Search results

I don't get it. This you offer an explicit text saying Jesus is an eternal being? I guess you have a "anything will do" standard.

Implying he is NOT God with a capital-G, right? Agreed but that is not the sense of the word people get excited about.

I don’t mock patriots of any country. Canadians are great neighbors. We are lucky they rather than Iran, China, Pakistan or Russia are our neighbors.

Be humble. I didn’t call you a liar. You can be wrong without lying.

https://trinities.org/blog/on-the-corruption-of-1-john-578/

I’m realizing I do need to amend the pillars the trinity must violate at every turn to include implications from logic, deductive AND inductive reasoning. Here @Johann demands explicit Scripture to state what is already implied: If Jesus is the son of God, that implies he is not God. If the...

@Dan Clarkston, can’t answer my question, huh? Just because there are verses about a thing - with no name and no authority- does not make it a trinity verse.

In fact, our country has been fairly evenly divided for decades. No matter who ‘wins,’ a very large plurality, ~48%, is strongly opposed to every action. IMO, this makes practical governance nearly impossible. Enter the Deep State. And why I advocate for peaceful secession and have for decades...

What do you make of the fact God’s Word does not actually say this, at 1 John 5:7 or anywhere else?

P1. True Worshippers worship the father. John 4:23 P2. Trinitarians do not worship (ONLY) the father. C. Trinitarians are not true worshippers. Mutual exclusivity.

I know Canadians. They are proud of their country. Those in Quebec are proud of their French culture and language. They should be proud. I can understand the focus on the Panama Canal and to a lesser extent, Greenland. While Canada does extensive trading with the US, culturally, they see...

As a political force, Trump is unprecedented.

Doing so takes humility, the recognition to need to look at God’s word anew, from the eyes of a babe.

I hear that. I did not hear an admission that your previous claim that by definition, the syllogism is NOT wrong, which was your initial claim. There you go again! Interjecting a reference (biological) that is not in the syllogism. Totally wrong. They are mutually exclusive terms, by...

The Lord's nature is revealed many times and ways. He is willfully ignorant of the Lord's nature. Take Acts 3:13, for example. The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant Jesus P1. God is the subject of the sentence doing the acting...

It is. It does. Changing references is what is illogical. The biggest kid in kindergarten may not be the biggest kid in 12th grade. The syllogism has no reference. Willful ignorance. You claimed there could be a sense of father that means brother - by definition. Major fail.

And that is how you changed the reference! Your brother inChrist is Jesus, himself. God is not your brother because he is our father - yours, mine and Christs.

Amigo, here is an interfaith article for you.

No. You did no such thing! What you did was change the reference. My son has a son. That makes him my Dad?! Trinitarian logic.

No, my friend. You have a psychological wall or as the Bible puts it, not eyes to see or ears to hear. Let’s return to the basics to avoid confusion and unnecessary confusion.