- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 10 2011,03:16) But Mike says, “Hey, I am going to define words and draw my conclusions from my definitions.” Mike knows that if he submits to the generally accepted concepts that he will lose the argument. Mike has already lost the argument because he refuses to work with the definitions given us.
Jack,Perhaps you could post a quote of a reputable person who's ever claimed that he was the same exact being as his own father?
What you call “generally accepted concepts” are concepts derived from Trinitarian minds trying desparately to explain how the Son OF the Being of God can BE the Being of God. And those concepts ARE generally accepted by Trinitarians, for what else do they have?
For example, it is “generally accepted” by Trinitarians that “the third person of the Godhead” is a bonafide definition of the Greek word “pneuma”. It's not though, so why would anyone in their right mind accept this teaching?
I'll be anxiously awaiting your quote where someone of note is the same exact being as their father.
Quote (Istari @ July 10 2011,04:40) Isn't it awful and annoying when someone closes down a hot debate with commonsense.
Don't you just want to tell that one to 'get lost, who asked you to interject'.
Yes Istari,We are all well aware that you are the only person on HN who has any commonsense. Let's see if you convert Jack from Trinitarianism with your wonderful post.
If not, then how about YOU discuss issues the way YOU want to do it, and let US do it the way WE want to, okay?
The name of a person is different to the name of a species or flesh.
Yes they are both names and yes they might even be the same word, but they have a different meaning.
Adam is the perfect example.
So is devil.Now take those examples and understand the different usages of theos and elohim.
How hard can it be?
There is no getting around it. It is the way it is.
Quote (Istari @ July 10 2011,21:40) All are missing a point here:
I disagree.
Some have the point and express it logically and simply. But I think that some people lack understanding here because they do not read what is written. Maybe just the top few lines.Quote I know that it is the Trinitarians who want the confusion but others GIVE THEM their ammunition and then get shot with it (Like the British selling Exocet Missiles to the Argentinians and then get blasted with those same Exocet in the Faulklands!!)
Perhaps you can't see it, but saying all is wrong except for yourself is the biggest cache of ammunition you can provide to any opposition. Because you single-handedly put down all truth that has been spoken thus far (giving ammunition to those who oppose your view) and you make the obvious error of promoting yourself above all else which people intuitively know is wrong and as a consequence of that, people often bundle your argument with that error. A tree is known by the fruit for example, and conclude that the message is not of a good root and write off your argument as a consequence.Is it not a better man who seeks peace and unity within the kingdom and a self-conscious man who promotes himself and puts down all others? Even the un-spiritual know that the “I am right and all others are wrong” attitude is wrong and destructive.
I feel that you have much to learn about the Kingdom.
T8,
I think you been 'hanging' with Mikeboll a little too long…What I wrote was EXACTLY RIGHT.
ADAM is a TITLE… it is a word meaning 'MAN' or 'MANKIND' in full.
The FIRST ADAM created by God was CALLED (Named) Adam after his own Species.
Now what is hard to understand about that?
If you continue to argue ADAM and Adam without the distinction between TITLE and NAME you end up in the same confusion and everlasting DEBATE as with GOD and God and god!
Maybe this is what you want… Maybe it serves a purpose for you to want continuous debate where it should be discussion leading to unity and truth.
Mikeboll's post is EXACTLY what I wrote… Thus fulfilling my point – or did he just post that post for a laugh – yeah… Just a laugh – funny hah hah…
But, Ok, I'll leave the deludeds to maintain their endless deluded debate.
Maybe it serves some purpose in their personal life to engage in arguments where the definitions of the words being disputed are unclear – kinda fuzzy wuzzy.
Lack of definition is a great source and cause of many disputes – look at Irene who didn't understand what CELESTIAL meant, Nor TERRESTRIAL, nor RESURECTION OF THE DEAD (Raised from the dead) and still confused over SPIRITUAL!! as are Mikeboll and (Hard to say anything positive or at all) Terraricca.
Now T8 is telling me that DEFINING THE TERMS OF WORDS TO ACCRUE POSSIBLE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OPPOSERS – IS WRONG!!
That Seeking to bring UNITY AMONG BROTHERS IS SELF-CONCEITED.
That standing on the outside and seeing where the errors are among warring parties is IS DENYING ANY TRUTH THAT MAY ACTUALLY BE SPIKEN BETWEEN THEM…
Has anyone read the book, 'The Wind Singers'…There are two warring parties there too who in fact actually believed the same thing but because they had different words for what they believed – sounding similar in opposition to each other – they spent years and countless lives battling against each other – in fact, it became A GAME to them… When someone came along who understood BOTH LANGUAGES and realised their errors, the both parties joined forces and tried to kill that person…(Hmm… Seems I heard a story like that some place else… Now where was that…and didn't Douglas Adams (ha ha) write a book called 'Hitchhikers guide to the Galaxy' with a theme that went something like that – something like that!!! That man was brilliant – his book on HhGTTG were awesome and contained so much stuff if truth I could spends year talking about it : Like the man who went on holiday – in his office… He was in his office but NOT in his office because he was on another planet – on the beach on another planet with a load of other people who were equally 'in their offices – but on Holiday… Fantastic mind…)So t8's premise is that warring parties should be left to war cos it helps to fill up pages of a (His) Scriptural Forum and justifies it's existence… Truth should not be spoken because truth brings about an end to DEBATE and DEBATES are not meant to end…
Hmm.. Seems I have been missing the point of STUDYING SCRIPTURES. I thought it was about getting to the truth of GOD AND CHRIST but it seems it's just about people have a war of words…
Well excuse me for breathing … Which I never do anyway so I don't know why I said it – Oh God I'm so depressed … Here I am, brain the size of a planet and all they do is ask me to sit in a corner and rust (Which I can't do – sit nor rust – so I don't know what they expect me to do – makes me even more depressed)
Oh well, just enough time for another cup of tea, then…!!
Yes, God is God and Jesus is God and Satan is God and Moses is God and Deborah is God…
Yes, I think I'll go join the Trinitarians on this issue.Hey WJ and KJ, sorry about all the rechid things I said about you in the past – can I join you guys now? (David went to hide out with the Philistines (because of his own 'Father' King Saul) who he was killing just the day before…)
Who is (are) the KING SAUL(s) in this thread?
Quote (terraricca @ July 11 2011,03:29) Quote (Istari @ July 11 2011,09:42) Terraricca,
Do you have anything of worth to say – ever?
istariyou really thing that you have ?
Pierre
Who are you?It is a sure thing 'Terraricca' that YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY…
Who are you?
What are you following me around for?
Stalking is an arrestable offence – don't you know?
Istari.
If you read what I said properly you would see that people often diss the message because of the faulted methodology.
I didn't disagree with what you said regarding the topic did I? I disagreed with your method of putting everyone down but yourself.
I mentioned that people are generally suspicious of such behaviour and often bag the message with the fruit.I was basically pointing out that you are not doing yourself any favours.
And my conclusion although not written, is that you are better off just writing what you think about the topic and forget about all the emotional baggage that you tack on. My guess is that your words would be more likely received.
No need to get uptight about it. I state this as a fact and you would do well to at least listen to my view.
Quote (Istari @ July 11 2011,17:24) It is a sure thing 'Terraricca' that YOU HAVE NOTHING TO SAY… Who are you?
What are you following me around for?
Stalking is an arrestable offence – don't you know?
Quote (Istari @ July 10 2011,17:06) So t8's premise is that warring parties should be left to war cos it helps to fill up pages of a (His) Scriptural Forum and justifies it's existence… Truth should not be spoken because truth brings about an end to DEBATE and DEBATES are not meant to end… Hmm.. Seems I have been missing the point of STUDYING SCRIPTURES. I thought it was about getting to the truth of GOD AND CHRIST but it seems it's just about people have a war of words…
Istari,What I resented, aside from the personal baggage that is completely unnecessary, is that you pop in with a lengthy post and think all is resolved. You did it with Keith in your debate with him. You made a couple of posts and then ran around the whole site bragging about how you single-handedly destroyed the Trinity Doctrine.
But Keith is still a Trinitarian, isn't he? So you didn't “destroy” anything from THEIR point of view.
My way is different than yours. I work slower and take my time painstakingly cornering them in their own words. It took me two years to get Keith to admit that Jesus isn't God just because he's called theos. That was monumental dude! Because that in itself took John 1:1, 1:18, 20:28, Titus 2:13 and other scriptures away from him. He can no longer (with any credibility) claim that 1:1 proves Jesus is God, because I lead him to admit WITH HIS OWN WORDS that just being called theos does NOT prove Jesus is God.
So just back off. You might like to do it one way and then go claim a false victory. But I still like to think there's a chance that I can lead these guys away from their comically flawed man-made doctrine by trapping them in their own words and making them see from their own words how ridiculous that doctrine is. And that takes time, patience, and stealth. After all, who do you think it was that pushed Jack so far into a corner on this topic that he had no choice but to start claiming he was the same being as his own father?
Now he has to live with those words that I'm trying to get him to show some support for.And who knows? Maybe he'll eventually figure out that he has to make himself sound like a babbling buffoon in order to defend his doctrine. And maybe he'll get so tired of sounding like a fool that he'll eventually come to the realization that his crazy doctrine just isn't worth it.
So feel free to go in guns all blazing if YOU want to do it that way. I prefer to use my sniper's rifle to pick off a little bit of their doctrine at a time.
And we won't judge you for the way YOU choose to do it, so don't pop in judging us harshly and saying WE'RE doing things wrong. I can't vouch for anyone else here, but I know EXACTLY what I'M doing.
Btw, just what ARE you going to do when Jack or Keith respond to your “title” post with the same nonsense they've been giving us? Will you slowly pick their defenses away bit by bit? Or will you just go throughout the site proclaiming that you've single-handedly defeated the Trinity Doctrine no matter what they say?
Bump for t8 and Mike who ignored this post and the points Jack and I made.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 08 2011,11:03) TO ALL,
On another thread some months ago WJ and I tried desperately to give Mikeboll and t8 an elementary lesson in nature and identity. It is unfortunate that some people who consider themselves students of the scripture cannot understand the elementary things.Please note that t8 said that Eve is not “Adam” with a capital “A.” Then he says that Eve is “adam” with a small “a.” t8 was saying that Eve was “adam” qualitatively and that's all. This does not mean that she may share the name Adam (capital “A”) with Adam. But Genesis 5:1-2 says that God called their NAME “Adam”
t8 said:
Quote I have answered this before. adam consists of all humans including Adam himself.
Adam is the first human and excludes all others including Eve.Eve is not Adam.
Eve is adam.I didn't invent Greek, WJ, I am only pointing out a reality.
Please don't blame me for the way English and Greek are structured.
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;st=100t8 knows that if Eve shares the name “Adam” (capital “A”) with the Adam, then Jesus may share the name “God” with God.
Note that God NAMED both the male and the female “Adam” with a capital “A.”
Quote 1This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their NAME Adam, in the day when they were created.
Genesis 5:1-2
Jesus shares the name God with God because God is a plural unity like Adam which He created. Just as Eve was Adam qualitatively and also shares the name “Adam,” so Jesus is God qualitatively and also shares the name “God.”KJ
Hi JackGood point! They claim Jesus has the same nature that the Father has but then seek to diminish his nature as something less than the Father.
To them he is not “The Only Begotten Son of God” but a son like all other sons and some demi-god who is neither 100% in nature God or 100% in nature man.
To them he is a cross or half breed of God and man making him a freak of nature.
All beings bear after their own kind. But to t8 and Mike Jesus is not in very nature God as the scriptures claim.
The argument that you can have identity without nature is a fallacious argument because if Jesus is “theos\god” like all the others as they claim then that means Jesus would be in nature like all the other so-called “theos\gods”.
If I call out for Sam how does one know that I am calling for a dog, cat, horse or a man.
But if I say “Sam is the daddy of 6 puppies” then I know Sam is a dog by nature.
This is elementary stuff that is over t8 and Mikes head or they just deny the truth so they can hold onto their Paganistic, Henotheistic, and Polytheistic belief in more than “one theos\god”. So they claim Jesus is one of those many theos\gods they believe in and serve.
If I say my Jesus has all authority and power and rules the entire Universe and that all things belong to him and are in his hands and that by him all things consist and he dwells in the hearts and lives of every true believer by his Spirit, then I know by his nature and name which is above every name that he is “The True God” and not “a god like the others.
Their Jesus is not “Fully God” or “Fully man” but some sort of demi-god and that is paganistic.
Blessings!
WJ
Mike and t8 do you care to address my point that you guys believe Jesus is half theos\god and half man?
Is Jesus fully “theos\god” and fully man?
In what way is Jesus not “fully theos\god”?
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 14 2011,03:39) Hi Jack Good point! They claim Jesus has the same nature that the Father has but then seek to diminish his nature as something less than the Father.
To them he is not “The Only Begotten Son of God” but a son like all other sons and some demi-god who is neither 100% in nature God or 100% in nature man.
To them he is a cross or half breed of God and man making him a freak of nature.
All beings bear after their own kind. But to t8 and Mike Jesus is not in very nature God as the scriptures claim.
The argument that you can have identity without nature is a fallacious argument because if Jesus is “theos\god” like all the others as they claim then that means Jesus would be in nature like all the other so-called “theos\gods”.
If I call out for Sam how does one know that I am calling for a dog, cat, horse or a man.
But if I say “Sam is the daddy of 6 puppies” then I know Sam is a dog by nature.
This is elementary stuff that is over t8 and Mikes head or they just deny the truth so they can hold onto their Paganistic, Henotheistic, and Polytheistic belief in more than “one theos\god”. So they claim Jesus is one of those many theos\gods they believe in and serve.
If I say my Jesus has all authority and power and rules the entire Universe and that all things belong to him and are in his hands and that by him all things consist and he dwells in the hearts and lives of every true believer by his Spirit, then I know by his nature and name which is above every name that he is “The True God” and not “a god like the others.
Their Jesus is not “Fully God” or “Fully man” but some sort of demi-god and that is paganistic.
Blessings!
WJ
Mike and t8 do you care to address my point that you guys believe Jesus is half theos\god and half man?
Is Jesus fully “theos\god” and fully man?
In what way is Jesus not “fully theos\god”?
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 10 2011,07:31) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 10 2011,07:20) They are just sticking there head in the sand with all these smokescreens about nature and identity.
Wrong.The distinction is very important.
Just as there is a distinction between Adam (the first man) and adam (all who share his nature).
It is the lack of this distinction that gets you guys into all sorts of doctrinal problems and confusion.
We do not wish to participate in your confusion.
But sameness of nature is the PRIMARY sense of the concept of identity.Identity 1. sameness of essential nature (Webster's)
The first definition is the PRIMARY sense.
So God created the adam in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created THEM.
You cannot separate identity from nature. You can only create individuality within that identity of nature.
You have not refuted us.
KJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 09 2011,23:31) Quote (942767 @ July 09 2011,05:22) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 09 2011,03:03) TO ALL, On another thread some months ago WJ and I tried desperately to give Mikeboll and t8 an elementary lesson in nature and identity. It is unfortunate that some people who consider themselves students of the scripture cannot understand the elementary things.
Please note that t8 said that Eve is not “Adam” with a capital “A.” Then he says that Eve is “adam” with a small “a.” t8 was saying that Eve was “adam” qualitatively and that's all. This does not mean that she may share the name Adam (capital “A”) with Adam. But Genesis 5:1-2 says that God called their NAME “Adam”
t8 said:
Quote I have answered this before. adam consists of all humans including Adam himself.
Adam is the first human and excludes all others including Eve.Eve is not Adam.
Eve is adam.I didn't invent Greek, WJ, I am only pointing out a reality.
Please don't blame me for the way English and Greek are structured.
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;st=100t8 knows that if Eve shares the name “Adam” (capital “A”) with the Adam, then Jesus may share the name “God” with God.
Note that God NAMED both the male and the female “Adam” with a capital “A.”
Quote 1This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their NAME Adam, in the day when they were created.
Genesis 5:1-2
Jesus shares the name God with God because God is a plural unity like Adam which He created. Just as Eve was Adam qualitatively and also shares the name “Adam,” so Jesus is God qualitatively and also shares the name “God.”KJ
No, Jack:Jesus body is the Holy Temple of God, and as his disciples who have born again are members of his body, and Holy Ghost dwells in us as well.
Adam and Eve were one body, and the comparison is made between this union and our union with Christ. We who are his disciples are his bride.
If we are members of the Lord's body, we are also “one spirit with him”.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Marty,You help me and hurt yourself for God alone is the Husband of the Bride (Isaiah 54:5). Jesus is the Husband of the Bride. Ergo….
It doesn't take a degree in rocket science Marty!
KJ
Hi Jack:And so, is God our Father or our husband?
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 13 2011,13:00) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 14 2011,03:39) Hi Jack Good point! They claim Jesus has the same nature that the Father has but then seek to diminish his nature as something less than the Father.
To them he is not “The Only Begotten Son of God” but a son like all other sons and some demi-god who is neither 100% in nature God nor 100% in nature man.
To them he is a cross or half breed of God and man making him a freak of nature.
All beings bear after their own kind. But to t8 and Mike Jesus is not in very nature God as the scriptures claim.
The argument that you can have identity without nature is a fallacious argument because if Jesus is “theos\god” like all the others as they claim then that means Jesus would be in nature like all the other so-called “theos\gods”.
If I call out for Sam how would anyone know that I am calling for a dog, cat, horse or a man?.
But if I say “Sam is the daddy of 6 puppies” then I know Sam is a dog by nature.
This is elementary stuff that is over t8 and Mikes head or they just deny the truth so they can hold onto their Paganistic, Henotheistic, and Polytheistic belief in more than “one theos\god”. So they claim Jesus is one of those many theos\gods they believe in and serve.
If I say my Jesus has all authority and power and rules the entire Universe and that all things belong to him and are in his hands and that by him all things consist and he dwells in the hearts and lives of every true believer by his Spirit, then I know by his nature and name which is above every name that he is “The True God” and not “a god like the others.
Their Jesus is not “Fully God” or “Fully man” but some sort of demi-god and that is Paganistic.
Blessings!
WJ
Mike and t8 do you care to address my point that you guys believe Jesus is half theos\god and half man?
Is Jesus fully “theos\god” and fully man?
In what way is Jesus not “fully theos\god”?
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 10 2011,07:31) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 10 2011,07:20) They are just sticking there head in the sand with all these smokescreens about nature and identity.
Wrong.The distinction is very important.
Just as there is a distinction between Adam (the first man) and adam (all who share his nature).
It is the lack of this distinction that gets you guys into all sorts of doctrinal problems and confusion.
We do not wish to participate in your confusion.
But sameness of nature is the PRIMARY sense of the concept of identity.Identity 1. sameness of essential nature (Webster's)
The first definition is the PRIMARY sense.
So God created the adam in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created THEM.
You cannot separate identity from nature. You can only create individuality within that identity of nature.
You have not refuted us.
KJ
Amen Jackt8 has refused to accept the reality that Jesus is in every way “theos\god” in nature as the Father is “theos\god” and that means to them he is less theos\god than the Father.
If Jesus is the “Only Begotten Son of God” then that would mean that he is in nature identically Theos\God as the Father just as adam is identically adam\man in nature as “Adam\Man”.
Their doctrine teaches men to believe in and serve more than one theos\god.
t8 admits that he serves 2 theos\gods when he said…
Quote (t8 @ June 14 2011,17:49) Actually I believe that Jesus is theos/god.
And…Quote (t8 @ July 05 2011,04:27) The Father is Theos and theos.
Mike admits the same when he said…Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 05 2011,18:35) Jesus is the god (changed to a god), or “powerful ruler” of all in heaven right now, and of the believer's on earth.
And…Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2011,14:05) Jesus is one who has been called by the title “god”, so he is also “A god”. He has not specifically been called “THE god” of anything in particular, but knowing that “god” only means “ruler”, I can honestly say that he is “my god”.
It took me about 2 years for Mike to admit that Jesus was “his god” and that he bows down to and serves more than one “theos\god”.The problem with their theology is they have placed another “theos\god” before the Father since they say they go to the Father through Jesus.
That leaves a big gaping hole in the “Anti-Jesus is God” crowd's theology because the Hebrew scriptures state very clearly…
Thou shalt have “no other gods” (elohiym) before me. Exod 20:3
And…
“But I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt. “You shall acknowledge no God ('elohiym) but me, no Savior except me”. Hosea 13:4
And…
…and that “there is none other God (theos) but one”. 1 Cor 8:4
Their theology places another god (theos) before YHWH. They can’t say this is not true because they have admitted they cannot have YHWH without Jesus. Their own words contradict themselves.
They say things like “I believe in and serve only one theos\god but yet I serve and believe in more than one theos\god!
Mike has even admitted that we take the term “Only One True God” too literally!
Blessings!
Keith
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 13 2011,10:39)
Bump for t8 and Mike who ignored this post and the points Jack and I made.
What points? I laughed Jack's post off as just Jack being Jack. Since when did the Hebrew language capitalize the “A” in “Adam”? If you two are not…………….let’s say, “adept” enough to know that Moses meant “Mankind – the Species” in Gen 5:2, then you are behind these other translators of scripture:
NET © He created them male and female; when they were created, he blessed them and named them “humankind.”
NIV ©
He created them male and female and blessed them. And when they were created, he called them “man”.NASB ©
He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man in the day when they were created.NLT ©
He created them male and female, and he blessed them and called them “human.”MSG ©
He created both male and female and blessed them, the whole human race.BBE ©
Male and female he made them, naming them Man, and giving them his blessing on the day when they were made.NRSV ©
Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them “Humankind” when they were created.NKJV ©
He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created.You'll notice that none of these scholars think that both Adam and Eve were called by Adam's PERSONAL name – as if the two of them were the same BEING. But from the PERSON of the one man Adam, a SPECIES called “mankind” sprang.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 13 2011,10:39)
Mike and t8 do you care to address my point that you guys believe Jesus is half theos\god and half man?
I believe Jesus was 100% powerful spirit being (many of which were called “god”), who was made flesh for a time, but is now back in heaven at the right hand of his own God – again as 100% powerful spirit being.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 13 2011,10:39)
Is Jesus fully “theos\god” and fully man?
Jesus is not any percent “man” anymore. But yes, he is a god, according to the word usage in Biblical times. But don't confuse him with his OWN God, the “God Most High”.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 13 2011,10:39)
In what way is Jesus not “fully theos\god”?
In no way whatsoever. He is as “fully theos” as the angel Manoah saw was “fully theos” and as Satan is “fully theos”. Again, don't confuse “god” with “The God OF gods” or “God ALMIGHTY”.Keith, do I need to remind you of the post where you acknowledged that just because Jesus is called “god” doesn't mean he is God?
This is simply word play that I've answered time and time again for you.
mike
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 13 2011,12:00) You cannot separate identity from nature. You can only create individuality within that identity of nature. You have not refuted us.
Jack,You and I share the same nature as HUMAN BEINGS. But you and I are not the SAME being. Notice the “S” at the end of the word “BEINGS”. You AND I could not be referred to as A human being – without the “S”. It would be ludicrous.
Jesus and the God who created him share the same nature as SPIRIT BEINGS. But they are not the SAME being. Similar to the above, Jesus AND God cannot be referred to as A spirit being – without the “S”. It would likewise be ludicrous.
When exactly did you lose your understanding of the phrase “Son OF God”?
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 13 2011,15:13) “But I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt. “You shall acknowledge no God ('elohiym) but me, no Savior except me”. Hosea 13:4
Hi Keith,Your last post is exactly the reason I halted all of our debates and discussions. Keith, your arguments are much like if I said, “I like Kathi”, and you are a little kid that keeps taunting me saying, “You said you LIKE her! You said you LIKE her! Mike and Kathi, sitting in a tree…………….”
Yes, Jesus is A god, just like the scriptures teach. So I acknowledge that. And yes, scripture says that all knees will bow to Jesus, so I acknowledge that. But you are a little kid yelling, “Oooh, Mike is going to bow down to a different god!” It's both annoying and childish. And for you to think this is the way to prove the Trinity is absolutely absurd.
Yes, I will bow and do obeisance to the one who my God placed as my Lord. But I will worship only the One who that same Lord taught us to worship. So play your games with someone else, okay? I won't respond to any more of these kinds of childish posts.
Keith, do you know that scripture says Saul SAVED Israel from the Philistines? Is Saul also God because of the words of Hosea 13:4?
Isaiah 19:20
It will be a sign and witness to the LORD Almighty in the land of Egypt. When they cry out to the LORD because of their oppressors, he will send them a savior and defender, and he will rescue them.Keith or Jack, WHO is this scripture about? Who is this “savior” that Jehovah Almighty will SEND?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
