Search results

God is God here but Jesus ain’t.

Sure! Again, God is referred to using singular pronouns 10,000 times in Scripture. A couple of vague plural verses does not overcome that. A couple of valid Alternative explanations is God was using the royal “we.” Or he was talking to Angels or other heavenly beings.

I think you do follow. The language of the Bible is one being does things through another being. We all understand that. Trinitarians want to pretend in the case of Jesus, he is the being who sent him. Do you follow?

God is referred to using singular pronouns 10,000 times in Scripture. One or 2 vague plural verses do not overcome that.

I take that you reference these parallel verses to imply 2 beings are one in the same being instead of the traditional ‘one through another’ Bible motif. For instance, God did not literally destroy Sodom and Gomorrah but ordered angels to do it. This does not make angels God.

You do know that singular pronouns do not refer to 3 persons, right?

You might have that backwards. The KJV is one of, if not the most inaccurate translations available today for a host of reasons. It puts things into verses that are not in the original language text.

ESV markets itself as the most literal translation available. NSRV is the only translation approved by Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Protestants. The Bible is highly figurative, rendering adherence to literal translations a bit silly. Frankly, a literal translation does not render proper 21st...

No. This is not how language is used. One simply says A is A. No other need to reference form - unless one has an agenda to abuse language.

I read 6 translations and often refer to the one I was recently reading when something comes up in online conversations. I've found depending on the verse, certain translations come alive for me more than others. The translations I read are: CEV - Read Devotionally (Love Most Ps 82:1) NLT -...

Form? There are several verses that star God chose Jesus as his servant. No form in the text. Acts 17:31 Complete Jewish Bible 31 For he has set a Day when he will judge the inhabited world, and do it justly, by means of a man whom he has designated. And he has given public proof of it by...

First, there is absolutely no verse in scripture that states Jesus is God, period. There are many verses that explicitly state God is alone, the LORD, our Father. And there are many verses where Jesus himself said God is greater than him. As for the implied verses ... Trinitarians deliberately...

Jesus is not God, fully or otherwise. The way we know this is that Jesus died. From Scripture, God the Father is associated many, many times. NEVER in Scripture is Jesus referred to as God the Son. Jesus said this over and over again, that his Father is God. Jesus is, as I am, a son of God. He...

God never declares Himself as 3 Persons of the Godhead. If you do not understand "You shall have no other gods before me", then you cannot understand how God declares himself the LORD alone in the most important commandment. “Listen, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone Deuteronomy...

None of the Apostles called Jesus their God. (Sad reliance on non-explicit verses). John 1:1 does not even reference Jesus. Unbelievable!

That is not true at all. I quoted the relevant part of the verse, which is about God, who alone is the Father. (Note the use of single quotes) I know you are desperate to find a distraction, 'For us, there is one God, the Father.' To this, you attempt to distract. I get it. I'll leave you to...

Again, where is that in the Bible? Nowhere. I'm not sure what kind of threat you think this is but you can call me whatever you want for it makes no difference to me or the master and savior I serve. The only God is Jesus' God. Not any more than the rest of us. Why do you even ask?

Thank you. I'm glad I hesitated posting in this thread. The posts contain assertions, not even arguments. So they are exceedingly weak. Your question is invalid as it has a flawed implied premise. Since the trinity is not in the Bible - not the word and not the doctrine - one cannot rationally...

You and your word of the day. Still, you fail to grasp the definition of your own word.

You are only occasionally hijacking a thread by introducing verses other than what the OP is about, Acts 2:36.