Search results

No, you are not interested in honest discussion when you quote "minor" issue than get all flustered when I agree with what you quoted. :mad:

That is the trinity option. I'm asking about what other options are there in interpreting that verse.

<sigh> To answer this question, one must do 2 things: Understand Definitions Read Scripture There is more than one sense to many words, including 'god.' It means mastery in one sense or having authority, such as a judge or commander or governor. There is another sense, normally differentiated...

No! You skipped over my question in the 1st paragraph about what the options are regarding John 1. For some reason you went to Isaiah and Matthew, which was relative to the 2nd paragraph of my post - having nothing to do with my question about options - bu making it seem that that was the answer...

LOL. ‘Minor issues’ is what you quoted from my link. I agree. KJVO-ists take ‘minor issue’ to be cause of one losing salvation.

Laps on ground already covered.

OK. Let’s start from the beginning.

Agreed. Minor issues.

You are calling your opinion a fact. I have given many newbies the NLT. They love it and have not got lost. That is a fact!

So do I my friend. So do I speak from experience. Beyond that, you replied way before being able to read the link and understand the objective analysis.

It's a matter of opinion. You've made unsubstantiated claims. Why the NLT is Good, actually

Yet, you claims was KJVO-ists falsely claim, that all modern Bibles copy from KJ rather go to the source manuscripts.

APPEAL TO DIVERSION. This has nothing to do with whether or not you read modern translators notes. And I seriously doubt punctuation is the same when the sentence structures are different. In fact, I know it is not true. Still, it is besides the point.

1st, my comment was regarding the options besides the trinity. 2nd, no one called the son of God Emmanuel. His name was Jesus, don't you know?! This is one of my favorite rationalizations to support the trinity and the most absurd.

100% False. I recall KJVO-ists saying this for decades. Have you ever actually read translator notes from modern translations? I have.

Not an intellectually honest answer to my question. The trinity is not in the Bible. Citing something as though it supports the trinity cannot be substantiated by invoking other verses in a unitarian book. The claim has to stand on its own. That's why I asked what other options are there in...

I did understand why you cited GE 1:26. Believe it or not, you are not the first to cite that as a poor attempt to justify the Trinity to me. Yes. See my previous responses since you are doing laps on ground already covered, e.g., #506.

Hmmm. I see that as backwards. The NLT corrected the major errors, especially of any translation with "James" in the title. Do you speak Swahili? I don't speak Middle English. I know NKJV is not technically Middle English but it is still virtually unreadable to me. The sentence structure is...

IMO, the best way to understand your point is to read John's preamble through the prophecy that came true; namely, Deuteronomy 18:15-18: 5 Moses continued, “The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what...

Take this thought to Christ.