Part 3 Proving Godhead Refuting Trinity with The NOUN
Part 3 Proving Godhead Refuting Trinity using Scripture with Concrete and Abstract Nouns
For Background please read notes below
Specific Bible Warnings to Trinitarians
ACTS 17:29 King James Version
The following is based partially on H. A. Wolfson, The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, Volume One: Faith, Trinity, Incarnation (Harvard University Press, 1956), pp. 359-363.
Read carefully the QUEEN OF HEAVEN
The connection with the Queen of Heaven to Polytheism ancient world to Alexandria to the Trinity
Also see in 2nd link the Trinity in the shape of the female sexual organ
Trinity is Pagan Practice of Polytheism in Mainstream Christianity #EndTimes #Apostasy (thethirdheaventraveler.com)
Study for yourself in connecting the dots - beginning from the Fall of Adam and Eve to the Flood to the Nephilim blood line continuing from the wife of Ham (Noah's son who was involved in sexual relations with Noah's wife - some scholars believe Ham had sexual relations with his father but more accurate or thorough research shows it was with his mother) to their descendent Esau to understand why God said He "hated" Esau. Continue to NIMROD The NICOLAITAN to the Queen of Heaven of Egypt and the Baal worship from Carthage. You'll see that Tertullian hailed from Carthage... you can't make this up . Continue through your study to the LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES - including the Chief Priest CAIAPHAS (not in the Levitical priesthood of Aaron but rather appointed by the Roman governor of Judea, Valerius Gratus. Note: Can you imagine? The Jew Priest who charged Jesus wasn't even a legitimate Priest to what God commanded but rather of the Nicolaitan bloodline calling himself a Jew but of the synagogue of Satan who was appointed by a godless heathen pagan gentile governor whose very name promotes his existence as GRACE which was one of Satan's many vain attempts to mock Jesus Christ.
I urge you to then continue to connect the dots through Egypt in the Second Century CE to The Roman Emperor Constantine in the 3rd Century focusing on the rise of the Vatican in later 3 CE foundation set on Constantine's original St Peter's Basilica. It is important to add here the top of the list of wolves to come out of the North African Church was none other than Augustine of Hippo in the 3rd Century who brought PHILOSOPHY - PAGANISM- RELIGION to the European continent through Rome.
Continue connecting the dots to the creation of the Catholic Church at the Vatican in the 4th Century on the land that Constantine gave to the Pope. The big lie was that St Peter's Basilica was constructed literally at the burial place of Peter which is NOT true. According to Bible Archelogy and I must add the Bible, there is NO EVIDENCE - textual (historical or archaeological) that Peter died in Rome. He never even visited Rome. What a sham the Vatican claims Peter as their first Pope.
There is no solid evidence—textual or even archaeological—that Peter died in Rome. Starting around the end of the second century, Christian pilgrims went to see Peter’s tropaion. But a tropaion is not a tomb. The word itself is very unusual; sometimes translated as “trophy,” it means something like a war memorial or a cenotaph (i.e., an empty grave). It’s not the word used in the Roman Empire for a burial place. Yet this spot—which was originally in the middle of an ancient cemetery—was quickly understood as the place where Peter was buried. When it was excavated in the 1950s, archaeologists were shocked to find that there was no grave and no bones under the tropaion.
However, if you study WHO claims Peter was martyred in Rome you'll find the same who were connected to Rome from Alexandria and invented the word 'TRINITY' - yes, none other than Tertullian himself as well as Clement of Alexandria his predecessor.
Further research that Peter was the first Pope
is an outrageous lie and to see how Catholics have been so misled into believing that Matthew 16:18 KJV is Jesus telling Peter that Jesus will build His Church on Peter. The word Rock Jesus uses is PETRA and NOT PETRAS = Peter. Secondly, even a simple knowledge of English grammar the reader can clearly see when Jesus uses the adverb "this" Jesus is referring to himself and NOT Peter. By both use of single masculine article - ὁ (ho) - including Jesus not using the 2nd person personal pronoun - and by the proximity rule of articles it is impossible to conclude that Jesus was establishing His Church on Peter. Note: Study the physical and spiritual connection of Alexandria Egypt to the Vatican. If you only take a second to ask why the Egyptian Obelisk is positioned in the center of Saint Peter's square in the Vatican.
At least they placed the cross on top...
Continuing forward study and connect the dots from the early 1st Century Church from Jesus Christ warning of the false teachers and wolves that would creep in. To the split of Antioch and Alexandria. and where God allowed Satan to hijack the Levitical Priesthood of Aaron but rather a to Egypt to Alexandria to the 2nd Century Jew named Philo - like Caiaphas - who thought he was a Jew but rather will be proven to be the synagogue of Satan) who loved Greek Philosophy to explain the Torah whose teaching inspired the Alexandrian teacher "TERTULLIAN" who invented the word TRINITY and who literally by fiat with the pen declared that God Son and Holy Spirit were in fact separate PERSONS defined as "human bodied" concrete persons but were really in existence as 1 person in human form called God - notice not Jesus Christ. Read it carefully for yourself.
On page 2,140 of the Oxford English Compact Dictionary (hard copy) We read in Part I that the word Person was set apart as a distinct meaning of the Trinity by Tertullian in 200 AD. Following the Juridical meaning of Person: Christian meaning by Tertullian (200 c) a "person" of the trinity - generally thought to be related to Latin persondre - to sound through ; but the long o makes this a difficulty the sense that mask has not come down into English. and in the sense that this did not arrive by logical order.
TRANSLATE: What we're reading here is although the true meaning of the word person is based exclusively on the definition of Person on the remaining page 2,140 which is a living body, a physical bodily object of an individual human being, Tertullian in the 2nd Century claimed that in Christianity because of his term 'TRINITY' the meaning of "person" changes to include the abstract nature of God. HOWEVER, there is NO LOGICAL ORDER TO ARRIVE AT THIS Change.
Repeat by Oxford University: There is no logical order to arrive at this change.
Why? Because even a child can recognize the difference between CONCRETE NOUNS and ABSTRACT NOUNS. How can God who can only be visually represented by the BODY of Jesus Christ, ALSO be witnessed by the physical body of The Father?
A Trinitarian will answer: This proves the Trinity because the SON is a PERSON and the Son is IN the Father and so the 2 are persons. Again this is NOT what is written in scripture.
The father, which means God, as the witness as The Father, used throughout scripture as God. If this were a person as defined by Oxford dictionary God would be a concrete human being, a body. However scripture is clear that God has not been seen and is SPIRIT. NOT a human being.
Only the Godhead is scripture evidence: God is a spirit NOT A PERSON and No man has seen him and that it is only Jesus Christ who is the VISIBLE IMAGE OF GOD. The Holy Spirit as I have addressed in Parts 1 and 2 is NOT a separate PERSON but rather an intangible abstract entity not perceived with the five senses and is the spirit.
Use a pair of commas in the middle of a sentence to set off clauses, phrases, and words that are not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Use one comma before to indicate the beginning of the pause and one at the end to indicate the end of the pause.
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Definition of terms: Noun - Is a part of speech that names something as a person, place, thing, or idea.
Trinitarians will go beyond this scope and add God the Father-even adding the perverted concept of non scripture God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
In part 2 by God’s abundant grace whereby his provision of the preponderance of evidence based on grammar, context, grammar, and scripture witnessing scripture I clearly showed that Jesus Christ and him alone stands as the physical body in concrete form meaning NOT ABSTRACT.
Thus here in part 3
we study NOUNS and the difference between the abstract noun is a type of noun that refers to something with which a person cannot physically interact. A noun is a person, place, or thing. However, in many cases, the “thing” might be an intangible concept—which means it is an abstract form of noun. In this instance, abstract means to exist apart from concrete existence. A noun that is abstract is an aspect, concept, idea, experience, state of being, trait, quality, feeling, or other entity that cannot be experienced with the five senses.
Another vain attempt of the Trinitarians to force the square peg into the round hole.
More than once Dr Vallicella points out that God's substance can't be understood as matter, which is correct. But he fails to understand what "substance" means in trinitarian doctrine. He writes: "The sense in which water is a substance is not the sense in which God is a substance. Water is a substance in the sense of a stuff; God is a substance in the sense of a hypostasis (that which stands under) or hypokeimenon (that which is placed under), or as I prefer to say, an individual."
From the standpoint of traditional, classical Trinitarian theology, this is incorrect. God is a substance neither in the sense of stuff (hyle) nor in the sense of individual (hypostasis). Here's a representative explanatory snippet from St John of Damascus, showing the universal traditional use of the terms, from "De Fide Orthodoxa" c.48: "Substantia quidem communem speciem et complectivam speciem homoiodon (id est earum quae unum sunt specie) hypostaseon (id est personarum) significat, utputa Deus, homo; hypostasis autem atomon (id est individuum) demonstrat, scilicet Patrem, Filium, Spiritum Sanctum, Petrum, Paulum."
So "substance" here means something like "essence" or "being" (in the sense of ousia) rather than hypostasis; the whole doctrine of the Trinity depends on this distinction between the one nature, substance, being, essence, etc. on the one hand and the three individual persons or hypostases on the other. In most cases where there is one existing human nature (man), there is one individual hypostasis (Peter or Paul); in the case of the Trinity there is one divine nature (God) instantiated in three hypostases (Father and Son and Holy Spirit); conversely, in the Incarnation there are two existing natures (God and man), but only one hypostasis (Christ the Incarnate Logos). It is not good Trinitarian doctrine to say that there is one individual or hypostasis (God) who is identical to three individual persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).
Unlike most other nouns, abstract nouns don’t refer to people or places. After all, people and places are real things that exist in our world. Even nouns that refer to fictional characters and places, such as Godzilla or Valhalla, are not, the reasoning goes, abstract nouns because these things would have a physical form if they were actually real... " END QUOTE
Why I as a Christian say a Muslim Scholar won the Trinity vs Tawhid Debate. Dr. David Woods Debate with Muslim Scholar Mohammed Hijab
25 Bible Verses About God The Father (KJV) = God compare with all Old Testament reference to GOD as The Father.
Bible Verses About God The Father
Part 1 Proving Godhead and dispel Trinity with the Preposition ""OF"