Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 06 2011,09:35)Keith,Exactly! The distinction in 1 Corinthians 8:6 is one of function and nothing more. The fact that it cannot be inferred that the Father is not Lord proves it.JackThe true confession is that Jesus is Lord and the Father is God.and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God…[Read more]

Hi SF.Covering all bases.There is usually more than one possible reason for something, and if one explanation is given, then I like to balance that with another possible explanation.

Oh yeah, I should say that I have reopened the debate.Thanks for letting me know your intentions.

People are uptight because too many times people ignore good questions and arguments that prove people wrong.We are just trying to get people to be responsible for their teachings.Also, we are now getting tougher with making people responsible for what they teach. Back then, it was more relaxed, but that led to abuse which BTW, I do not consider…[Read more]

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ April 06 2011,12:56)Hahahaha! WJ, You should see my other posts where im callling him the “Godfather” lol!thats so funny that we came up with the same idea about mike.Maybe its just a spiritual truth that was revealed here, through two wittnesses at different times haha.But if the witnesses were Pharisees, then you could…[Read more]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 07 2011,09:29)I have had enough of formal debates anyway. I just want to post freely without any obligations.My opinion as to why you said this is because you are not winning any or most of the debates. I bet if you were winning your debates that you would never have said this.It looks to me like this is your way…[Read more]

There are two points that need to be mentioned.1) That it is OK to take your time if you say so. Just a short note to say that you wish the debate to continue and that you are busy now, is good enough.2) That I can reopen the debate and if the outcome is different, then I will edit the Debate Log to reflect that.As is plain to see, the system…[Read more]

Cool.Thanks.

No probs.No pressure then. Sort out the other stuff first.Cheers.

So that explains your posts SF. They are a product of your age.

WJ, where is your faith in your Trinity Doctrine.You cannot call your god by the grammatically correct terms, “THEM” & “THEY”. Instead you call God “HIM” & “HIS”, even though you are referring to 3 persons.Shame on you for not practicing what you preach.Shame on you for not even giving an answer as to why you do not call your Trinity God,…[Read more]

WJ, I am just checking.Are you still engaging in this debate?If so, then I can wait for your answers.There are 2 outstanding questions and they are on this page.I just need to know whether this debate is being conceded by you or if you still wish to engage in it.If it is the former, then the debate will be closed and the result will be logged in…[Read more]

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ April 04 2011,05:00)When God talked about the Angels in Heb1, did that INCLUDE MOSES, THE SPYS OF JEREICO, JACOB, PAUL, PETER? YES OR NO??Perhaps not specifically, but Jesus, John the Baptist, and other men are called angels in scripture.Malachi the prophet was obviously a messenger of God and look at his name.

WJ.I seem to remember recently reading a post from Mike that answered your first question.It had an explanation containing info explaining the difference with YHWH/LORD and lord (kurios).Did you read that?

Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 23 2011,15:32)Mike, The verse includes 1:1b with 1:1c to make that distinction.If we changed the word 'God' to man it would read:In the beginning was the word, and the word was with the man, and the word was man.  You don't need an 'a' or a 'the' in the 'c' part of the verse.That is true.This is Keith's view:a) In the…[Read more]

WJ, definite articles exist in the Greek text and indefinite ones do not.There is no definite article in John 1:1c, that is a given.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 24 2011,02:49)Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 22 2011,19:22)Now that we all know it IS a grammatical possibility, whether some of us like it or not, are we ready to move on?MikeI have never agreed that it is Grammatically possible but only that “they say” it is possible.So move on if you like, but get your facts…[Read more]

I think Mike is only trying to get people to answer honestly.If people were more honest, then perhaps Mike would not have to try and squeeze out honest answers from others.

Stu are you still here arguing against a God that supposedly doesn't exist.I mean, why waste your time?I can tell you now that you will not receive a Nobel Prize for arguing about something you do not believe exists.You are better off discovering something than discovering nothing within your limited range.BTW, even with your limited range, your…[Read more]

Quote (Istari @ April 06 2011,01:51)Hi Sophia,As always, truth is a double edged sword…It is certainly true what you say – and it certainly applies to many here (no names from any you mentioned – or could be all)However, often what seems like those things you mention are seen that way because the observer is not knowledgeable about the subject…[Read more]