Search results

I'm so glad you found Psalm 45:7. All jack has is some vague personal attack.

It's so funny that you think this is a reasonable rebuttal. LOL

Funny that you started this thread from the inside out from my perspective. I've been thinking of starting a thread about REAL lowercase-gods in the Bible, making Ps 82:1-6 as the starting point and working my way up to John 1:1c.

So, you agree - logos - has no divine authority?

Yes, NAME is referring to ALL that is holy and good, SINGULAR.

LOL I did not say your quoting God was speculating. Claiming his words mean he was referring to himself in the plural is speculating. But I'm sure you knew that.

Hmmm. I wonder if Pinseeker believes if another person "seconds" my post, that makes me right? How in the world do you suppose repeating what another poster wrote advances the conversation? Just doing laps. He's plural - in this 1 verse He's singular in <5,000 verses He's plural - in this 1...

No, you do not get me at all in switching God, in his wholeness, in his unitarian nature, in Scripture in the beginning with ‘the Father.’ You do this because you realize the contradiction.

Speculation, offsetting 5,000 times God is referred to using singular pronouns. Friend, in the NAME of all that is holy and good (not names); this is normal language usage.

And your theory is to COMPLETELY DISREGARD that our lord was an adult when he was baptized along with everyone else specifically identified in Scripture to speculate that ‘family’ could possibly include children and infants. Talk about going as far away from following Jesus AND get away with it?!

It’s so much like Dr. Seus.

Top of the list, along with the death of a spouse. Honestly, I lost the will to live when he died. My solemn prayer many nights is to go home to be with him again.

I only believe in one Jack. If Jack said ‘let US make X in OUR image according to OUR likeness,’ I would reach the obvious conclusion that Jack was talking to somebody else. Only a mystical dualist would conclude the other is himself.

A heretic conclusion that still not a trinity. A heretic conclusion that goes against the Sh’ma, the 1C, ‘For us there is one God, the Father’, and Jesus himself telling us he has a God who is the only true God. So, you have to ask yourself, do you rely on your conclusion or what Jesus, etc...

This is how you know it is figurative. Same as us being made in the image of the invisible God. Doesn’t make us God. No. We represent accurately the monotheist Scripture without imposing false trinitarian doctrine onto it.

Oh God! Not another thread hijacked by OSAS. This thread is about the meaning of faith. I had to double check.

You do. That’s why I say that you are so funny. It sure is.

You say it is not a lie then IMMEDIATELY invoke a verse that does NOT say what you claim. In your parlance, it is your opinion that John 1 says that Jesus was with the Father in the beginning. However, if you examine the text, you will find it does not reference Jesus OR the Father in the...

Just another fallacious trinitarian talking point. We don’t determine equality based on the one way they are different. That’s how inequality is determined.

Rich already listed about 5 things God cannot do according to Scripture. So, you again accept contradictions or must accept your literal interpretation is incorrect.