Recent content by RedFan

So were the Greek Orthodox. Both trace their roots to the apostles.

I'm asking whether Jesus could have emptied himself of an attribute of God (like omniscience) in the course of foregoing equality with God. @Wrangler sees such a result as akin to God changing. Do you?

What's your take on Phil. 2:6-7 then? Is it not possible for him to have "emptied himself" of a damn thing yet still be God, lest it violate the immutability tenet?

Certainly our Lord didn't know this when he said what is recounted in Mark 13:32. But perhaps he knows now. I tend to view the earthly Jesus -- the one who, according to Phil. 2:6-7, "did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but emptied himself" -- as having emptied himself...

Yup, Jesus not denying Thomas's declaration, and instead calling him blessed for it, fills in the missing gap in the argument. An admission by silence. Good job!

I have no credentials. So maybe you should put me on your ignore list. I'm just another ignorant Trinitarian, I guess. (By the way, Peter was taught DIRECTLY by Jesus too, and later denied even knowing the man. So we cannot conclude, without more, that every word uttered by an Apostle is true.)

You're missing a step, Jack. The fact that Thomas said to Jesus "my Lord and my God" tell us Thomas's opinion. There is one more step before we can conclude that Thomas was correct. Do you want to fill it in, or would you like me to?

I have no cause other than to try to learn the truth. I do not claim "Logos" was used figuratively. I claim that it has alternative meanings in Greek. "Word" "Reason" etc. (It's not productive for us to debate which of us is better schooled in Greek. I'll just say that I am not a neophyte.)...

How so? I don't see his purpose shedding much light on what he meany by Logos in his Prologue. And I sure don't want to segue away from the Prologue's meaning! Lots of Trinitarians read the Prologue as absolutely dispositive and conclusive proof of Trinitarianism (or at least Binitarianism)...

Knowing John's purpose in writing does not solve all issues with knowing his meaning. Contemporaneous context is still important in divining the latter. To get it right (or as close as we can come), I would think the meaning of "Logos" to a first century Greek writer is more important than the...

Fair point, in terms of the modern understanding of "Word." But let's use Logos instead, as John did, and try to put ourselves in the First Century when John wrote, to understand what nuances influenced him. Greeks had used Logos for centuries-- as early as Heraclitus -- to refer to a...

"RedFan" is actually a nod to the Cornell Big Red, my alma mater (both undergrad and law school)

The Gallup poll you shared contains no indication that the members of any particular profession "tend to engage in double talk." (I know lawyers don't!) Is there another poll that fills in this missing detail? I'd hate to think you made it up.

You've lost me. Is there a relevant point to this graph?

I respect your opinion, although I don't share it. John 3:2 has Nicodemas using God twice, once with the article and once without. Just like John 1:1. The "from" and "with" references don't detract from this fundamental affinity.