Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

What do you mean... "Church"?


Recommended Posts

Actually, doing a Yahoo search, almost sounds Jewish to me. biglaugh.gif One only needs to do a search by the name of James Trimm and this is the link that currently comes up on page 1, link number 2.

http://www.lebtahor....VAveryPaper.htm

Ahhh, and on that page,....

"James language expertise is questioned, as James passed on challenges to demonstrate any conversational ability in Semitic languages. And one could in addition often observe the very low skill level of his English writing output."

Which I guess is probably as close to an answer as I'll get. Thanks for the link Mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Okay, I looked up Saint John Chrysotom Theological Seminary on Google. The first site listed, just happens to be about James Trimm.

http://www.seekgod.ca/saintjohn.htm

The story they tell there is very similar to VP Weirwille's. A degree is claimed which cannot be proven. James is kicked out of his fellowship and starts his own church.

I really need to look into this more than I have.

Edit.

Researching this college is fun! It's faculty was composed of several dead members.

http://www.lebtahor.com/truth/trimm/yeshiva/sainthohn/saintjohnpage.htm

"This is very reminiscent of the faculty incidents at MBI and MWHU that I found. Here Don Bryant De Cordova is president. Dom Jerome Joachim is listed as the Professor of Canon Law and Liturgics. The problem here is that Don Jerome Joachim is dead and has been since 1997. This is the same guy that was one of the signatures on James Trimm's false doctorate. Below is a copy of the Ladd lineage at CACINA website. If you scroll to the bottom, you will see that Francis Jerome Joachim Ladd was consecrated in 1974, just as Hargis has listed on his faculty page. He was born in 1928 and died 1997. Kind of hard to be an active member of a faculty when you have been deceased for about 6 years.

there's more dead members documented there

Also James apparently fabricated a person to come to his defense at a group that no longer wants him around. I found this info on 2 other websites as well.

I found six or seven sites tha are rather unfavorable, will look at them as I have time

Edited by Gen-2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

God first

thanks everybody

I wrote the Wep sites and then it was ok to post what they

From: research <research@lebtahor.com>

Subject: Re: Grease Spot Cafe

Date: June 5, 2010 12:09:26 AM EDT

To: Roy Perry <year2027@comcast.net>

Roy, you are more than welcome to post anything from my site and it is not slander, but truth, with all the evidence posted. Trimm likes to lie and threaten people. He threatened to sue me once, I told him to go ahead. He knew he could not, because he was a liar. If I had slandered him, he could have sued me and the courts would have forced me to remove my site, but he cant, because I am telling the truth. Peace Roy, Kathryn

At 07:02 PM 6/4/2010, you wrote:

God first

thanks Leb Tahor

I posted on a board with that point at you let me give you what i write what posted "The purpose of this page is to expose the truth about James Trimm (also known as James S. Trimm, James Scott Trimm, falsely called Dr. James Trimm, Dr. James S. Trimm and Dr. James Scott Trimm. I say falsely because he does not have any degree.), President of SANJ, the Society for the Advancement of Nazarene Judaism, and also the “Nasi” of the Nazarene Beit Din. He was originally investigated as a result of his slander against another woman, in the early summer of 2000; all of which is documented under the Chronology of Initial Events section. As a result of important information that was brought to light, it was obvious that slander was not the only unrighteous act of James Trimm. James Trimm was also guilty of lying, deceiving, theft, plagiarism, false teaching, division,... I could not, in good conscience, not say anything and let this unrighteousness go unchecked, even if it meant that I became another target of his slander. James Trimm's reaction was indeed to attack, instead of repent. He has increased his unrighteousness by publishing the Hebraic Roots Version NT, listing James S.Trimm as translator. Yet this Hebraic Roots Bible - HRV is not a translation, but a plagiarism with his agenda added."

the purpose of this board is to expose cults but I do run the board If I did any thing wrong I will remove it but please let me know and join us from time to time. And please tell if do want me to quote you because James Trimm is new on our board but do not want attack him but teach him.

I believe he like the Way Ministry and only wants our money but I am given some lead way and I am sorry grammar not better. Lets me tell his answer "There is no difference legally between libel/slander and repeating lible/slander you have read/heard somewhere else. " because i quoted you and others what i wrote about him.

While I think he a fool but I know I am a fool that is getting wiser everyday my study of God word but my research is odd but where takes me. Thank you with love and a holy kiss blowing your way from Roy

this what got no judgment here

with love and a holy kiss Roy

Edited by year2027
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not responded to many questions because the most efficient way to do so would have been to cut and paste. There are few doctrinal issues I have not already covered in my books and articles. however I have been asked not to cut and paste and more, so that leaves me having to spend hours recomposing what I have already composed.

I have no need to put myself on trial here. I just spent nearly a year in discovery and depositions preparing for trial by TWI and in the end they chose to settle rather than go to trial. I have no intention of now being the subject of a witch trial by ex-TWIers.

Our beliefs must be big enough to include all of the facts, open enough to be tested, and flexible enough to change.

If anyone wants to discuss doctrine then you can email me at cleartruth@yahoo.com

If you want to engage in Lashon HaRa and Slander attacking me rather than my doctrinal arguments, then enjoy yourselves.

Lashon HaRa is the sin of using words as a weapon to harm someone.

It is amazing how many people who would never think of picking up a baseball bat and attacking someone with it, will take up words (true or false) and use them as a weapon to attack a person. This is as wrong as picking up a baseball bat and using it as a weapon. And the man who says that he is only repeating what he read or heard, is like a man who uses a baseball bat to attack someone and then insists that he is not responsible because he did not manufacture the bat!

My response to the slander about me is here:

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_68/8857000/8857710/1/print/sl2.pdf

And my response to the false claims of Copyright Infringement and Plagiarism of the HRV are:

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_68/8850000/8850159/1/print/jstrimm3.pdf

Edited by James Trimm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is more to life than doctrinal arguments. TWI left a pretty large wake of hurt ex-followers....why there is even a forum.....and when they start a forum to tell the other side of the story...chances are.... there IS another side to the story.....(What was that 'victims of fraud' link Roy posted?)

In TWI...when we said anything negative about "leadership" ...out came the manipulative language...."disappointment"..."sin"..."lockbox". I never heard them use Lashon HaRa, but it is probably only a matter of time. So glad I am no longer swayed by THAT tact!

Besides, ex-way always have Michael Rood .....that is.... if they are in need of a self-proclaimed Messianic Prophet! Sometimes it is good to keep it in-house. :biglaugh:

Edited by geisha779
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.aramaicpedangta.com/Online_Version/dont_know_aramaic.htm

The below short and to the point analysis is taken from the above web site link. This is a web site that says some of the same stuff that James has been saying about how good the Aramaic texts are and how bad the Greek texts are. Of course, a Greek translator would not agree. I wonder if the Greek translators complain about the Aramaic texts? Well maybe that can be for another topic.

James Trimm: Trimm’s Hebraic Roots Version is to be thoroughly avoided. The translator has made an absolute “hodge-podge” of a translation. For the Book of Matthew, he uses the Hebrew versions, which arise from the Middle centuries and have no evidence of being originals. For the Gospels (ironically, including Matthew) he uses the Old Syriac, a corrupt Aramaic version. He claims that the Old Syriac is superior to the Pedangta which is thoroughly rebutted by the history of the Church of the East and the Syrian Orthodox Church. Ironically, as the Old Syriac only includes the 4 Gospels, Trimm is forced to use the Pedangta for the other books (indeed, I once confronted him about his hypocritical use of the very Pedangta he badmouths, to which no answer was given). It has even been shown that his “translation” of these books is not even his own work, that they are plagiarised from the Way International's translation.

And if the above link does not work, I do not know why this is the case. When I copy and paste this directly into my browser it works fine and takes me to the site. However, when I copy and paste it to this forum I am not getting the same results.

I did a google search for the below mentioned person who is more of an esteemed Aramaic translator and the above link came up number 2 on the first page.

Paul Younan

Edited by Mark Sanguinetti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.aramaicpedangta.com/Online_Version/dont_know_aramaic.htm'>http://www.aramaicpedangta.com/Online_Version/dont_know_aramaic.htm

The below short and to the point analysis is taken from the above web site link. This is a web site that says some of the same stuff that James has been saying about how good the Aramaic texts are and how bad the Greek texts are. Of course, a Greek translator would not agree. I wonder if the Greek translators complain about the Aramaic texts? Well maybe that can be for another topic.

http://www.aramaicpedangta.com/ Online_Version/dont_know_aramaic.htm

Unfortunately the Hebrew/Aramaic origins crowd has become slit into two groups:

Pedangta Primacy Theory and Critical Text Theory.

Pedangta Primacy is to Aramaic origins what the Majority Text and Textus Receptus supporters are to Greek Origins Textual Criticism. They insist that the Pedangta is the original inspired original Aramaic NT. (In both cases this points to the Byzantine type text, for the Majority Text, the Textus Receptus and the Pedangta are all Byzantine type texts.

Critical Text Theory (this is my party) maintain that we must apply objective rules of textual criticism to a wide variety of Hebrew and Aramaic texts (and even take into account the textual history of Greek and Latin versions as they express underlying Hebrew and/or Aramaic) in order to arrive at the best possible most original Hebrew/Aramaic text. This is comparable to the Critical text position in textual criticism in Greek origin textual criticism. One major difference, however is that the Greek Critical text theory tends to support the Greek Alexandrian type text, while the Aramaic Critical theory points to the Western type text as oldest (The Old Syriac for example is a "Westernt" type text (as laid out in my book The Hebrew and Aramaic Origin of the New Testament at http://www.lulu.com/nazarene ) (in fact the "Western" type used to be called the "Syro Latin" text type because of the affinity between the Old Syriac, the Old Latin and the Greek Western text.

Unfortunately many of those who subscribe to the Pedangta Primacy theory take things personally and make personal rather than academic arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God first

thanks James Trimm

what one will find they do search on me is I have a lot of enemies

Because I would give them a holy kiss

but I do not pasted my answers

it better not to say nothing if you have not good to say

I know you call it Slander I call it a fare debate

You welcome to go on Wep sites and post things about me

i told complete my life story

because you did slander you did it to your self

how did you slander your self?

by not being truthful about it because some of us would understand

we are not perfect either

with love and a holy kiss Roy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

who is "you"?

"Who am I?" and "Why am I me?"

I've been asking myself those questions as long as I can remember. Every time I think the answer is coming to me it pulls away, like trying to remember a dream.

Just thought I'd mention it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not responded to many questions because the most efficient way to do so would have been to cut and paste. There are few doctrinal issues I have not already covered in my books and articles. however I have been asked not to cut and paste and more, so that leaves me having to spend hours recomposing what I have already composed.

I have no need to put myself on trial here. I just spent nearly a year in discovery and depositions preparing for trial by TWI and in the end they chose to settle rather than go to trial. I have no intention of now being the subject of a witch trial by ex-TWIers.

Our beliefs must be big enough to include all of the facts, open enough to be tested, and flexible enough to change.

If anyone wants to discuss doctrine then you can email me at cleartruth@yahoo.com

If you want to engage in Lashon HaRa and Slander attacking me rather than my doctrinal arguments, then enjoy yourselves.

Lashon HaRa is the sin of using words as a weapon to harm someone.

It is amazing how many people who would never think of picking up a baseball bat and attacking someone with it, will take up words (true or false) and use them as a weapon to attack a person. This is as wrong as picking up a baseball bat and using it as a weapon. And the man who says that he is only repeating what he read or heard, is like a man who uses a baseball bat to attack someone and then insists that he is not responsible because he did not manufacture the bat!

My response to the slander about me is here:

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_68/8857000/8857710/1/print/sl2.pdf

And my response to the false claims of Copyright Infringement and Plagiarism of the HRV are:

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_68/8850000/8850159/1/print/jstrimm3.pdf

James, it appears as if you came here to recruit, therefore you have opened yourself up to a trial of sorts. You want to preach your propaganda then the people will try you, if they are wise, before they follow you. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice . . . .

Also, you clearly do not understand the true concept of "Lashon HaRa."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James, it appears as if you came here to recruit, therefore you have opened yourself up to a trial of sorts. You want to preach your propaganda then the people will try you, if they are wise, before they follow you. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice . . . .

Also, you clearly do not understand the true concept of "Lashon HaRa."

If anyone wants a good understanding of Lashon HaRa you can look at the following:

http://nazarenespace.ning.com/profiles/blogs/lashon-hara

http://nazarenespace.ning.com/profiles/blogs/lashon-hara-by-mikahael-ben

No I did not come here to "recruit" I came here originally because I was being sued by the Way International. After the suit ended I began discussing other topics, one of which was doctrinal so it was moved to the doctrine section.

It is logical to conclude that anyone that has a doctrine and posts in favor of it is by definition "recruiting"... why am I different?

Should not doctrine be debated on its own merits rather than falling into the logic error of attacking the one presenting an argument rather than responding to the argument?

Besides I have already responded to every one of these false accusations in my two PDF files, that should be sufficient to say that has been covered now lets talk about doctrine. Everything that can be said on the subject of attacking James Trimm has already been said and already been responded to, so there is nothing more to say on that topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James, it appears as if you came here to recruit, therefore you have opened yourself up to a trial of sorts. You want to preach your propaganda then the people will try you, if they are wise, before they follow you. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice . . . .

Also, you clearly do not understand the true concept of "Lashon HaRa."

In another thread you comment that you do not see in my words "how to live and love"... I responded "Torah"

Here is what the Torah says about how to love one another:

You shall not go up and down as a talebearer

among your people; neither shall you stand idly

by the blood of your neighbor: I am YHWH.

You shall not hate your brother in your heart.

You shall in no way rebuke your neighbor,

nor bring sin upon him,

You shall not avenge nor bear any grudge

against the children of your people,

but you shall love your neighbor as yourself.

I am YHWH.

(Lev. 19:16-18)

One of the ways we love our neighbour is by not being a "talebearer" that we "in no way rebuke [our] brother".

Is that the kind of love I have found Doctrinal sub-forum? Or have I been the target of talebearing and rebuke?

Edited by James Trimm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, if one wants a reliable source for information on "lashon hora" one could go to Chabad.org and look it up there. Or look it up on Jewfaq.org or a number of other websites designed by people who actually practice Judaism, study Torah, and understand it. Which, btw, James clearly does not.

BTW, James, using yourself as a source does not add validity to a logical argument/discussion/debate. For that, one must use other reference material.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James, you cannot pull a a few verses out and claim that sums up everything written on the entire subject. Well, you can't do it with any integrity anyway. There are plenty of instances in the Bible where people rightly proclaimed the dishonesty that another was partaking in.

BTW, this is a discussion board. That means we share a few thoughts, concepts, verses, resources etc. We then discuss the topic with others, giving some amount of respect and honest consideration for what the other participants have to say and then perhaps responding to it. You aren't participating in discussions, you are preaching. One would have to have an awful lot of free time on their hands just to get through one or two of your posts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, if one wants a reliable source for information on "lashon hora" one could go to Chabad.org and look it up there. Or look it up on Jewfaq.org or a number of other websites designed by people who actually practice Judaism, study Torah, and understand it. Which, btw, James clearly does not.

BTW, James, using yourself as a source does not add validity to a logical argument/discussion/debate. For that, one must use other reference material.

I was not quoting myself as a source... if you would actually read the directives the moderator recently gave us we were asked to post links rather than cut and paste. So rather than paste what I have written in the past on Lashon Hara I have posted this link to it:

http://nazarenespace.ning.com/profiles/blogs/lashon-hara

Which is mostly a collection of quotations from Scripture, with some commentary that is pretty literally drawn from it.

And then I posted this link:

http://nazarenespace.ning.com/profiles/blogs/lashon-hara-by-mikahael-ben

Which I did not write.

I find it odd that you say I am not Torah Observant but claim that Chabad is. Chabad rejects the Messiah. The Torah specifically forbids us from rejecting Messiah (Deut. 18:18-19). Moreover the Messiah is the Torah incarnate, so in rejecting Messiah one is rejecting the incarnate Torah. Why would you regard Messiah rejecting Rabbinic Jews as a better authority than Messiah accepting Nazarene Jews?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chabad does NOT reject Messiah. Perhaps they reject YOUR Messiah, but they most certainly do not reject Messiah.

and yes, yes I would regard Rabhbinic Jews as a better authority on Torah.

My Messiah is Yeshua and if you advocate rejecting the incarnate truth, then that tells us enough about your credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Messiah is Yeshua and if you advocate rejecting the incarnate truth, then that tells us enough about your credibility.

Yeah, well good luck with that James. Most of the regulars in the doctrinal forum have known me for going on 10 years now and we have had many discussions about Torah, about our lives and families. And they know what about you, exactly????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, well good luck with that James. Most of the regulars in the doctrinal forum have known me for going on 10 years now and we have had many discussions about Torah, about our lives and families. And they know what about you, exactly????

How can you say, "We are wise, and the Torah of YHWH is with us"?

Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood.

The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken.

Behold they have rejected the Word of YHWH;

So what wisdom do they have?

(Jer. 8:8-9)

In other words, those who accept the Word of YHWH (that is the Messiah, see Jn. 1:1-3, 14) are a better source for Torah wisdom, than those who reject the Word of YHWH (Messiah).

Edited by James Trimm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly my point, James. The problem for you is going to be that these people have already been sucked in by one false prophet, they aren't going to be so easily fooled again.

Your intentions ring loud and clear in your lengthy posts. You wish to preach and teach and win followers to your way. Your responses likewise indicate you have no interest in discussing and learning from others because you already believe you know more than anyone else here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God first

thanks James Trimm

James James james do understand love because you do not show it

Love more than words to say I love you is one but to prove you love is another

The Jehovahs Witness I mean the EX-Jehovahs Witness who more knowledgeable of your ideals than your yes James ideals and The Way Ministry

EX-Jehovahs Witness some take my words truthful but not all

you see James no one is hearing you

I can quote from Atheist that once were Jehovahs Witness that read my words

why do you think I can say something like this because it that was in not the Jehovahs Witness cult because prove I understand their pain

the bible is vain book that only fools believe it but the wise live it

like Abigail , Gen-2, Geisha, Mark, Wordword, Todd, Cman, and many others

As long as your into pasted your message you never learn a thing did you know I was never ask to do anything but I saw a need on my own to part hit from my post too

with love and a holy kiss Roy

Edited by year2027
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...