Search results

The word in John 1:3 does not refer to Jesus. Jesus says he has a God who is the only true God. On top of all this, Scripture repeatedly says Jesus is the Son of God (not once saying he is God incarnate). All this should end the dispute. But so it goes.

Great distinction! Thanks for the thread.

OT Psalms is referring to YHWH, not his servant, right?

There is the infinite divide; the insistence that reality is subjective. Even at the conceptual level, you cannot grasp the notion that contradictions do not exist in reality. So, this affects every application of understanding, perverting it to various densities of intellectual quick sand.

This has to be the most unsafe supposition ever made! God explicitly excepted himself when it was said ‘all things’ are subject to Jesus. You suppose he is implicitly renouncing his (singular) claim to all glory in who’s name is greatest, YHWH (who is Jesus’ Father) or the son of YHWH? Wow!

That’s EXACTLY what trinitarians like you do; Defining God according to a man's understanding - in direct contradiction to God’s explicit word. For us, there is only one God, the Father. Jesus is not the Father. Ergo, Jesus is not God.

Strawman. It’s not subjective. It’s not merely that ‘unless something makes sense to the man, it cannot be true.’ It’s the principle upon which logic is based on - not humanist logic. Logic is the non-contradictory identification of truth. Do you believe contradictions exist in reality?

Logic is not the friend of mystical dualists.

LOL. Projecting, you are. Not able to respond to significance of many verses juxtaposing God compared to Jesus. Gods word just does not relate to your man-is-god doctrine. Still, rather than attack me personally, I would like to hear your explanation of many verses juxtaposing God - in his...

Wrong. It is about the reality that God - in his unitarian nature - so loved and gave. Not “the Father” who gave his son. An inconvenient truth

And it is not OK to blaspheme God of the Bible, right? So, how come the verse in question does not mention it? Because it is the spirit of God that is being discussed - and contrasted - with that of God's servant, Jesus.

I think you realize I mean in the context of it being OK to blashemy against God. Where is that in the Bible?

You got it! I think mystical dualists struggle with the notion of mutual exclusivity; that if ALL is for X, it necessarily means none is for <not X>. Despite the poetic and figurative 1st chapter, the Gospel of John is the most anti-trinitarian book of the entire Bible. Only here does Jesus...

1. Christ. 2. You might have forgot to add, became obedient unto death. This distinguishes our lord from his God and Father, who is eternal and cannot die: Jesus died. We all know Mark that you are trying to ask a trick question but the word of God revealed your attempt to blur what Scripture...

Very well put.

Untrue. I've adddressed it over and over again. See post # 121.

Really? I did not hear that. Praise be.

God God in his unitarian nature God in his unitarian nature, not "the Father" God, not "the Father, but God" in his unitarian nature so loved the world God, not "the Father, but God" in his unitarian nature so loved the world that he gave God, not "the Father, but God" in his unitarian...

To support your claim, you are required. I read the monotheist Bible for what it is. You copy and past monotheist text, supposing it supports trinitarianism. God God in his unitarian nature, not "the Father" God, not "the Father, but God" in his unitarian nature so loved the world God, not...

The verses Jn 3:16-17 say God - in his unitarian nature, not 'the Father' as you allege.