Search results

Do you not see how Jude 1:3 takes about Apostolic writing, which became the NT? No one is buying your rationalization of the usurpation of the RCC authority, including ‘succession’ of Apostles!

Just because s matter of faith has been revealed to us does not mean it has been revealed to our family.

I struggle with this because it implies it is pointless to raise children in the faith.

Once again, you reference verses that do not support your claim. Make a Blessed Day

@Truman, welcome!

It's amazing how far apart we are on religious but on politics, we are one (to coin a phrase).

How many centuries after Christ died did this man-made Creed invented?

Where is this in the Bible?

I thought only recently you stated your understanding of 1 John 5:7 changed (improved) as a result of this thread? I’d think that is profitable. Some things are objective, like the fact that the trinity is not in the Bible - not the word and not the doctrine. Just because some things are...

My path is the explicit Word of God. And I will not stand for it to be cut across. See Mark 7:13.

Obviously, any interpretation that does not support the trinity has to be attacked. We agree about the meaning of John 20:31 - for there is no other take of these explicit words. I think you have to admit it puts trinitarian misuse of John 1:1 on display as they try to use it to support a...

Right is exceedingly narrow compared to wrong. And yes, another declaration. What do you think the strongest anti-trinitarian book of the Bible is?

With God’s blessing & curse. Without writing a treatise, many theologians say God’s plan was established before Creation. His plan never changed but was revealed to us in His good time. And that plan accounted for our sinning.

No. Because the Gospel of John says so. When John 20:31 says everything I wrote was for X, logic dictates nothing he wrote was for non-X. John is the most anti-trinitarian book in a collection of anti-trinitarian books.

Wow! Your statement is the opposite of what I said. No one said the statement in question is the only one you are taking to support your view. I'm saying the statement is NOT an explicit statement of your view. There is NO verses that explicitly state your doctrine. See the difference?

And this is the most obvious passage in Scripture - besides John 1:1 - that demands to be taken figuratively. "We are one" DOES NOT MEAN we are one being. Never has. Never will. And again, we know this from other Scripture. In John 17:22 Jesus says we are one as he and God are one. For...

It is not beautiful but perverted. I'm not sure where this idea comes from that an all powerful, all knowing God takes risks. It is an impossibility. It is an impossibility. Both, the beauty and sacrifice are a Diversion, for neither has anything to do with the 4th century man-made doctrine of...

Because being free is an absolute.

They are plain words - plainly figurative. Being on the same page is what this verse means and is a way of speaking even today. Being the same being is how trinitarians suppose this verse is to be interpreted. Not only is it far fetched given other Scripture verses, it is certainly not an...

I haven’t sat down on my computer in a week. I’ll look for it and even send a PM when I find it.