Search results

I’m pointing to both, the Hebrew theology and use of language. Otherwise, one risks projecting false trinitarian doctrine onto unitarian text.

I agree Jesus is a lord, just not the LORD. Again, not one verse explicitly makes the claim. Can you admit that?

No. It does not. Keep in mind Jews are monotheists who reject the trinity to this day. Another thread delved into what God does directly compared to indirectly, yet he is credited with the action. This is how the Jews write about Adonai. Two examples were who spoke to Moses through the...

And Jesus said he’s going to his God. That is the only God. Jesus’ God is the only God.

Context. The Commandment prohibits perjury WHEN swearing to tell the truth in God’s name.

You got to be kidding me! The Bible has to be the most metaphorical book of all time. Now you are holding Apostles to only literal use of words? An anti-Scriptural idea, which presumed God is unable to effectively communicate and communicate the difference between himself and his chosen...

The when today’s Christians reference the HS and the trinity, they are not directed by the HS? Seems you want to have it both way. How about, the Epistles prologues do not mention the HS because they were not trinitarians? Isn’t that plausible?

There is not more. The Commandment was a prohibition against perjury. To this day, we swear on a Bible to tell the truth in a court proceeding. Any more meaning is beyond and outside the word of God.

What is silly about unraveling the contradiction? What is true? A. ALL will be saved — Universalism B. SOME will saved - Only those who put their faith in Jesus.

Right. All people includes those people. Logic works. You really ought to try it sometime.

Neither do I. The logical alternative is there but you don’t want to answer why the excluded the HS in all their epistles. So be it.

Again, it is NOT taking his name in vain but an exclamatory statement.

Well, there it is. BTW, the expression, ‘taking the Lord’s name in vain’ applies to court cases, as does the Commandment against perjury, not general lying.

Great point. I would just add that it is not doctrinal differences that cause war. Thomas Jefferson famously said that if his neighbor believes in 10 gods or no gods, it neither picks his pocket or breaks his bones. Doctrinal purity is a higher priority for many Christians over loving others as...

Again, IF Jesus died for all, then universalism would be correct doctrine. Given there is a condition to be saved that the majority of human beings do not meet, it is absurd to say he died for all.

Moving the goal posts. They were worshipped. Now, what about answering my question?

Explained many times. Trinitarians want the statement to be declarative but it is obviously exclamatory. When I drop a wine glass on the flooe and yell, 'oh crap' others know I am not declaring the wine glass to be feces. Such tortured stretches is what trinitarians are left with as they know...

I addressed this elsewhere. It is a trinitarian notion that worship means one is a God but they are in denial David, Daniel and Neburchanazar were all men who were worshipped. Therefore, it proves nothing about the divinity of Jesus. By contrast 1 Corinthians 11:3 clearly states God is the head...

Undoubtedly, they will make a dualistic Appeal, such as Apples are oranges.

I suppose your question is RCC-centric. On another thread, a poster asked what would one think and due if they grew up on a deserted island with no contact with the outside world, and as an adult, happened upon a Bible? The explicit teaching in the Bible is to be Baptized, independent of any...