Search results

LOL. For us, there is one God, the Father. Pure Scripture.

You are guilty of that and don’t realize it. Honestly, it’s not that hard. The trinity - the word and doctrine - and ‘Jesus is God’ is not it the Bible in any manner, shape or form. By reading your doctrine into unitarian text, you make one desperate and contradictory claim after another...

No but I suggest starting a new thread on using the Bible as a dictionary. IMO, you are very guilty of disregarding explicit Scripture to read you doctrine into text you prefer. You either don’t realize you are doing it or have been so indoctrinated, that you don’t realize it is wrong.

This is Circular Reasoning. Nothing in Scripture comes close to ‘Jesus is God.’ You start with that THEN want to alter every rule of reasoning to support it: 1. Definition 2. Logic 3. Language Usage 4. Explicit Scripture.

No. I’m sorry. I thought that was your doctrine from your posts.

Jesus is the Messiah, which means Christ, which means Gods Anointed, which means Son of God. His God, the Creator of us all, is the only true God, who we relate to as Father. I am a Biblical unitarian. Any questions?

Oh, that not a trinitarian? If that were true, you would have done it already. We are speaking English, GEN. Is it your position that objects of sentences and subjects of sentences in other languages are one and the same thing?

Yes, I should have used the principle that both he and trinitarians rest, mystical dualism. @GEN2REV applies this princinple to 2-in-1 Being, whereas trinitarians apply this principle to a 3-in-1 Being.

No, I'm untwising trinitarian double speak. Calling Jesus ANY of God - son, servant, word, lamb - proves he is not God. Rather than admit this aspect of Language Usage, you Appeal to Diversion - from Jesus and God to water and cups Prepositonal phrases - such as OF, in, on - relate objects to...

Jesus is the container, not the contents. You added the word "in" to confuse the contents with the container. And you deny the significance of "of," Jesus is OF God. This proves he is not God.

It is as rock solid, certain as can be. Subjects of sentences are not objects of sentences. There you go again, pretending the container is the contents.

You are distorting the word of God, which did not say Jesus was a form of but is a servant of God. Language usage proves this means that he is not God.

The Bible explicitly says God is the Father of Jesus @ 2 Corinthians 11:31. That's good enough for me. Why is it not good enough for you?

It must take a lot of mental discipline to write such things AND claim Jesus is God. Is it truly your position that God almighty submits to the will of another?

Appeal to Diversion. I see what you did there! Pretend he is not talking about what John 1:1 actually says - logos. Out of nowhere assert something irrelevant to John 1:1. Does your Bible say Jesus is a servant of God? Mine does. The only reason Jesus is called a servant of God is because he...

Of course. You have to retreat to opinion because the facts are not on your side. P1. Hosea 11:9 explicitly says God is not a man. P2. Jesus is a man (explicitly stated numerous times) C. ? Trinitarians want to subordinate explicit text to verses they say imply that a man is God.

You missed my point. The Bible says many times God, the Father and Jesus - 2 Beings. This time it omits the Father and trinitarians claim the and refers to one person. John 1:1 does not even reference Jesus but you credit it anyway.

This proves that the deity of Christ is EXTREMELY unclear, given the ‘clearest’ statement has the equally valid reference of 2 people.

I was saved by Prevenient Grace. THE moment of truth for me was the choice to OBEY the prompting of God's Holy Spirit, to tell a saint doing missionary work in Haiti to delay his trip. There is one thing I'd like the world to know about this. Although people think obeying is subjugation and...

Cute!