Since you already know it all, why do you ask questions that you already know the answers to?!?Good shot, I lost my entire family to the J-dubs, so you did guess the most offensive thing you could call me.Derision and name calling are the last resort of the ignorant!!!

T8Yes this is so, “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.” Jn. 1:1 But I fail to see your point, unless this is a backhanded way of showing that “Jesus” is God, which not only is not the discussion, but wrong.Pierre,Funny, I was just thinking the same thing about you, because like the JW's you already have…[Read more]

One more time, “Christ” means simply, “the anointed one” therefore until “Jesus” physically came into existence, “Christ” was only a concept in the mind of God. In Prov. 8:22-31 the writer is speaking metaphorically concerning the joyousness of the coming Messiah, it is not meant to be taken literally. Remember that the OT is the “shadow” of…[Read more]

You are also aware that Easter and Christmas are the same kind “fabricated” holidays? Easter covered up a pagan fertility rite (that's what the eggs and bunnies are about) and Christmas is not even close to the day “Jesus” was born, it was created by the Catholic Church to allow pagans to continue celabrating the Yule.Something I didn't see in…[Read more]

PierreWhat I meant by “essence” is the power of God that dwells in the believer. It is the unction (unction is defined as: The action of anointing someone with oil or ointment as a religious rite or as a symbol of investiture as a monarch.) from God. Let me go back a minute. I said in another post that contrary to popular belief, Christ is not…[Read more]

Actually “manifestation” and “incarnation” are not synonyms. Incarnation is defined as: A person who embodies in the flesh a deity, spirit, or abstract quality: “Rama was Vishnu's incarnation on earth”, and manifestation is defined as: 1. An event, action, or object that clearly shows or embodies something, esp. a theory or an abstract idea:…[Read more]

These threads would be funny if it weren't for the fact that they're so utterly pathetic! How hard is it to understand from John 1:1 and 14 that “Jesus” (still don't like to use that name as it's misleading) and the Word are one and the same?!? Look at Isaiah 55:8-12 (KJV), “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,…[Read more]

Quote                        Our PreexistenceYes, we all preexisted our physical flesh! Thanks very much for your concern in this matter!2Tm.1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given ]] in Christ Jesus before the world began, (John 15:27)    …[Read more]

Hi guys and gals,I find it very difficult to follow your trains of thought. This thread started out as a discussion of the “incarnation doctrine,” but now seems to be about something else. Unfortunately, for me, I don't read very fast (an error in the teaching methods when I first learned to read) and so it would take far too long for me to read…[Read more]

FYI Ed Jrebellman is a moniker and as such can be spelled any way one chooses, however in this case rebell is an acronym derived from my name: r(ichard)e(dward)bell(my last name). There is a long and irrelevant story connected to why my name is Richard Edward Bell, which is not my birth name.Quote “Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show t…[Read more]

Hi guys and gals,I'm kind of new to this site and so I have been trying to get a handle on some of these topics, but it seems to me that by this time most, if not all, have devolved into personal attacks, which edify no one. All you people seem so full of yourselves, that it really makes me wonder if anyone here has a clue as to what a Christian…[Read more]

Hi all,I haven't been here for a long while, but every now and then I like to throw in my two cents worth. But it is going to be extremely difficult to stay on point if Charles is going to take passages out of context in an attempt to prove his circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is a formal logical fallacy (Fallacy is defined as: A mistaken…[Read more]