"The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of Elohim. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned".
Is Jesus God?
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
"The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of Elohim. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned".
Greetings again Truster,
Kind regards
Trevor
Discussing this is off the topic of this thread, but I was interested in your statement here. I think you are responding to my question about your statement "Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist. I cannot and will not speak peace to him or her." Personally I do not agree with your application of the verse that you quote as I believe that faith is a response of the heart and mind Romans 10:17 "faith comes by hearing". I would be interested in how you understand the Parable of the Sower, and the responses of the various categories. I suggest that Jesus' quotation of Isaiah 6:9-10 is also very relevant, even helping to understand the verse that you quote and I suggest misapply. I would be interested in how you define "the natural man" and how any individual changes from a natural man into a spiritual man or similar.
Kind regards
Trevor
Who are we to say what God CANNOT know?
That's the issue here.
Having been made unto the likeness of God - we should take care not to overstep the boundaries. We should be reminded of the pride and vanity of Lucifer.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
There is no yes or no to that!
God obviously knows that He exists.....lol.....why would that question even arise?
He'll know that's a silly, illogical question for Him to entertain, never mind contemplate.
Would God waste His time to bother with that kind of thought?
Bye for now.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
You're dealing disingenously, here. You are stonewalling against a simple yes/no question against which you would feel no need, whatsoever, to stonewall, were you dealing honestly. You simply hate the question, because it necessarily embarrasses you on account of the light it sheds upon the incoherence amongst your affirmations. Have fun w/ this one:
CAN YOU, betsy123, KNOW that God does not exist? Yes or No?
Remember, you have said:
But now, you're claiming that it is impossible for God to answer "No!" to certain questions, such as "Can God know that God does not exist?"
Lol. Why have you changed, and asking me instead?
The issue is with you claiming God cannot know blah-blah-blah.
You asked that question about God - Can God know that He does not exist?
I told you it's an irrational/illogical question.
Here's why:
If God does not exist - there is no God!
So why do you ask if God (who does not exist), can know that He does not exist?
If God does not exist - He's not here to know, or not know anything.
Lon
Well-known member
!
!
Two totally different questions.
The first is akin:
Q: "Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?"
A: illogical question.
It is a nonsense question that contradicts itself, much like impossible drawings of things that cannot exist other than on paper. Sure, you can say "I see it right there on paper." But it can only exist in 2-D as a false representation of a 3-D object.
As teachers, we say there are no 'stupid' questions,
but there certainly are problematic and illogical questions:
Q:"Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no?"
A: (and the only answer for most) "Poor question."
My answer "yes" or "no" would provide you with no further information. We'd be where we left off with such nonsense and worse for the endeavor for you might have confirmed something in your mind that you've no right to affirm or deny by such such a lacking question."
For me: "Yes." "Yes."
Similarly: John 16:30 John 21:17 1 John 3:20 Psalm 147:5 Hebrews 4:13 1 Kings 8:39
If so, then God is to say what God knows. Djengo may be pointing to such :idunno:
!
Two totally different questions.
The first is akin:
Q: "Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?"
A: illogical question.
It is a nonsense question that contradicts itself, much like impossible drawings of things that cannot exist other than on paper. Sure, you can say "I see it right there on paper." But it can only exist in 2-D as a false representation of a 3-D object.
As teachers, we say there are no 'stupid' questions,
but there certainly are problematic and illogical questions:
Q:"Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no?"
A: (and the only answer for most) "Poor question."
My answer "yes" or "no" would provide you with no further information. We'd be where we left off with such nonsense and worse for the endeavor for you might have confirmed something in your mind that you've no right to affirm or deny by such such a lacking question."
A better question, simple to answer: Is Jeremiah 32:17 true? "Do you believe it?"
For me: "Yes." "Yes."
Similarly: John 16:30 John 21:17 1 John 3:20 Psalm 147:5 Hebrews 4:13 1 Kings 8:39
If so, then God is to say what God knows. Djengo may be pointing to such :idunno:
John 1:18 English Standard Version (ESV)
18 No one has ever seen God; the only God,[a] who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
John 1:18 New International Version (NIV)
18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[a] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
John 1:18 New Living Translation (NLT)
18 No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God,[a] is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.
18 No one has ever seen God; the only God,[a] who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
John 1:18 New International Version (NIV)
18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[a] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
John 1:18 New Living Translation (NLT)
18 No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God,[a] is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.
advenureside
New member
Thank each one of your patience and consideration.
I would like the opportunity to explain another trinitarian deception on the deity of Yahoshua.
If someone is being honest in their heart - and admits that the Trinity is confusing and illogical, they are being factual and honest about how they are realizing that the rest of the Bible is not confirming the Trinity Theory - that was in fact - inserted into the Translation by The Trinitarian Translations.
And this is demonstrated when we even look at the Greek Manuscripts.
For a perfect example -- Let’s present Act 17:29
Here is how the Trinitarian Translators Translated the verse -
Act 17:29 - Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the BRIMSTONE is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
Here is exactly how the words are - in the Original Greek Manuscripts.
Act 17:29
γενος G1085 The offspring -
ουν G3767 therefore -
υπαρχοντες G5225 who are,
του G3588 of -
Θεου G2316 God
ουκ G3756 not
οφειλομεν G3784 should -
νομιζειν G3543 regard -
χρυσω G5557 gold -
η G2228 or -
αργυρω G696 silver -
η G2228 or -
λιθω G3037 stones -
χαραγματι G5480 engraved -
τεχνης G5078 crafts -
και G2532 and -
ενθυμησεως G1761 the thoughts -
ανθρωπου G444 of man. -
- το G3588 The -
θειον G2304 brimstone -
ειναι G1510 are -
ομοιον G3664 similar ..... -
And it says exactly this -
Act 17:29 The offspring therefore who exist of God not should regard gold or silver or stones engraved crafts and the thoughts of man, the brimstone are similar.
I could take you to every single last verse that Trinitarians use to support their Trinity Doctrine and I could prove “ by the Original Manuscripts “ that they have added, deleted and changed words to insert their own interpretation.
Trinitarians simply must change and add to and subtract from the Bible to claim the Bible supports - The Trinity Doctrine. They have no manuscripts for their faith. So they change The Translation to say what they feel it should have been inspired to say.
This word " θειον “ that they added and inserted into the Translation - to say " Godhead " is NEVER ever again used to say godhead, The Trinitarian Translators always Translate it correctly in every other verse where it used, To say = BRIMSTONE - in all of the other verses - as - this is what it really means.
You can even go to Google Translate and look it up - it means " sulfur "" θειον “ - also in the Bible. So Trinitarians are literally doing exactly what the Bible says not to do. And this is what Trinitarian Spirit is all about.
The reason the word “ Brimstone / θειον “ was used by the original authors is that brimstone - when present in rocks and gold, silver and iron elements found in the earth where they are formed and cooled under pressure and heat, they leave a shining glistening multidimensional layer that shines and glistens. Little stones that had Brimstone layers on them are glistening stones that shine and glisten. The Priests in the Old Testament had Brimstones on their breastplates.
Rev 9:17 out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone. θειον
Luk 17:29 out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone. θειον
Act 17:29 - Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the BRIMSTONE. Θειον
is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. Brimstone gives a shining, glistening and two-dimensional layer that is attractive to Idol worshipers. The Trinitarian Translators not only changed the context of the entire verse - they also used the word " God head " to substiture for Brimstone / Sulfer.
I would like the opportunity to explain another trinitarian deception on the deity of Yahoshua.
If someone is being honest in their heart - and admits that the Trinity is confusing and illogical, they are being factual and honest about how they are realizing that the rest of the Bible is not confirming the Trinity Theory - that was in fact - inserted into the Translation by The Trinitarian Translations.
And this is demonstrated when we even look at the Greek Manuscripts.
For a perfect example -- Let’s present Act 17:29
Here is how the Trinitarian Translators Translated the verse -
Act 17:29 - Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the BRIMSTONE is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
Here is exactly how the words are - in the Original Greek Manuscripts.
Act 17:29
γενος G1085 The offspring -
ουν G3767 therefore -
υπαρχοντες G5225 who are,
του G3588 of -
Θεου G2316 God
ουκ G3756 not
οφειλομεν G3784 should -
νομιζειν G3543 regard -
χρυσω G5557 gold -
η G2228 or -
αργυρω G696 silver -
η G2228 or -
λιθω G3037 stones -
χαραγματι G5480 engraved -
τεχνης G5078 crafts -
και G2532 and -
ενθυμησεως G1761 the thoughts -
ανθρωπου G444 of man. -
- το G3588 The -
θειον G2304 brimstone -
ειναι G1510 are -
ομοιον G3664 similar ..... -
And it says exactly this -
Act 17:29 The offspring therefore who exist of God not should regard gold or silver or stones engraved crafts and the thoughts of man, the brimstone are similar.
I could take you to every single last verse that Trinitarians use to support their Trinity Doctrine and I could prove “ by the Original Manuscripts “ that they have added, deleted and changed words to insert their own interpretation.
Trinitarians simply must change and add to and subtract from the Bible to claim the Bible supports - The Trinity Doctrine. They have no manuscripts for their faith. So they change The Translation to say what they feel it should have been inspired to say.
This word " θειον “ that they added and inserted into the Translation - to say " Godhead " is NEVER ever again used to say godhead, The Trinitarian Translators always Translate it correctly in every other verse where it used, To say = BRIMSTONE - in all of the other verses - as - this is what it really means.
You can even go to Google Translate and look it up - it means " sulfur "" θειον “ - also in the Bible. So Trinitarians are literally doing exactly what the Bible says not to do. And this is what Trinitarian Spirit is all about.
The reason the word “ Brimstone / θειον “ was used by the original authors is that brimstone - when present in rocks and gold, silver and iron elements found in the earth where they are formed and cooled under pressure and heat, they leave a shining glistening multidimensional layer that shines and glistens. Little stones that had Brimstone layers on them are glistening stones that shine and glisten. The Priests in the Old Testament had Brimstones on their breastplates.
Rev 9:17 out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone. θειον
Luk 17:29 out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone. θειον
Act 17:29 - Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the BRIMSTONE. Θειον
is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. Brimstone gives a shining, glistening and two-dimensional layer that is attractive to Idol worshipers. The Trinitarian Translators not only changed the context of the entire verse - they also used the word " God head " to substiture for Brimstone / Sulfer.
advenureside
New member
For a correction of what the translation says - the trinitarian translators translated the verse to say
Act 17:29 - Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the GOD HEAD is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
The manuscripts say something different. = Act 17:29 The offspring therefore who exist of God not should regard gold or silver or stones engraved crafts and the thoughts of man, the brimstone are similar.
Act 17:29 - Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the GOD HEAD is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
The manuscripts say something different. = Act 17:29 The offspring therefore who exist of God not should regard gold or silver or stones engraved crafts and the thoughts of man, the brimstone are similar.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
They are, indeed, different questions; the one is not the same question as the other. I'm not sure, however, what (if anything) you mean by "totally", here. Especially, since both questions have the same object, viz., the false proposition, 'God does not exist'. Though there is difference between the two questions, there is also similarity, or commonality, between them.
The difference between them, of course, is that the subject of the one is God, whereas the subject of the other is not God, but is, rather, some man or woman who is not God.
What you wrote--"Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?"--is not a question at all. It is simply nonsense with a question mark stuck onto it. Since the phrase, 'a rock [God] cannot pick up', is meaningless, the whole string of words--"Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?"--is meaningless, as well. Adding those extra words ("Can God make"), and the question mark, does not magically transmute it from being nonsense into being something intelligible.
Inasmuch as what you wrote ("Can God make a rock He cannot pick up?") is not even a question, the question that I asked ("Can God know that God does not exist?") is not "akin" to what you wrote. At least, it is not akin in the sense that one question, as a question, is akin to another question, as a question. I suppose you could say that the question, "Can God know that God does not exist?", is "akin" to what you wrote in the sense that both are made up of words, and that some of the same words occur in both, such as 'can', and 'God'.
Here is a list of a few meaningless phrases:
- 'a square that is a circle'
- 'a dog that is not a dog'
- 'a rock too heavy for God to lift'
- 'a being that does not exist'
- 'the tooth fairy'
- 'the flying spaghetti monster'
- 'illogical question'
- 'meaningless question'
- 'nonsensical proposition'
There is another meaningless phrase: 'nonsense question'. Questions are meaningful. Questions are not nonsense. Whatever is meaningless, whatever is nonsensical, is not a question.
Also, though I'm not going to get into it in this post, I would note that, despite popular usage, it is the case that no thing contradicts itself; it takes two, distinct things for contradiction to occur:
- the thing doing the contradicting,
- the thing being contradicted
Thus, here is another nonsense phrase: "thing that contradicts itself".
No drawing is impossible; 'impossible drawings' is a nonsense phrase. All the drawings I've ever done, or seen done, were, as it turns out, possible.
Perhaps you'd be willing to give an example or two of things to which you would be willing to tag the phrase, "thing(s) that cannot exist other than on paper".
No question is stupid. Only persons are/can be stupid.
If you're referring to the question, "Can God know that God does not exist?", answering "Yes" to it could only be driven by irrational thinking. Answering "No" to it is the only Biblical, and (therefore) rational, answer. Of course God cannot know that God does not exist!! The proposition, 'God does not exist', is a falsehood.
Obviously betsy123, though a proud promoter of irrational thinking, is unwilling to willfully walk herself right into overtly appearing so irrational as to answer the question with a "Yes. God can know that God does not exist." Obviously, only an extremely debased mind--a genuine fool--could answer the question in that manner. Yet, betsy123 also knows, in light of all the affirmations she's already laid out in her posts, that it would be a serious embarrassment to her claims, were she to agree with rational, Biblically-minded people, by openly confessing, "No. God cannot know that God does not exist." So, she has decided to take the weasel's way by simply stonewalling against the question, and puffing out some gibberish which she vainly imagines will serve to exempt her from having to answer the question.
We'd be where we left off with such nonsense and worse for the endeavor for you might have confirmed something in your mind that you've no right to affirm or deny by such such a lacking question."
I believe Jeremiah 32:17. Since it is written
"Ah Lord God! ....there is nothing too hard for thee",
obviously it would not be too hard for God, Who is rational, and the very Author of our rationality, to answer "NO!!!!" to the question: "Ah Lord God, can You know that You do not exist?"
Would you say that, from Jeremiah 32:7, or any other verse in the Bible, we ought to arrive at the idea that it is not too hard for God to sin against Himself?
Only rank, sanctimonious hypocrisy can stand there--as betsy123 does--and accuse others of acting like the rebellious Lucifer simply because they, thinking in a Biblical, logically-consistent way, are willing to declare the truth that there are, indeed, things that God cannot do, and things that God cannot know.
Anyone who wishes to say, "God knows everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, in the widest, most absolutely inclusive sense imaginable", is saying, therein, that "God knows the false proposition, 'God does not exist'".
Are you entertaining the idea, here, that, perhaps, God knows/can know that God does not exist? Sheesh, I hope not.
To claim that God can know the God-blaspheming falsehood that God does not exist makes the claimant as much a fool as it would make a person a fool to claim that God can know that something greater than God exists.
Here are some interesting questions:
With no difficulty, whatsoever, I, for one, exercising my God-granted rationality upon the propositions God gives us in His God-breathed Scripture, answer "No!!!!" to each of them. Only overt pagans, and simpletons who have fallen under the spell of many world-acclaimed irrationalist miscreants misnamed "philosophers" could refuse to answer "No!!!!".
Lon
Well-known member
Up to this point, all agreement. An impossible drawing isn't talking about the drawing, but the object. On the technicality, I'll give it to you: "Impossible object drawing" Or impossible 3-D drawing" or such. It'd be a lack of communication if such wasn't understood from the example.
As to your: "Can God know, that God does not exist?" To me, it is also one of those questions that have no context for meaning because if the object does not exist, then of course whatever that object is, if cognizant by implication, could not very well know it didn't exist because the whole of the object, including the cognizant awareness is nonexistent. Somehow,the topic needs to go back to God being aware of all things. I 'may' follow your logic at this point, but it needs its finishing touch and so I'll wait to see the final proposition (which you do give at the end here). I about deleted my previous post midway, but thought it might be a good distraction if not help the subject along. Too many cooks often can ruin a soup (or distract Betty long enough that she slips out quietly). Of course God 'cannot' know He doesn't exist, because such doesn't, in fact exist.
Another illustration --> . <-- Can this period, that exists, not exist? Answer: "Yes" but for the memory of it. Your question about God goes well beyond this illustration. Heaven and earthy will pass away, so then this period. Not so with God. I think it important for the mention of what I believe you are getting at.
Sure (both large so in the spoiler).
Spoiler
I yet hold the idea that the questions are misinformed or naive. It can mean the person has a deficiency, but it seems best to leave that off until the end of the lesson where teachers generally pull conferences upon the issue of failure, rather than the immediacy of the student's in-proficiency, (because no child can be left behind and other kinds of motivations).
Or an immature mind. Some are not capable of abstract concepts having never left concrete operational thinking to become formal thinkers. I'm not saying Betsy is incapable of formal operational thinking, but it is generally difficult to get people to perceive on this level, what the deficiency happens to be. The answer, I concur, is "No, which is not a deficiency in God's ability."
:nono: As I stated above, of course not, but it doesn't show a deficiency in God's ability to do all things. It rather is because the question asks something that can only be 'no' and is no reflection on 'ability' whatsoever.
So either she is confused or a miscreant. I'd HOPE for being able to clear up the confusion. God-speed if such is also your endeavor. In Him -Lon
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Lol. Why have you changed, and asking me instead?
The issue is with you claiming God cannot know blah-blah-blah.
You asked that question about God - Can God know that He does not exist?
I told you it's an irrational/illogical question.
Here's why:
If God does not exist - there is no God!
So why do you ask if God (who does not exist), can know that He does not exist?
If God does not exist - He's not here to know, or not know anything.
So, failing to justify your refusal, you refuse to answer "No" to the two questions I asked you:
- Is God able to know that God does not exist?
- Are you, betsy123, able to know that God does not exist?
Also, you deny that God is able to answer "No" to the question, "Can God know that God does not exist?" (According to your view, all things are possible with God, with at least the exception that He cannot answer "No" to that question. That is, according to your view, it is impossible for God to answer "No, I, God, cannot know that I, God, do not exist." So, you are hypocritical when you complain at me for pointing out that God cannot know certain things.)
Here are some other questions you will enjoy stonewalling against, also:
- Is God able to know that betsy123 is holier than God?
- Is God able to know that betsy123 is wiser than God?
- Is God able to know that betsy123 is mightier than God?
- Is God able to know that betsy123 created the heaven and the earth?
You gotta read my explanations again.
Think about it: is something that does not exist, be present?
Is something that does not exist, do anything?
It's not hypocritical. It's just simple logic.
You're getting yourself confused.
Unlike God, I am not OMNISCIENT.....therefore, that question is totally irrelevant.
That's quite different from asking "Can God know that He does not exist," since
a...... non-existing God
wouldn't be here
.......to know..... or.....not know anything.
You have to ponder on that.
Now.....with that new set of different questions, here is the answer:
If there is such a creation of God (named betsy123), whom He created to be holier, or wiser, or mightier, or whom He had created to create heaven and earth - of course, God would know that betsy123 is all those. After all, we're talking about His creation (betsy123).
The Creator has intimate knowledge of His creation.
He is an all-knowing God. God is Omniscient.
Omniscient
having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/omniscient
Last edited:
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
You failed, again.
What you call "my explanations" is a tissue of nonsense, and my reading your nonsense any number of times will not cause it to magically become explanatory.
Your phrase, "something that does not exist", is a nonsense phrase. Thus, you've asked no question.
Yeah, it's hypocritical.
False. It's not logic at all.
I know what you're up to. Doesn't work.
By the way, here's another fun question for you to stonewall against:
Is any personal being (whether it be God, betsy123, 7djengo7, or any other personal being, whether human or otherwise) able to know that God does not exist?
And, another:
Notice that I did NOT say this nonsense to you:
"Can a non-existing God know that He does not exist?"
Rather, I asked you a question:
"Can God know that He does not exist?"
Your phrase, "a non-existing God", is meaningless, just like the phrase, "a square circle". Perhaps you are pleased to have borrowed it from the vain babblers who are pleased to call themselves "atheists", and "brights", and "freethinkers", etc.?
Fail! Sad! betsy123 the shameless weasel. You've not answered one, or more, of the questions you call "that new set of different questions".
Here they are, again:
I'm asking you, betsy123, right here, right now:
What you call "my explanations" is a tissue of nonsense, and my reading your nonsense any number of times will not cause it to magically become explanatory.
Your phrase, "something that does not exist", is a nonsense phrase. Thus, you've asked no question.
Yeah, it's hypocritical.
False. It's not logic at all.
You're getting yourself confused.
I know what you're up to. Doesn't work.
- Your false claim that my "question is totally irrelevant" doesn't hide the fact that you have not answered "No" to my question, and are obviously afraid to do so.
- Here's why you are afraid to do so: If you answer "No" (as any rationally-thinking person would) to the question, "Is betsy123 able to know that God does not exist?", you have demonstrated that you are ABLE to answer "No" to it, and yet, you have denied that God is ABLE to answer "No" to the question, "Is God able to know that God does not exist?"
By the way, here's another fun question for you to stonewall against:
Is any personal being (whether it be God, betsy123, 7djengo7, or any other personal being, whether human or otherwise) able to know that God does not exist?
And, another:
Is God able to know that betsy123 knows that God does not exist?
Notice that I did NOT say this nonsense to you:
"Can a non-existing God know that He does not exist?"
Rather, I asked you a question:
"Can God know that He does not exist?"
Your phrase, "a non-existing God", is meaningless, just like the phrase, "a square circle". Perhaps you are pleased to have borrowed it from the vain babblers who are pleased to call themselves "atheists", and "brights", and "freethinkers", etc.?
Fail! Sad! betsy123 the shameless weasel. You've not answered one, or more, of the questions you call "that new set of different questions".
Here they are, again:
I'm asking you, betsy123, right here, right now:
- Is God able to know that you, betsy123, are wiser than God? Yes or No?
[*]Is God able to know that you, betsy123, are holier than God? Yes or No?
[*]Is God able to know that you, betsy123, are mightier than God? Yes or No?
[*]Is God able to know that you, betsy123, created the heaven and the earth? Yes or No?
Nang
TOL Subscriber
The answer is logical: something that doesn't exist is not here to do anything,
which include the ability to know, or not know.
You're the one who loves playing with words - and it caught up with you. :shrug:
Not only do you insist on your irrational argument (despite the clear, logical explanation given).......either you're being obtuse about it, or it's really sailing way over your head.........
.....but obviously, you can't keep a discussion without resorting to personal attacks.
Well it's said the first one to throw a personal attack is the one who loses the argument.......nothing more for me to say.
This so-called discussion between us has really sunk down to an "idle talk."
Before we say anything more we'd regret, I'm bowing out of it.
Have a nice day.
Last edited:
Does a scripture determine if Jesus is God?
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Scripture is validation of all that God has predetermined.