Search results

You are absolutely correct in saying that John prologue became one of the biggest proof texts behind the trinity. They did so by changing "logos" to "Jesus." But there was no reason to do that. It was done to make John 1:1 a proof text for the extra-Biblical trinity. When the logos is understood...

Jesus was certainly not a "mere" man. Actually according to Ps 8:4-5, there is no such thing a "mere" man, but that's another story. Adam was created perfect. But he had free will. He could have obeyed God, but he didn't. The point is, a man has the potential to live a perfect life. Genesis 1...

NO! John did not rely on Greek philosophy for truth! John's gospel, particularly the first chapter, is a brilliant polemic against Greek philosophy. It was because Philo and others "harmonized" Greek philosophy with the scriptures that the trinity was born. There were plenty of trinities in...

There is not a chance that the Jews (the ones to whom God actually spoke) of the 1st century would have thought the "word" in John 1:1 was "Jesus." The word "logos" has a rich history. It really can't be boiled down to a single English word. Essentially, in the 1st century the word "logos"...

If only people stop substituting "Jesus" for "word" in John 1:1 and learn what "logos" actually means, there would be less confusion. The Bible would actually make sense. But, 2,000 years of tradition is a tough nut to crack. Nonetheless, every day more and more Christians are starting to...

I'm not saying there is no trinity, but 1 John 5:7 is not a good proof verse. If you dig around a little, you can easily find that the words, "and these three are one" are not found in any early manuscripts. The words were added at a rather late date. There are several modern English that rely...

Specifically, I'd be interested in your take on Isaiah 65:17-25. What does it mean to you? When do you see this happening? Clearly it's not happening just yet. If it is indeed symbolic, who determines its meaning. You? Me? The Pope? Franklin Graham? If it is me, why can't I say that it means...

They are not the same thing. A "leader child" is a specific child. "A child will lead" is not. It could be any non specified child. As far as marriage in the new earth; most say there will not be marriage based on Matt 22:30. While I'm not 100% sure about marriage, I am hesitant to build a...

No, Jesus does not have a miniME. Isaiah does not speak of a "leader child." It says a child will lead the animals. In our language there is a difference between the two phrases. If you recall, the animals in the garden of Eden ate fruit to live. There was no shedding of blood. But after the...

It's not complicated. A little child is a little child. I could quote any dictionary, but why bother? "Little" and "child" are well known words in the English world.

If these passages are not literal, who determines what the actually mean? Why couldn't I say the really mean that humans will co-exist with aliens from a star in the constellation Leo? What do you see in the scriptures that makes you think there will be no animals in the new earth? If you read...

Well, you and I were born in the flesh after Abraham, and yet: Eph 1:4, According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Maybe this verse and John 8:58 both mean something in God's foreknowledge? Could be.

Sure there is. It says nothing about a trinity. Just because it mentions three individuals doesn't make them one, a godhead, a substance, or whatever. Would you suggest that Daniel 2:49 makes Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego somehow one, a trinity? I assume not, but it is really the same...

I understand.

I never looked at the angle that we are not Jesus' children. We absolutely are not his children. We're his brothers and sisters. Good point!

I did get it wrong. It's the wolf that will lie with the lamb. A few other currently unlikely friendships will also come to pass. Isa 11:6, The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a...

Bummer! I was looking forward to hanging out with lions and lambs.

No need to be sorry. I agree with you, it certainly is easy to waste a lot of time in forums. I often regret the amount of time I waste.

The is no "the I am" anywhere in the scripture. You're inserting "the" where it isn't there. Read your own post. You brought up the crucifixion as though Jesus' crucifixion made him God. I'm just point out that crucifixion does not make anyone God. In the text. By Apostles, I assume you mean...

Several people in the Bible other than Jesus uttered the phrase, "ego eimi" (the Greek I am). I say it myself all the time and I hear it from others. Crucifixion was a common way to execute people in those days. Didn't make any of them God. The context of John 8 is relevant. There is no church...