Search results

does Jesus agree with the scribe in mark 12?

if Jews are wrong about the nature of the Most High, no trinity, why does Jesus agree with the Jews?

if i create a house and create the structure through a perfect image, who made the house, me or the image? if Jesus was the Most High they would have said Jesus is the Most High, they wouldnt be saying image, Son and all the rest, its more complicated than just "they are one and the same"...

wow thats one big long filibuster, i got an idea, i will just copy past a whole lot of whatever and maybe people will think i am on to something. or better yet keep it short and simple and easily prove my point Mark 12 28-34 28And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one...

so the question, is the Father the Son? answer, He is but He isn't. typical trinity logic

the Father is the creating power, Jesus is the vessel creation went through according to Paul and Plato.

we have souls, when we die do those souls not go back to the Most High?

Jesus is the Father and the Son yet Jesus said He was sent by the Father, you dont send yourself

your responding to the wrong person, the justbyfaith guy thinks the Father is the Son

yet the bible does not say this: only you say that

the Father was in Jesus, i never said different. the Father was in Elijah, we dont think he was the Most High

and in order to make this work you have to get rid of the whole father son thing because now Jesus is Father and Son. exactly Jesus says He is Son of the Most High, never the Most High, cant understand why you guys refuse to acknowledge this.

i dont think you know what blasphemy means, it is not specific to claiming to be the Most High, it means profaning the name. claiming to be godly, of the heavens, fell under blasphemy. Jesus even says he was claiming to be the Son of the Most High. do you say of him whom the Father consecrated...

i dont remember Jesus ever calling Himself the everlasting Father. the phrase is Father of eternity, i dont think its saying the Son is the Father, because that would make no sense at all, not to mention the Jews were not expecting the Father, as well as this idea screws up the trinity doctrine...

makes no difference if the "he" is in italics, the phrase is understood as i am him, he, the one, someone etc. we know this because when hearing this the Jews asked "who are you?", or in other words, who is "he"? and in John 10 you have Jesus and the Jews having this exact same conversation...

you realize someone saying: I am the great I Am is not the same as I am He. what you did was very misleading.

sorry but the bible does not say this, this right here is pitiful, your going to quote Jesus, the Christ, and add words that He didnt say. this is pure desperation, how do you expect anyone to take you serious?

but when you speak for someone else by definition you are speaking for someone else. but you didnt answer the question. thats what we call dodging. the bible does not say it, you inserting your assumption into the text does not count, sorry. if the bible clearly says it then why in the...

no its not crystal clear because it is not crystal clear, do you know what crystal clear means? if you asked me what color my truck is and i told you a flock of ducks flies under the full moon, this might mean blue in my world, but its not the same as me saying my truck is blue. why dont you...

i agree, it creates a big distraction, ever since rome invented the trinity 400 years after Jesus people have been persecuted, killed and argue the nature of Jesus, something Jesus spent little time teaching on if He spent any time at all on it.