Search results

If you mean Constantine, you are mistaken. Do you know the Arians were Origenists?

NOPE, but the HS doesn't help you interpret the scripture. All that idolatry of the voice in your ears makes you think you are being helped it. Edit: This is my view alone. Don't get offended.

Think of it as weak, like a Jehovah's Witness without education.

No worship? Pathetic, I expected better. If you can find where λατρεύω is used as a command about the messiah, you would have a point.

You are paranoid about something having nothing to do with Biblical Law. There are fewer places in the bible to make that claim. One in the New Testament is bogus, and another in the new says listen to him. We are not required to worship or even "serve" him as God.

He wasn't because he was either counseling or consulting the Mighty God the Everlasting Father. Check it using the Blue Letter Bible's morph tags.

Check the Hebrew part of speech for Counselor. You may get a nasty surprise.

While I feel this to be true also, I believe being an obedient heretic is better than being a paranoid-believer in Eternal Conscious Torment, and Total Inability (i.e. all are sinners).

Of course it isn't. That is why Satan gave Valentinus the vision of the baby.

You might want to check the Hebrew participle that is translated Counselor. If it is a participle, the English word Counselor is poor translation choice to say the least.

You might to check for the Hebrew participle on number 1.

He did not, but he did say he wasn't either both. What became of him when he died on the cross?

And the God it was, A word another assumed to be exactly like it was a second word. Now were the individuals the words or were they both God. They are not of the same existence. It is better that Jesus is an individual rather than fully GOD. You don't get the confusion of having three...

You can't even understand the bible from the Greek and you can't tell me why Arianism was or why Athanasius insisted that the christ was twice begotten. Arians thought they could become sons of gods while still alive. They believed in the old trinity doctrine, but believed in the pre-existence...

The bias gets removed when you study it carefully. Why doesn't the New Testament make sense after 400 years of translating? There are no changes because there is a vested interest in phallacy and idolatry.

@Johann It is the laws of God which have done more good, not just trust in God or in belief of some imaginary man-god.

No, it doesn't because non-deities can perform this action. It can be an action or an object. Again, this is not true. And I have admitted the lexicons are wrong, but so are you. αιων conveys permanent or change. But that is far from what κοσμος implies which is area. Exactly. Nine...

No, it can't according to the "basics". The syntactical guides do a false cherry pick for this. The syntactical guides are guesses as to how the "basics" work. The dative of secondary object doesn't work with the preposition εν. Secondly, you fail to question Robertson erroneous 8 case Greek...

Then we should be all be paranoid what a great role model which God makes himself to be. rubbish.

No, it doesn't. ποιέω seems to include objects in the LXX, so I am wrong there. While ποιέω means to perform just about anything; this is not updated in the lexicons. But anything other than permanent precedents for αἰών or even other than change is bad. It is not a synonym of for κοσμος.