard not the CREEDS NOT THE COUNCIL.

================================================

TRUTH

True, the Bible is the Unique or the Only Standard for Biblical doctrines not the CREEDS, NOT THE COUNCIL but my opponent forgot to mention or he intentionally might not mentioning it for an obvious reason as to hide it from the truth that he also should say, NOT TO MAN-MADE INVENTIONS such as Triune God or Trinity. 

Chicken feathers are not considered food and can't be eaten yet my opponent said, it is not good to eat implying that feather are food for him but not good to eat. This is also true to his crazy doctrine that is isn't a Bible doctrine but pagan by origin and influence, yet my opponent is insisting it as in the Bible. 

The truth is that it was already proven he lied in his presentation saying that triune god or trinity was mentioned in the Bible but was not. So the feather which he considered food, he knew it wasn't good to eat as triune god or trinity not good for the soul yet he swallowed it.

# of words - 176

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #5

Q #5.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

If TRINITY doctrine are chicken feathers invented by the Catholics since that wasn't a meat found written in the Bible, why are you eating it?

A#5

Who say so? 🙂

Early teachings concerning Trinity may be classified into three main categories:

Conscious Tritheism

Implies Tritheism

Subconscious Tritheism

Again, my standard is the Bible. Catholics Trinity are UNSCRIPTURAL and we are not agree to it.

===============================================

TRUTH

Are FEATHERS food? Are there any people, or even animals that eat FEATHERS? Certainly NO, and of course NONE! What kind of god or gods do you have that gave you feathers to eat? 

My opponent has still had the guts to argue it! His triune god or trinity god is a low class, nasty and cruel god who’ll feed those feathers as their food. How crazy also are these people who considered feathers as food yet complaining it is not good to eat? 

Look how my opponent compared feather parallel to their doctrine triune god or trinity god. He is right of admitting that his doctrine triune god or trinity really can’t be found or not being mentioned in the Bible but a man-made one invented by Theophilus of Antioch who was born a pagan. 

Now, the pattern and position of his mind goes redundantly where he said with regards to his crazy doctrine that,

"Early teachings concerning Trinity may be classified into three main categories:

Conscious Tritheism

Implies Tritheism

Subconscious Tritheism"

As I'll return to him his question "WHO SAID SO?" The answer is obvious, NOT THE BIBLE but from Catholics, from the people who were pagans influenced by wrong belief, who are enemies of GOD who alone is MIGHTY or the mighty of ALL 

When my opponent said that, "Again, my standard is the Bible. Catholics Trinity are UNSCRIPTURAL and we are not agree to it." then he lied and proving clearly that he is LIAR the fact that he contradicted himself again!

# of words - 260

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #6

Q #6.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

Here's from your affirmative presentation you said 

"Why does the One God has the aspect of being Three?

To answer this question we have to find out from the THEOLOGY IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE TO THE THEOLOGY IN THE LATIN LANGUAGE because the studies and records of the CHURCH FATHERS were all in Greek. From around A.D. 100 to the formation of the papal system at the end of the sixth century, this period of four to five hundred years was called THE PERIOD OF COUNCILS in church history. Theological studies during this period continued to be WRITTEN IN GREEK."

Why quote them to establish your doctrine TRINITY eventually you also rejected?

A#6

What we firmly believed is the Triune God mentioned in the Bible Mr Carl Cortez. All the PAST TRUTHS of God form the FOUNDATION of the Truths Today. We know that God's truth are CUMULATIVE; later truths do not negate earlier ones. What we see today are the cumulative revelations of God.

================================================

TRUTH

My opponent at this time had totally abandoned the scriptures or the Bible as his basis for his answers. The doctrine he himself confirmed not found in the Bible was traced back from writings not part of the Bible or from men of God who wrote the Bible but from a person who invented it, and were developed and had been established by Councils, the Roman Catholics who later made Creeds for their followers to observed. 

My opponent emphasized it undoubtedly that the founding of his doctrine was no longer in Jerusalem but in Rome and by the Greeks, and he was also proud to say that the Latin translations revealingly played an importance in the formation of his doctrine triune god or trinity. 

So from this point it is then so clear that the doctrine Triune/Trinity god never could be known without the great players for its establishments in the sequence of history, and this happened of course outside the truth established in the scriptures that the men of God even the apostles had embraced already. 

So why then my opponent said that they no longer believed or would no longer agree how the triune/trinity god was defined by its inventors in the first century as they are denying “the three persons are co-equal, co-existent, and co-eternal” now? Yet, he said “later truths do not negate earlier ones” meaning, their evolve doctrine of today of the triune/trinity god do not disprove or dis-agreed the first or earlier definitions of it by its inventors. My opponent again OPPOSED HIMSELF!

Once more, my opponent showed inconsistencies and is self-contradictory that made his doctrine FALLACIOUS!

# of words - 275

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #7

Q #7.
Yandex Zysev Ancheta

Do your Triune God, namely:

God the Father,

God the Son, and

God the Holy Spirit

Co-existed, co-equal and co-eternal simultaneously or at the same time?

YES or NO.

ANSWER TO QUESTION #7

YES, at the same time.

=====================================================

TRUTH

My opponent Yandex Zysev Ancheta certifies himself a LIAR. He confirmed that his Triune/Trinity God namely:

God the Father

God the Son 

God the Holy Spirit

simultaneously co-existed, and are co-equal, and co-eternal as he CONFIRMED it debunked himself of saying 

" I do agree to the Triune God Moderator Christine Marie Reluya Cajeta "One God in Three Distinct Person/Hypostases it was in my opening salvo. Mr Carl Cortez should know this from the very beginning.

But we dont agree on this 

"Each of these persons has their own will, personality and they each perform different or separate roles" 

It is contradict to the Bible kya nga nilatag ko ang John 8:28-29 e 

And we also dont agree on this

God the Father, - who is not God the Son and God the Holy Spirit 

God the Son – who is not God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, 

God the Holy Spirit – who is not God the Father and God the Son." - Yandex Zysev Ancheta

THESE 3 god my opponent believed who are DISTINCT (synonymous to separate) who are co-equal, co-existed, and co-eternal DO NOT have each their own will, personality and never each performed different or separate roles? LATER he said, 

"We know that God's truth are CUMULATIVE; later truths do not negate earlier ones..."

My opponent's doctrine is TOTALLY ABSURD and a great LIE! 

total # of words - 230

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #8

Q #8.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

From your answer to Q#6 you claimed that your Triune God namely: 

God the Father

God the Son 

God the Holy Spirit

who co-existed, co-equally and co-eternally at the same time. you said: 

"What we firmly believed is the Triune God mentioned in the Bible Mr Carl Cortez..." . 

WHERE in the scriptures your Triune God was mentioned as what you already had claimed. Please show me single verse and that is enough.

A#8.

"Go therefore and disciple all the nations, baptizing them into the NAME of the FATHER and of the SON and of the HOLY SPIRIT"(Matt 28:19)

There is One Name for the Divine Trinity. These name is the sum total of the Divine Being.

This verse indicates to us that God is TRIUNE; notice, however, that NAME IS SINGULAR. 

The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit Three Distinct but the Name is One.

"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all" (2Cor 13:14)

Notice, the Three are present in this verse.

The love of God is the source, since God is the origin

The grace of the Lord is the course of the love of God, since the Lord is the expression of God; 

and the fellowship of the Spirit is the impartation of the grace of the Lord with the love of God, since the Spirit is the transmission of the Lord with God, for our experience and enjoyment of the Triune God—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

=================================================

TRUTH

My opponent failed to provide a single verse showing what I asked from him of presenting the word Triune/Trinity god being mentioned in the Bible. What he was showing me even though he used 2 reference scriptures were his personal understanding and opinion in defense attempt to his preconceived ideas never even Matthew and Paul mentioned in their letters. 

Jesus in Matthew 28:19 clearly demanded from his disciples the NAME where Eusebius, the contemporary of Theophilus in his time quoting it saying “baptizing in my NAME.” That of course refers to the NAME (singular) JESUS as how his disciples understood it well best proven in the Book of Acts of the Apostles. 

The doxology of Paul in his letter to the Corinthians clearly emphasized the entire work of God’s salvation such GRACE, LOVE and FELLOWSHIP of GOD to mankind. Paul never mentioned here the strange word to him Triune/Trinity god in his letter.

My opponent's answer again showed himself of being incompetent trying hard defender of his chaotic doctrine he himself don't understand. 

total # of words - 217

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #9

Q #9.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

You said YES, that your Triune God namely: 

God the Father, 

God the Son, 

God the Holy Spirit 

co-existed co-equally and co-eternally at the same time. 

HOW could your three persons Triune God think, plan, act, and performed their actions DISTINCTIVELY yet NOT SEPARATELY at the same time? 

A#9.

Joh 14:10 - Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak from Myself, but the Father who abides in Me does His works.

This verse UNVEILS that the relationship between the Father and the Son is one of INTERPENETRATION & MUTUAL INDWELLING. Thus, each in the GODHEAD interpenetrates and coinheres (nananahanan sa isat isa) the others, that is, each is permanently one with the others. 

And the mutual inbeing & interpenetration reveals the fact that the TRIUNE GOD is INSEPARABLY & UNIQUELY ONE and also PRESERVE the DISTINCTION within the Godhead.

It was further revealed by the Lord in John 16:13-15

Joh 16:13 - But when He, the Spirit of reality, comes, He will guide you into all the reality; for He will not speak from Himself, but what He hears He will speak; and He will declare to you the things that are coming.

Joh 16:14 - He will glorify Me, for He will receive of Mine and will declare it to you.

Joh 16:15 - All that the Father has is Mine; for this reason I have said that He receives of Mine and will declare it to you.

These verses unveil the INNER RELATIONSHIP of INTERPENETRATION that exists between the Father, Son & Spirit.

Firstly, the Spirit’s speaking is “not…from himself….” That is, the speaking source of the Spirit within the Godhead is from the Son and the Father, which reveals the interpenetration of the Three. 

Secondly, the Spirit’s taking is described as “he shall take of mine….” That is, the taking position of the Spirit within the Godhead is out of the Son and the Father, which reveals the interpenetration of the Three. 

Thirdly, the interpenetration of the Father, Son, and Spirit is also revealed by the inner nature of the Spirit’s hearing. The Lord’s words concerning the Spirit, “What things soever he shall hear …” refer to a hearing within the Godhead.

==============================================

TRUTH

My opponent again attempted to explain his complex thought about his multifarious doctrine and ended being so BYZANTINE. His method of interpreting scriptures obviously is so wrong where he failed to bring light and a clear understanding the complex idea to its simple form or from general to specific that went only to nothing but defying himself and of the simplicity of God’s truth. 

In the light of defining the complex word my opponent is using, definitely not the found in the scriptures, are words that English Vocabularies explains contradicting again how my opponent attempt to use it as camouflage cloak of his erroneous doctrine such as: “interpenetration”, “coinhere”, “indwellings”, “inbeing”. 

1. Interpenetration of the 3 persons or 3 individuals (direct transitive verb) - mutual penetration of the 3; diffusion of EACH 3 through the other (direct transitive verb). Three (3) person or individuals mutually penetrating to each other or diffusing of EACH through the other YET the three (3) persons HAVE NO will, consciousness, personality, mind EACH? Strange and so WEIRD!

2. 3 persons/individuals Coinhere - (intransitive) To inhere or exist together, as in one substance. The three (3) persons or individuals inhere or exist together as in one substance (hypostasis) but my opponent insist of calling his man-made doctrine god triune/trinity persons (hypostases) in the plural form? AGAIN, contradicting and WEIRD!

3. Indwellings of 3 persons/individuals – 3 persons or individual abiding within, or as 3 persons as 3 guiding force or 3 individuals with 3 motivating principles YET EACH is not separate from each OTHER having no separate wills, consciousness, personality and mind? STRANGE and so WEIRD! 

4. 3 persons/individual Inbeings - The fact or state of 3 beings in; existence in something else as 3 YET not separate? So, chaotic and so WEIRD!

total # of word - 298

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #10

Q #10.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

WHAT are the three (3) respective specific name of your Triune God namely: 

God the Father,

God the Son and

God the Holy Spirit

whom you claimed interpenetrating each other being distinct from each other yet not separate from each other as to justify your own interpretations of the Godhead the Bible never mentioned?

----

A#10.

In my A#8 I mention it already that There is One Name for the Divine Trinity(Matt 28:19).These name is the sum total of the Divine Being.

This verse indicates to us that God is TRIUNE; notice, however, that NAME IS SINGULAR. The name denotes the person. Hence, to baptize people into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is to baptize people into the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Furthermore, in Col 1:19 Paul says, the FULLNESS OF THE GODHEAD dwells in Christ. Therefore, the name of the Triune God is Jesus Christ.

==========================================

TRUTH

My opponent's answers to Question #9 and Question #10 only showed how my opponent played words which indirectly he isn't aware that he himself was exposing his erroneous belief. He said that the NAME (singular) required in Matthew 28:19 using the Bible translations released in the 16th century AD is JESUS CHRIST itself whom he called his Triune God. 

So, JESUS Christ is the NAME of my opponent's Triune/Trinity God. 

He also used Paul's letter to the Colossians where Paul explains the godhead that is in JESUS himself as the only "hypostasis" of God he mentioned Heb. 1:3 defying his claims and exposing it as FALSE of using "hypostases". Col. 1:19, Col. 2:9-10 explained that there is only ONE "person" or "hypostasis" of God only or in the godhead and that is JESUS.

"For in him (JESUS) all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven,..." Col. 1:19

"For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead [a]bodily; 

and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all [b]principality and power. " Col 2:9-10

JESUS is the NAME of the Father, Son, and Holy ghost, the "hypostasis" or person of God where GOD dwells who is the HEAD of ALL principality and power, the ALMIGHTY or the "mighty one" of ALL.

total # of words - 229

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #11

Q #11.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta 

You said that your TRIUNE GOD are three (3) persons. 

Can you provide me references from the Bible (Biblia-Greek) in VERBATIM the word "person" or "persons" referring to the GODHEAD?

A#11

PERSONAE came the word Persons and the Greek word OUSIA became the word essence.

By saying God has ONE ESSENCE(ousia)

and 

THREE PERSONS (hupostases PLURAL)

"For in Him dwells all the fullness of the GODHEAD bodily"(Col 2:9)

THEOTES the Greek word for GODHEAD.

============================================

My opponent AGAIN failed to show proofs from the scriptures the word persons or the plural form of persona. His answer showed again his opinion and a clear “eisegesis” teaching strange doctrine never the Bible mentioned or have been taught. 

TRUTH (Based on Biblical Proofs)

1. There is only one reference for the word person referring the godhead and that is Heb. 1:3 where in Greek it is “hypostasis”, singular form as person NOT “hypostases”, plural form as my opponent exasperatedly was insisting.

2. The word “osuia” which is Greek meaning essence wasn’t in the scriptures especially when link to the godhead but from the teachings and inventions of the Roman Catholics as to justify their man-made paganistic theory headed by Theophilus of Antioch whom born a pagan. 

3. The Greek word “Theotes” mentioned in Col. 2:9 never mean persons in the Greek interlinear G2320 but this is a feminine noun being defined as deity or the state of being God called the Godhead.

MY OPPONENT AGAIN HAD OBVIOUSLY LIED AND IS BUSTED!

# of words - 172

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #12

Q #12.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

"Personae" is plural of "persona" which is Latin in form from its Greek word "prosopon" which refers to the mask or the theater image or role. 

"Hypostasis" is the singular for "hypostases/hupostases" plural which refers to an existence. 

"Adamu/Adamah" is the Hebrew for the english word "person" which means from the ground. 

The Greek word "ousia" in latin "substancia" means "essence in English but doesn't refer to the word person. 

EITHER WAYS, "persona/e, hypostasis/es, adamah as referring to the English word person as applying to your Triune God doctrine "three persons in the divine Trinity of the One God" 

Here is my question: 

How can a One God become 3 persons or 3 personae, or 3 hupostases or 3 "Adamah" but not separate from each other?

A#12

This is HOW GOD is revealed in the Bible. We cannot question God why He revealed Himself in such a way. But this how He reveals Himself in the divine revelation. 

God is mysterious yet very experienceable. 

He is One God. 1 cor 8:4

And this One God is Triune - the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Mt 28:19. 2 Cor 13:14.

The Father is God. 1 cor 8:6

Jesus Christ is God. Rom 9:5

The Spirit is God. Acts 5:4,3

Are there three Gods? 

They are DISTINCTLY THREE yet never separated into three, because in essence, life, and being, God is ONE. 

The Triune God coexist (exist at the same time) and coinhere (dwell in one another) eternally without succession.

=========================================

Another “eisegesis” again my opponent had boasted in his answers to my question #12 where all the scriptures he used are out of context, an obvious attempt to cover up his fallacious thought in defense to his man-made doctrine. 

TRUTH

1. 1 Tim. 3:6 says Paul that God’s mystery in the past already had been deciphered and was clearly revealed when GOD, the mighty one manifest in the flesh yet my opponent said, God is mysterious.

2. Nowhere you can read trinity or triune god mentioned in Matthew 28:19 and 2 Cor. 13:14 but purely a hallucination of my opponent.

3. Rom. 9:5 never taught that Christ or the Son is God but in proper exegesis in the context especially based on the original greek manuscript, Paul refers the Father who sent the Son is the only God who is blessed forever. There were no punctuation marks such as comma in the original manuscripts.

The actual Greek text reads, "kai ex wn o cristoV to kata sarka o wn epi pantwn qeoV euloghtoV eiV touV aiwnaV amhn,"

The verse can be, and should be, translated as "from whom the Christ according to the flesh. God who is over all be blessed to the ages. Amen.", or possibly but not likely, "from whom the Christ according to the flesh who is over all. God be blessed to the ages. Amen." 

The phrase "God be blessed to the ages" is a Pauline doxology.

4. Where can you find God the Holy Spirit in Acts 5:4? NONE! 

“Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this ...”

5. Where can you find God the Holy Spirit in Acts 5:4? NONE! 

“Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this ...”

MY OPPONENT AGAIN IS BUSTED AND HAD OBVIOUSLY NARRATING A MYTH!

# of words - 273

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #13

Q #13. (a question of precision and credibility)

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

You clearly showed to me where you took your doctrine Trinity or Triune God and also CONFIRMED from your answer to my question #1 that: 

(a) the word Trinity and Triune God wasn’t mentioned or can’t be found in the Bible but first mentioned by Theophilus of Antioch its inventor in the 1st century AD; 

(b) and introduced by the Catholic as you cited in your affirmative argument “saying from around A.D. 100 to the formation of the papal system at the end of the sixth century”,

(c) citing as well as your reference “THE PERIOD OF COUNCILS in church history.” 

(d) that it was in Latin translation of the Bible from Greek your doctrine Trinity or Triune God came from, and 

(e) from your answers to my question #8 you said, “later truths do not negate earlier ones. “ meaning, what you claimed later truths of the Trinity do not contradicts or refutes the earlier one like the Traditional Trinity doctrine you cited as your reference for your Triune God belief. 

You also CONFIRMED that these three whom you called Triune God namely:

God the Father

God the Son

God the Holy Spirit

co-existed co-equally, co-eternally, dwells in one another at the same time meaning joined together in one body only, and they are inseparable all the time, 

BUT you turned to DIS-AGREE later that your Triune God namely 

God the Father

God the Son 

And God the Holy Spirit

Has their own will, personality and performing different or separate roles.

You turned to DIS-AGREE as well the traditional trinity definition of the members of your Holy Trinity or Triune God: 

God the Father, - is not God the Son and God the Holy Spirit 

God the Son – is not God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, 

God the Holy Spirit – is not God the Father and God the Son.

Here is my QUESTION: 

HOW will you now RECONCILE and JUSTIFY the chaos seen in your presentations and cross examination that you even said in your answer to my question #10, that JESUS Christ is the only name of God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit or your Triune God who are inseparable yet three distinct persons? 

(attached are the proofs)

A#13

There is NO CHAOS in every answer that I give. You only need to understand Mr Carl Cortez that the truth in the Bible is PROGRESSIVE.

It is true that i mentioned Theophilus, the formation of papal system and the period of councils and much more i do mentioned and fully agree that the name of the TRIUNE GOD is Jesus Christ(Col 2:9).Well hindi ko dinedeny yan Moderator Christine Marie Reluya Cajeta. 

The truths as revealed in the Scriptures have been lost, missed, misunderstood, misinterpreted, and wrongly taught. Therefore, there is a need to recover and rediscover it. God's Truth IS PROGRESSIVE. Since the TRUTH IS PROGRESSIVE, therefore, CHANGES ARE NOT SHAMEFUL THING. The extent to which we see the many revelations in the Bible is the extent to which we will change.

Like what Jesus said in John 14:6 " I am the way, the truth and the life" so without the way there is no going, without the truth there is no knowing and without the life there is no living.

We know that God's truths are CUMULATIVE. All the past truths of God form the foundation of the truths today. Among them were men like 

Edward Cronin

Anthony Norris Groves

John Nelson Darby

William Kelly

G.H Pember

C.H Mackintosh

C.H Spurgeon

Charles Stanley

George Cutting

B.W Newton

Robert Govett

Dwight L.Moody & 

J.G Bellet

We are gone higher not by ourselves but by standing on the shoulders of all the foregoing teachers. We thank God for those who have gone before us. 

We are standing on the shoulders of John Nelson Darby. Darby stood on the shoulders of Count Von Zinzendorf, and Zinzendorf stoon on the shoulder of Martin Luther. 

We are not boasting that we have seen the picture of God's Eternal Purpose, for we are standing on others' shoulders to see this vision. We thank God for this.

=============================================

My opponent failed to show me proofs how his doctrine was warring against the scriptures and how even himself was rejecting the works of their successors but later in his presentation involved them as reference of how their false doctrine evolved which is obviously chaotic and remained un-reconciled. 

TRUTH

The devils workmanship of inventing fallacies to defy the apostle’s doctrine was what my opponents has presented in his answers to my question #13 that never addresses or meet what I asked from him. 

1) Paul, the legitimate apostle of Christ had said clearly in his epistle to the believers in Galatia giving them ultimate warning against false teachers that will be coming to promote false doctrines. He emphasized it clearly to believe them not but curse them with their crafty man-made teachings. 

2) All the names my opponent boasted whom he said were working shoulder to shoulder as propagating the LIES that gone too far from the truth of the scriptures, had each of them issues of errors. They themselves do not have same beliefs but the promoter of dividing the Christendom where each of them had their followers. 

MY OPPONENT, IN HIS FRUSTRATIONS SORTED OUT TO HIDE HIMSELF IN NAMES HE BOASTED HE CLAIMED WERE PART OF GOD’S PURPOSE THAT TAUGHT ANOTHER GOSPEL THAN OF WHAT CHRIST’S APOSTLES HAD ALREADY ESTABLISHED. THEY AREN’T GOD’S PEOPLE BUT SATAN’S MINIONS THAT WENT AWAY FROM THE TRUTH, WHO ADVANCED THE FALSE DOCTRINE INVENTED BY MEN SUCH AS MY OPPONENT AND NOT AFTER CHRIST, NOT WHAT CHRIST’S APOSTLES PREACHED. 

“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto ANOTHER GOSPEL:

Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would PERVERT THE GOSPEL of Christ.

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which WE HAVE PREACHED UNTO YOU, let him be accursed.

As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, LET HIM BE ACCURSED.” Gal. 1:6-8

# of words - 257 (excluding the scriptures)

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #14

Q #14.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

Based on your answer of my Q#13 you justified all the contrasts of your affirmative presentation and answers to cross exam saying the word "there is no chaos" though there are as you have been required to reconcile all your statements like you said, 

that the “later truths do not negate earlier ones. “ meaning, what you claimed later truths of the Trinity do not contradicts or refutes the earlier one like the Traditional Trinity doctrine you cited as your reference for your Triune God belief but you did DIS-AGREE or indirectly REFUTING/REJECTING their teachings. 

This is truly confusing as it seems. Let me ask you now, HOW do you understand really the meaning of the word "PERSON" as referring to your Triune God? 

(Please satisfy me with your answers citing your references the definitions from the Bible and reliable definitions from Dictionaries NOT from your own understanding or personal ideas.)

A#14

When I say "later truths do not negate earlier ones" im referring to RECOVERED TRUTHS.

When it comes to the person of God. The Bible shows us that God in whom we believe is a person, and as a person He is quiet marvelous because He is not a PSYCHIC BEING 

"The first man is out of the earth, earthly; the second man is out of the heaven"(1Cor 15:47)

The Father refers to Himself as "I" 

&

The Son also refers to Himself as "I"

"I" denotes a person. In John 14:10 I am in the Father and the Father is in Me" 

So God is a person with personality, He has love, mercy, kindness and even angel Mr Carl Cortez. He has the entire range of emotions. Therefore, our God is not a conceptual object rather, a living person.

============================================

After my opponent admitted the doctrine “triune god/trinity” was nowhere can be found in the Bible and emphasized it clearly that Theophilus of Antioch was the person responsible of inventing it, in the middle of inquiry he rejected and denied the tenets of the triune god/trinity god’s definition authored by its creators. 

TRUTH

Flaws observed: 

1) He said, “When I say "later truths do not negate earlier ones" i'm referring to RECOVERED TRUTHS.”. If triune god/trinity doctrine came not from the Bible but a man-made doctrine spearheaded by Theophilus of Antioch, how then can that be called recovered truth if the word of God alone is the TRUTH? My opponents argument detected self-confessed truth is perceptibly a lie and undoubtedly trickery.

2) He also attempt to lay his invented definition birthed from opinions of men that linked to paganism like what he said “When it comes to the person of God… that God in whom we believe is a person, and as a person… He is not a PSYCHIC BEING.” God is like human beings and being compared to a physic being? God has been created rather than being the Creator? This is again fallacious statements invented by my opponent proving that his triune god or trinity god isn’t the God, the mighty one of the Bible. The Bible only mentioned Christ, the man, as the only person of God both “hypostasis” not hypostases (Heb. 1:3); “monogenes” (physical body) and the “prosopon” (image) of God (Col. 1:15) when GOD, the mighty one manifest HIMSELF in the flesh. (1 Tim. 3:16). 

3) He clearly revealed his triune god/trinity as like a human being not the GOD who is Spirit and has no beginning and is eternal based on his reference itself of how he defined God as a person.

# of words - 299

REBUTTAL TO MY OPPONENT'S ANSWER TO QUESTION #15

Q #15.

Yandex Zysev Ancheta

Can’t the established TRUTH about GOD (mighty one) be known without the aid of the LATIN translations of the Septuagint fashioned by the Greek philosophers, that was brought to Rome, the formulation of the new word TRIUNE God or TRINITY invention, the basis of your belief now, which was the very heart or your assumed cumulative new revelation TRIUNE God?

(Here’s a quotation from your presentation)

“In Latin, the word TRIUNE is used for the Trinity. Tri means “Three"; and Une means “One"; hence, TRIUNE means “three-one,” being both "Three and One" we simply say “the three-one God,” that is, “the Triune God.” According to the pure revelation of the Bible, God is Triune; He is the Triune God.

Why does the One God has the aspect of being Three?

To answer this question we have to find out from the THEOLOGY IN THE GREEK LANGUAGE TO THE THEOLOGY IN THE LATIN LANGUAGE because the studies and records of the CHURCH FATHERS were all in Greek. From around A.D. 100 to the formation of the papal system at the end of the sixth century, this period of four to five hundred years was called THE PERIOD OF COUNCILS in church history. Theological studies during this period continued to be WRITTEN IN GREEK.

After the establishment of the Catholic Church with its headquarters in the city of Rome, where Latin was used most prevailingly, theological studies entered the SECOND STAGE---the stage of the LATIN LANGUAGE From the seventh century to the sixteenth century, theological literature was written chiefly in Latin. Even during the Reformation, Martin Luther still used Latin in his writings, although he was German. Therefore, Latin also occupies quite an important position in theological research.”

A#15

The TRUTH concerning One God with Three Distinct Persons cannot be understand properly without knowing the STUDIES CONCERNING THE TRIUNE GOD IN THEOLOGY THROUGHOUT THE AGES & the ORIGINAL TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE such as SEPTUAGINT & VULGATE. After the passing away of the apostles, there were the so-called church fathers in the church history who expounded the Biblical Truths and studied extensively the writing of the apostles as well as the contents of the Old Testament and had high theological attainments. Due to their research the term TRINITY was coined. Theological studies during this period continued to be written in greek.

During reformation, Latin language occupies an important position in theological research where the Latin was used prevailingly in the stage of Latin language.

The very God upon whom the entire universe is focused is not a single God; He is TRIUNE. Both the Old & New Testaments use PLURAL PRONOUNS in referring to the Triune God. In Genesis 1:26 here the PLURAL PRONOUNS "Us" & "Ours" are used. Then in John 14:23 Jesus said, "We will come to Him and make an abode with Him" who are the "WE"? So our God is Triune. It is not invented like what your are trying to postulate Mr Carl Cortez

Again, though the Bible does not have the TRIUNE or TRINITY as a TERM but it has a TRINITY or TRIUNE GOD as FACT. The Lord said that its not easy to understand His person 

Supposed the Bible only revealed God as God the creator, not the Triune God. If there were no Father, and no Son, and no Spirit, how could God dispense Himself into us? 

We are fallen, and we have the problems of sin, the world, and Satan. How could these things be taken away? There was the need of someone to condemn sin, to judge the world, and to cast out Satan. In the divine dispensing, THIS SOMEONE IS THE SON(jesus). The Son was sent by the Father to condemn sin, to judge the world, and to cast out Satan through His death on the cross. In order to die on the cross, He needed to put on humanity. How could God without blood and flesh be crucified on the cross to shed blood for the forgiveness of sins? It would be impossible. So the Son had to put on blood and flesh so that He could go to the cross and die in a physical way (Heb. 2:14). He put on humanity so that He could shed human blood to wash away our sins. He judged the world, and He cast out Satan (John 12:31).

Furthermore, if God were only God, how could He enter into us? In order to enter into us, God must be the life-giving Spirit (1Cor 15:45)The Spirit is the holy breath for us to take in (John 20:22).

==============================================

TRUTH 

The truth about One God was taught already in the Old Testament where never the Triune God was mentioned as my opponent admitted it only existed after Theophilus of Antioch invented it in the 2nd century AD who was born a pagan. Paul clearly wrote Timothy emphasizing all scriptures which refers to the old manuscripts as God-breath useful for instructions, conviction, correction, training in righteousness, so that man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work, especially in serving God whom they knew during their time. 

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work..." 2 Tim. 3:16

My opponent suggested that God was not known being the only one God by men whom he chose like Adam, Abraham, Jacob, the prophets, etc. before Christ era where God dealt with them in their language known as Hebrew for it needed to have a pagan language such Latin and Greek first to surfaced. 

In whose report shall we believe?  We should believe the report of the Lord, which has been established already in the scriptures by his chosen men, not the latter pagan writers attempts to describe God who knew many gods as what my opponent wanted to propagate.  Trinity or triune-god is a LIE for there is only ONE Holy in Israel, the God who is mighty of all or the Almighty!