Search results

Distracts themselves from the much scarier act of self-examination.

Obviously, you're revealing your man-hating here. Where you OK with men defining all this in 1973 in Roe v Wade?

Yes but we are disorganized, like sheep to the slaughter.

I'm not following the purpose with the <purpose being answered>, let alone fulfilled. If I inquire as to the purpose of a fork, what is being answered beyond the purpose being defined? And fulfilled?! It means past tense action. Using a fork one time would make it a disposable fork. Then...

Ditto. The CCP virus was a Leftist, globalist scheme from the beginning. Anyone who is not an idiot could see it. Was there an actual health danger? Yes, about as bad as the annual flu. I remember how that comparison was mocked when it 1st came out. Then the evildoers changed the metric from...

Interesting thread. The justices were right about the context of the 14A use of the word "person" in that amendment did "not include the unborn." The 13A-15A were a reaction to the War of Northern Aggression, having nothing to do with abortion. Beyond that, the unborn belong to a special...

Profound.

Such power was delegated from the Sovereign States to the Creature of the inter-State compact, known as the US Constitution. See Article I, Section 10, 'No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation' Because the War of Northern Aggression dissolved the notion, in practice...

Quite a contrast. I have never been part of the JW's but have checked it out myself. The evidence of tampering is overwhelming. Could you explain why the Apostles were disobedient to this supposed command of the risen Christ by not baptizing in the name of 3? I recall your rationalization...

Oh God! Please don’t go Redfan. You are a great addition to our online community.

Matthew 28:19 supposedly says to baptize in all 3 names. Yet, every epistle states only the dynamic duo, as I showed. This means nothing to die hard trinitarians.

Indeed. 'For us, there is one God, the Father.' Not too equivocal. In fact, it's hard to imagine a stronger anti-trinitarian statement. Especially in the absence of what is missing; not once is 'God the Son' or 'God the Holy Spirit' explicitly stated. This should be definitive to anyone not...

There is a thread I started a couple of years ago delving into the disobedient Apostles. While there are numerous verses indicating they baptized, not one confirmed they baptized as Matthew 28:19 alleges was commanded. Therefore, 2 possible explanations emerge: The Apostles, having seen the...

I have been contemplating writing a rebuttal to every verse that trinitarians impose their doctrine onto unitarian text. One tactic of ambiguity trinitarians have engaged in for centuries is to falsely equate a god with a lord. There are many of both in Scripture and the terms are certainly not...

Untrue. 1st, it is dubious that this is the actual words of Christ. Was Matthew 28:19 Added To The Bible 2nd, if Jesus said to baptize in the name of Moe, Larry and Curly, it would say nothing about the trinity and it'd be obvious even to trinitarians. 3rd, I always found it odd and out of...

You took the converse of my point. False doctrine is not found in Scripture and what you are advocating is not found in Scripture. It is not merely "something" not found in Scripture, like how to get from Dallas to Boston, but doctrine not explicitly taught in God's word. Scripture explicitly...

Welcome to the forums! Welcome indeed. Very well written. Succinct.

Another bedrock trinitarian basis of apology, contradicting your admission that God cannot die. Furthermore, you rely on dualism to support your doctrine nowhere to be found in Scripture.

This is the heart of many trinitarian apologies, nowhere to be found in Scripture and, therefore, in violation of Mark 7:13. God, being sovereign, could have chosen any means to achieve reconciliation of us to him. He could have raised up a holy rooster or cow to be the sacrifice, etc. He could...

Not in theological support of the trinity can one arbitrarily pick a random number to express the inherently contradictory concept of 3-is-1-ism.