You can go on an anti-intellectual  rant all you want about the “wisdom of the world.”  All you have presented is a bogus argument. that backfires on you.  You, too, are part of the wisdom of the  world and so  have done nothing but state you own homespun opinions of the Trinity.  I can’t think of a faster way to be pulled off tr…[Read more]

It takes a lot more to really dig into the depths of Scripture than just the  mere conviction you are right because you believe you were moved by the Spirit.  Every kook and nutcase and fanatic in the book claims that they are right. that they and they alone were truly moved by the Spirit.  So forget that kind of argument.  Doe…[Read more]

Sorry, t8, that really doesn’t answer any of my questions.  If anything, your response makes your position appear even more untenable, as now you feel teh Father isn’t eternal either.  So if  the Father and Son aren’t eternal, who  or what is?

Your reference to science seems way off topic, not an analogous situation.  The rest of your post shows you want to unduly attack the “experts” as being all “biased” simply because they do not agree with your views.    so, forget it.   No takers here.

OK, so at what point prior to creation did Christ come along?  Why?  How? At what point did God teh Father come along?  If the Son is not eternal, then neither is the Father, as you can’t be a Father  without a Son?  So, what was leading up to these major changes in God prior to creation? What would you call God prior to being either Fath…[Read more]

Generally, scholars understand Philippians to be claiming  that Christ preexisted as God and that the surrendered  certain  privileges of such divinity in order to accomplish his mission.  That is based on a keener understanding of the Greek here than what you have.  That is way some Bible translations simply read “who being in very nature God.”

Sorry, no takers here.  First, you affirm predestination, which is neither a rational teaching nor a biblical one.  Secondly, you overlook biblical passages that speak of Christ as the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning creation and its ultimate culmination.

Also, I don’t have the time to look at material on youtube, which may or m…[Read more]

I didn’t say you didn’t do your own study.  The issue is, Study of what?  What sources do you use?  I have yet to see you demonstrate any knowledge or study of any Trinitarian writings or doctrines or solid sources of biblical scholarship.

2 Cor. 5:19 is a major passage Trinitarians appeal to.  In that you missed this point her and in another post, that tells me you are not familiar with Trinitarian doctrines.

Passages such as  Jn. 14:10-11 and also Jn. 14:20 are those used to support the Trinity, however.  You would know tht, had you reread anything on the doctrines and rationale for the  Trinity.

Sorry, if I may have gotten some posts confused.  I didn’t have time to look back at them.  But if your post was the one arguing about the indefinite article in John 1, then yes, it does appear you are simply repeating some online source.  If t8 is the one who posted that material, my same response applies there.

Yes, this is a hot social issue and can trigger prejudicial responses.  So, how do you know you are right?  How come you seem to know more it than the good doctor?  Don’t you think your analysis  is a result of prejudice on your part?

Yes, most psychologists  subscribe to the idea that sexual preferences are learned, not inherited.

You need to look more carefully at Jn.17.  Jn.17:5 , along with Philippians 2:5-7, is stating that Christ is eternal, is God, but humbled himself and took up human flesh, became a kind of  servant, but is no  way an inferior being to God.  If I wanted to describe this in terms contemporary relational metaphysics, I would say that the…[Read more]

Christ means more than just that.  He means  he is eternal, God,  the beginning of all creation  and the ultimate effect of creation.  As we read in Jn. 5:8,”Most assuredly, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am.”

Judge not, that you be not judged, my friend.  If you had read  carefully “The Revelation of John”, you would have easily noted that  the first chapter is abut “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the coming of Christ.  This same point is also  made very clear in Rev. 22:12-21. Also, I have pointed out a number of important additio…[Read more]

Sorry, but your case doesn’t hold any water.  It looks like  copied it from some online source who really doesn’t know Greek grammar.  Your source failed to inform you that “Theos” is not the  subject but the predicate nominative.  According to Caldwell’s Rule, in Koine Greek, the  predicate nominative does not require the definite artic…[Read more]

Here are some additional biblical passages I think you need to take into account.   Matthew 1:23: “…call him Immanuel, which means God with us.”  That shoots down your theory that Christ was not God when born.  2 Pr. 1:1: “…by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.”  Jn. 5:28: ” Then Jesus said to them, ‘Most assu…[Read more]

Yes, true.

Yes, it was foul language.  I am sure you can  read the post from the Jewpenetrator, which is what I am talking about here.

Thanks for the info.

You have a whoe thread her on the Trinity.  Now you tell me you’re not interested in the Trinity. Also, one more post from this forum with foul language in it, and I am going to blacklist your forum.

John does not say that the Word is the Spirit.  That is your supposition.  Verse 14 onward makes it very clear that  the Word  is Christ.

Yes, very true.  God is omnipresent.

Afraid I don’t follow your post at all.  Jesus discussing sources?  What does that mean?

The Bible does no say Jesus is a tool.  That’s why I said earlier the tool example isn’t exactly  I had in mind.  The Bible says that Christ or the Logos is God, is God’s Reason.  So yes, teh Bible is claiming Christ  is ontologically God.

OK, I’m still puzzled what inclination you are speaking of, but I don’t want to pry. I am well aware that many read in “carnal lust” and passion when the Bible talks about the “flesh.’  However, actually “flesh”, in the Bible, means selfishness, insensitivity, not passionate feelings.   Sin isn’t flesh, it’s insensitivity.

If the bike is something you are using, one of your tools, then in a very real sense it is you parked down the road; it is you in the sense your hand would be you if it were down the road, got blown off.  It’s like your toothbrush.  You really can’t tell where you end and it begins.  That’s why others would not want to use it.  Your blo…[Read more]

Sorry, I don’t follow you when you talk about suppressing your natural inclinations.  What do you mean by that? Also, if yu are actively involved with a church, it may have some solid theological resources available.

You might find it helpful to take some courses in theology.

Yes, true.

Remember, you are not just citing Scripture.  You are most immediately going on your understanding of Scripture, your interpretation. Question is, How accurate and reliable of a source are you on Scripture? I have my doubts there.

It’s a great idea to pull out the  fathers.  However,  you have to be more honest and go into more detail about them. Tatian was initially Trinitarian, then changed his mind.  Origen, who also was not Trinitarian,   was later declared a heretic. In that you missed these point about Tatian tells me you were careless in  your studies…[Read more]

Alright, let’s roll with the  tool example, though this isn’t exactly  the way the Bible depicts Christ’s relationship to God.    Yes, when   leg is amputated, that still is part of me.  Many persons report they can still feel the presence of their leg.  Truth is, we are all omnipresent, though in a very limited sense of the  term.  …[Read more]

Oh, OK, I see.  Everyone in the universities is biased.  I guess you would know.  You just told me you have a seventh-grade education.  I take that to mean no college education.  So yes, I guess from the sidelines you have such a clear view of university life.  Everyone is biased, but not you, of course. This is precisely the probl…[Read more]

That is also my point.  Views our culture had of homosexuality and other forms of sexual practices were not always  rational or anything but a sanctified form of sexual oppression.