Search results

This really has nothing to do with the question in the OP.

Calling something, like a word, a person is called personification. Words are WHAT’s, not WHO’s. Where I want to go with this is to demonstrate the fraud of the inherently contradictory dogma of the trinity using: Definition Logic Language Usage Scripture John 1:2 is this word not he word.

It CAN refer to a person? There is a Greek word for ‘he’ and it IS NOT houtos.

Another JW bashing thread! You seem to possess a real divisive Spirit lately. JW’s say they are Christian. They read the Bible. That’s good enough for me. I generally take people’s word on this subject. Agreed! There is not a doctrinal purity test to be saved. I don’t believe it is...

I’m big on definitions. I’ve read the soul = body + spirit. However, verses like you reference call that into question. I don’t agree with @Peterlag on this matter. And I suspect Language Usage plays a roll in the confusion. Some people use soul and spirit interchangeably even though not...

Talk about avoiding the specific by going to the general! Acts 18:5 specifically proclaims ‘the word’ is that Jesus is the Messiah, period. I’m not interested in generalities but specifics. If there is another verse where proclaiming ‘the word’ specifically means something other than that Jesus...

Evidence that John 1:2 is not referring to a person, eh? Rather it is referring to this word of god.

This is an example of why it is hard to talk to you. Jesus is specifically said to not be an angel in Hebrews and here you directly contradict Scripture AND read into text what is not there. This is just another verse that does not refer to Jesus (but an angel) but you are imposing that onto...

Jesus was not referred to in Jn 1:1. Jesus is not introduced until v14. I realize there is a difference between accuracy and precision. When people generally say, they were 'proclaiming the word' it can generally be taken to mean the word of God, to Scripture. At church we often say, let's read...

My 1st unanswered question.

Not sure why you are repeating what was already said. The question is, is there a Biblical verse that states proclaiming the word means anything other than that Jesus is the Messiah? Yes or No will suffice. If Yes, please provide those verses. Thanks!

I'm not sure what this has to do with adoptionism. No one is denying that Jesus is 'of God,' which by definition makes him divine. All that is refuted is the claim that he is a deity. Hebrews 1 calls attention to Jesus being adopted, not only by David via stepson of Joseph but by God.

Hebrews was written after the resurrection. "Today" refers to the day God resurrected his chosen suffering servant.

Which is NOT Jesus. Words are WHAT's not WHO's.

No. I am not changing my definition of criteria! I was talking about rejection criteria and because of your completely illogical posts, I changed focus to acceptance criteria. Really, it is (x) compared to (1-x).

I love the NLT, CEV and VOICE translations. Check those out.

Agreed. What do you think of agency in relation to the Great Commission? I believe Jesus is the gate to God. Lately, I’ve been pondering the notion of agency in Scripture. Do you believe the One Saviour God calls on agents to assist in his plan for salvation, which explains the Great Commission?

This shows your negative acceptance criteria. By using the word ‘not’ in what you would believe reveals you accept as true that which is absent from Scripture; namely, any verse which explicitly says ‘Jesus is God.’ This is not logical. The burden is on the one making the positive claim. The...

Not at all. I totally accept the word was God - figuratively and not referring to Jesus.

It’s awe inspiring how you make things up as you go. YHWH clearly, directly and repeatedly started that he alone is God. Now all a sudden you invent 3 Scriptural fictions: God, an eternal Spirit, ever was in the flesh, that died. In such a state, YHWH would only hint at this truth out of not...