Search results

What you are referring to is not in dispute; Jesus is OF GOD. This proves he is NOT God. If Jesus were God the text would say so. It wouldn't say he is OF GOD.

SpecUlation. It’s all trinitarianism has. Why does it matter who the mystery man is?

I’ve asked this question many times to trinitarians. A couple of years ago, I started a thread about Disobedient Apostles. It’s the only plausible explanation, right?

Trinitarianism is not Biblical or logical.

Wow! What a convoluted way to try to back door trinitarianism. 1st, Jesus is not in John 6:46. 2nd, ‘of God’ is proof that the man in question is NOT God. Reading comprehension 101: objects of sentences (of God) are not subjects of sentences (any man). 3rd, your question implies an invalid...

The sophistry is you claiming the OP fails to meet the standard but then withhold precisely what is your rejection criteria.

Dishonesty? Your question was about seeing God and theses verses have nothing to do with seeing God.

Let’s start with your rejection criteria. The following sets of words would be deemed by me, Marks, as going against the trinity: - - -

Non-specific rejections are not value added. Twice I’ve asked you to be specific with what you don’t understand. This exchange supports the lack of rejection criteria.

Sounds to me that you are again relying on a bad translation. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known John 1:17-18 Revised Standard Version

Mark, you do this all the time! Your question was answered in the OP. What specific question about the OP do you have? What did I write that is confusing to you?

I guess you did not read - and understand - the OP. What specifically in the OP do you not understand?

It is funny how you continue to think copy-and-pasting is a substitute for discussion. To wit, Focus on What You Can Control, Leave What You Can't - Becoming Who You Are

It does not seem your post is the least bit responsive to the exchange.

In fact, such verses would never be written IF the authors embraced trinitiarianism. Here is another 1 COR 15:57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. IF it is significant that there is a verse that mentions all 3 members of the trinity, it must also be...

Dares to suggest that ethics are relevant? That you are a Cultural Marxist is seen, in part, by your failure to distinguish between ethics and politics. You quack like a duck, fly like a duck and sound like a duck. So, there is that. Equity, the new buzz word Leftists are perverting. Being...

A well written statement of idolatry - not just of the trinity but of the book from which it does not come from. I truly cannot fathom this obsession with mystery. The goal is having a relationship with our Creator and being guided at all points by his divine Will for us. And by the way, the...

I misunderstood. It seems I typed 3 rather than 4. I’ll fix the OP.

Yes. Holding unequal things as equal is a perversion. It is the application of the idea that is perverted, not the idea itself. You advocated communisim or Cultural Marxism but pervertedly call it equality. We are unequal independent of social ills. Not denied but who is paying for it...

The question of Jesus having a God is not limited to sense.