Search results

I've already answered this several times. When Mark 1:1 says this is the story of the Son of God, do you conclude it cannot be biological son but only a step son?

If you ONLY look at the genus level, then all things are equal. Study how species are not equal in the same genus. I'm rooting for you! Let me ask you this; is the Holy = unholy?

Evidence of this is how trinitarians subordinate how one may be saved with their doctrine, AS IF the central point of the Bible is The nature of God is triune and if one does not believe this, one cannot be saved.

Just watching How Then Should We Live. Blaise Pascal considered people special. Special means not equal. We are special because Christ died for us. Christ did not die for tulips or humpback whales.

You are not seeing because you do not want to see. What is this reference to our actions? Different actions is analogous to different species. Not equal.

That is a figurative interpretation, which trinitarians prefer because they cannot refer to a literal text. It's not even referring to the same beginning as Genesis but the beginning of universal restoration. Watch this.

Now I don't know what you are talking about. Are you supposing that altered corruptions are NOT superior to unaltered originals? Not sure why you are side stepping the point of grammar, which makes none superior to modern translations as our language uses grammar.

I was paraphrasing Luke 23:43.

How then, is doctrine formed; by not reading Scripture but forming ones own doctrine?

Sad attempt to use figurative verses to support a literal interpretation. Words are not a being. The Word in question is the word of God. God put these words in Jesus's mouth as Saint Luke explains, quoting Deuteronomy 18:15-18 again. 20 Then God may send Jesus the Anointed, whom God has chosen...

They assert equality when there is none. Many NT books begin: Grace and peace be with you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus the Anointed. Philippians 1:2 (Voice) Again and again, the NT unitarian writers did not get the trinitarian memo. 'For us, there is only one God, the Father' 1...

We are predictably doing laps on ground already covered. First borns are always the only child until other children come around. I already quoted verses pointing out how we are children of God. Jesus is said to be the firstborn of all creation. The first of others to follow. Jesus WAS the only...

Not much of a job for a god. But if you read the Bible, you will find that Jesus relied on the Father to bring him glory. So much for your theory of this non-existent '3rd person.' 'Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory...

Priceless. This is a priceless example of taking verses out of context to synthesis support for a doctrine that is not in the Bible. Like the trinity, hypostatic union is not in the Bible. It's so silly to recognize that God is referred to in the singular over 5,000 times but conclude he is plural.

I have read John 1. The proper way to read John 1 is from the perspective of Deuteronomy 18:15-18.

Well, Jesus choose the 12 to follow him. This is not equal to everyone else who Jesus did not choose.

You do realize that for every biological classification of 'genus,' all related species are equal in terms of meeting the requirements for that genus, right? This does not mean the different species are equal to each other. In fact, the whole reason for the lowest level of biological...

Because I know we all have our Bibles, I will not clutter this post with my preferred translation but only cite the relevant verses. Read carefully Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12; Acts 8:16; Acts 10:48; Acts 19:5; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 1:13; Galatians 3:27. Then ask yourself the question...

As I said in the OP, the Bible promotes inequality at nearly every turn. My friend like to point out the 12 Apostles as a prime example of inequality. These 12 are not equal to the general population at the time.

Great point! It is only rational to call unequal things unequal. Today's totalitarian Leftists are not liberals at all. They are OK with constraining to achieve equality. This constraint is aka slavery, tyranny. Simply put, not everything is equal. Therefore, not everything should be...