Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,11:20)Quote OK.Lets see if this is true.God (the Father) > Jesus > angel > John.That is what I say. So where is the error?What do you say it is then?Trinity > Jesus > angel > John or what?You're assuming that the Revelation message was transmitted down an ontological gradient from the highest being in existence (God)…[Read more]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,11:17)Quote (t8 @ Nov. 04 2007,11:11)Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,11:05)And you try to change the meaning of John 1:1OK.Lets see if this is true.God (the Father) > Jesus > angel > John.That is what I say. So where is the error?What do you say it is then?Trinity > Jesus > angel > John or what?I can…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,11:11)I have a question for you. Are 'identity' and 'nature' mutually inclusive or exclusive? Can I have an answer with you rationale please.I will let you answer your own question.The Devil is the Father (of lies and murder).Nevertheless he is a father. This being called the Devil is identified as Satan.Now there are…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,11:04)Quote (t8 @ Nov. 04 2007,10:58)Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,10:06)The same counter-argument can be tendered in response to this proof text. The fact is there is no explicit or implicit grammatical evidence of a contrast being drawn between the Father’s or Son's respective “beings” in the Revelation 1:1 text.…[Read more]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,11:05)And you try to change the meaning of John 1:1OK.Lets see if this is true.God (the Father) > Jesus > angel > John.That is what I say. So where is the error?What do you say it is then?Trinity > Jesus > angel > John or what?

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,10:53)Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 04 2007,10:44)He should also write…God > a god (Jesus) > a god (his angel) > a god (John) who then wrote this down for the churches. Well as I pointed out to WJ before. There is no “a god” in Greek.There is just “theos” and it can apply to “theos” in identity or “theos” in…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,10:56)Quote (t8 @ Nov. 04 2007,10:50)It can be easily proved that God and Jesus are spoken of as 2, not as the same being. The vast majority of “theos” (ignoring idols) is the Father. Only in a few instances is theos used of Yeshua, man, and angels.So if the “theos” of the bible and in Revelation 1:1 is the Father,…[Read more]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Nov. 04 2007,10:06)The same counter-argument can be tendered in response to this proof text. The fact is there is no explicit or implicit grammatical evidence of a contrast being drawn between the Father’s or Son's respective “beings” in the Revelation 1:1 text. And it is this very information that t8 must produce in order to sh…[Read more]

It can be easily proved that God and Jesus are spoken of as 2, not as the same being. The vast majority of “theos” (ignoring idols) is the Father. Only in a few instances is theos used of Yeshua, man, and angels.So if the “theos” of the bible and in Revelation 1:1 is the Father, then why try and change, add or takeaway from that?Is that not a…[Read more]

Hi Towshab.I know that you do not believe that Yeshua is the messiah, but this is what he said to the Pharisees.John 8:42 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I…[Read more]

Oh, I forgot to mention that proof text #4 has been posted.I await your reply.

You have been a member here for over 3 years.What difference does it make if it drags on for some time? My attitude is that I come here when other more important things in my life are done first.Unless you are thinking of leaving soon, I would prefer that we stick to the 6 proof texts (or was it 5?).I don't mind if you take your time, I am going…[Read more]

Revelation 1:1The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,OK. Let's look at who was involved in the Revelation of Jesus Christ.God > Jesus the Christ > his angel > John > who then wrote this down for the churches.So I count 4 identities…[Read more]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 01 2007,17:40)So why do you get upset because I give a picture of the Henotheistic faith?Call me what you like, but I see that it is very hard for you to call me a follower of the way or a believer.But I have noticed that men who are given labels, (who don't label themselves) are often given these labels by carnal…[Read more]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 01 2007,18:17)Word games again t8. For it sounds like you are saying this..”there is “Only One True God”, but…?Funny thing is that I didn't say “but”, although I have nothing against that word.Actually if you look closer what I am saying is what Paul says.1 Corinthians 8:5-6 5 For even if there are so-called gods,…[Read more]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 01 2007,17:00)Did Jesus say he wasnt good? Do you believe he was not good?Jesus goodness comes from God.He was acknowledging that he is not the originator, but we can assume that he was a recipient.Likewise we can be good too. But that goodness is not of ourselves is it? It is something we can receive and embrace,…[Read more]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 20 2007,20:16)Please explain my existence using the theory of god, and make it a better explanation than the scientific model!God created the cosmos and within that cosmos, he created you, by reason of processes dictated by laws that he set in motion and by giving you his spirit (possibly when you were conceived in the womb) and…[Read more]

Quote (Stu @ Nov. 01 2007,18:17)Science sees common ancestry with all other living species.Science which is knowledge also sees common features between the 2000 BMW with the 2007 one.Did the 2007 one come from the 2005 or did a creator make both, but use 90 something percent common features? Perhaps if you were an artificial life form and were…[Read more]