2 Cor 4.4 (Jesus, The God of this age!)

[7djengo7]

We can see how scripture supports the fact that 'The God of this age' is a direct referral to Jesus Christ.

Its a total shame that many scholars have written this off as to pertaining to Satan...in effect, heaping praises upon him.

Any serious student of scripture can easily determine that this passage is yet another GREAT verse declaring Jesus as God!

Not Satan as God!

You're the only "serious student of scripture" in the world, aren't you? So far, as far as I've seen, you haven't cited a single author from the last 2,000 years who agrees with your eisegesis on Paul's phrase, "the god of this world". I'm not saying there isn't/hasn't been anybody who does/has; maybe there is/has been. It really seems to make no difference either way. I'm just pointing to the curious fact that you haven't cited a single one, as though, perhaps, you are trying to garner some personal glory for having been, in the last 2,000 years, that one, lonely, "serious student of scripture", for having single-handedly discovered such a precious, hidden "truth" as you've discovered, and, of course, you wouldn't want anybody to think you had just lifted the idea from some other author, now, would you. No. Of course you wouldn't! Rather, you'd like to tell people you came to it by, as you say, "simple exegesis" (a meaningless phrase), so that you have an opportunity to show them how you can copy/paste blocks of Greek text (which, for all anybody knows, you can barely (if at all) read/interact with, yourself) into your forum posts. It is as easy to copy/paste paragraph upon paragraph of Greek text into a post as it is to meaninglessly chant the word "context" over and over and over...

How many people have you, personally, observed become Trinitarians because you have shared your "truth" with them, that Paul was not referring to Satan, but rather, to Jesus, as "the god of this world"?

And, by the way, why do you say that 2 Corinthinans 4:4 is "another GREAT verse declaring Jesus as God", rather than saying, instead, that it is "another GREAT verse declaring [the Holy Ghost] as God"? Why do you say that Paul was referring to the person of Jesus as "the god of this world", rather than saying that Paul was referring to the person of the Holy Ghost as "the god of this world"? That is, why'd you choose to paste the Son into the phrase, as you did, rather than to paste the Spirit into it?

 

[7djengo7]

I had written to you:

Here, you are saying that, at least at one time, Satan was the ruler of the world.

Your reaction to this was:

Scripture makes this claim, not me.

I'm quite aware that Scripture makes the claim that Satan was the ruler of the world, which is why I, also, make the claim that Satan was the ruler of the world. Why, then, do you NOT make the claim that Satan was the ruler of the world? Odd.

I had asked you:

Was Satan, at that time, able to blind, and blinding, the minds of men, or not?

And you wrote:

Not according to scripture.

Only God has this power and prerogative.

So, here, you're saying that Satan has never been able to blind, and has never blinded anybody, either prior to the cross, or since the cross. What is your point, then, when you tell people that 2 Corinthians 4:4 is not "pre-Cross scripture"? If Satan has never been able to blind anybody, either before the cross, or after the cross, then exactly what relevance do you say there is in your insistence that 2 Corinthians 4:4 is not "pre-Cross scripture"?

 

[7djengo7]

No two people believe identically, on any topic.

So much for what you wrote, here, then:

Contrary to popular modern belief, ‘The God of this age’, (ho Theos tou aiōnos toutou), actually pertains to Jesus Christ and NOT Satan, and provides yet another potent scriptural proof for Jesus’ deity.

The word 'popular' means that more than one person believes that Paul was referring to Satan as "the god of this world".

But, inasmuch as, so far, you've not cited a single author from the last 2,000 years who believes, with you, that "Jesus Christ and NOT Satan" is "the god of this world" spoken of by Paul, you may well be correct in saying that no two (or more) people believe this obscure "truth" you are preaching!

God reveals Himself to each one as He pleases.

Again, I've asked you who it is that has been blinding all Trinitarians (with the exception of yourself) against this obscure "truth" you've been preaching? Apparently this "truth" you've been preaching is pretty negligibly God-glorifying, at best, seeing as you are apparently the only person in the last 2,000 years who hasn't been blinded against believing it.

How useful has your "potent scriptural proof for Jesus' divinity" been over the last 2,000 years in the cause of Trinitarianism, seeing as perhaps all Trinitarians (excepting yourself) have been Trinitarians despite our understanding that Paul was referring to Satan, and not to Jesus, as "the god of this world"?

 

[7djengo7]

I said it hundreds of times before, but it goes in one ear and out the other for peeps like you.

Ever hear of CONTEXT?

If I didn't let meaningless noise go in one ear and out the other, I'd be a nervous wreck. Whenever you say the word "context" to me (and to others who see through your claims), what you're basically saying is "Polly (Apple7) wanna cracker." If you ever start actually meaning something by the word "context", you let us know. How about that?

You randomly cherry-pick out a verse or two, out of its original context, and then claim that it does not fit the narrative.

Well....what is the narrative of Rev 20.10 -15 vs. the narrative of Rev 20.1 - 3?

Go study up, and come back with a plausible answer...

Your faux question, "what is the narrative of Rev 20.10 -15 vs. the narrative of Rev 20.1 - 3?", is gobbledygook. Putting a question mark at the end of a string of words doesn't make your string of words into a question. If you actually ask me a question, I'll try to answer it.

Now, you said:

The verbs employed in Rev 20, are in the aorist, completed action.

Its a done deal.

See that? You did not say merely "the verbs employed in Rev 20[.10-15]", did you? No, you didn't. What you actually said was "the verbs employed in Rev 20, are in the aorist, completed action", didn't you? Yeah, you did. And, even if you hadn't said what you said, the fact is, the verb in v. 10 ("cast") is, indeed, aorist, just like the verb in v. 2 ("bound") is aorist. So, if the fact that the aorist verb for Satan being bound (in Revelation 20:2) necessitates that Satan, in our past, has already been bound (which, of course, it doesn't (though you assert that it does)), then the fact that the aorist verb for Satan being cast into the lake of fire (in Revelation 20:10) necessitates that Satan, in our past, has already been cast into the lake of fire.

No amount of your pointless, special pleading, nor your meaningless parroting of the word "context", is going to help you out, here. So, sorry Polly, no cracker for you!

You wrote:

Too many people use Rev 20 as their premise for eschatology...of which, results in serious errors...

Now, do you not see why I can't take you seriously when you pretend to know what you are doing with Greek text? Right there, for one, is a perfect example of the fact that you, evidently, have coherency issues in the English language; if you can't operate any better than you do with English, why do you expect anybody to take you seriously when you pretend to pontificate about Greek? Why?

By the way, I have yet to find, in Scripture, where it says (as you say) "Satan was bound at The Cross"; it sure doesn't say that in any part of Revelation 20. That's a slogan you've meaninglessly parroted from who knows where?, but it's not found in the Bible. Not at all, no sir.

 

[7djengo7]

That's something I put up on the shelf.

I suppose that, most of the time, that's the way I feel about it, too. What I know is that Calvinism, of course, fails at it miserably, as does Arminianism, although exponents from both often have very interesting, useful things to say, and I can't help but somewhat appreciate the lot of 'em, even though I have to disagree with them so much. One thing that I like, however, is that, as far as I've been able to tell, at least, the problem of evil seems even way harder, nay impossible to deal with, rationally, for folk who go around barking that "God does not exist" or "I don't believe God exists" than it is for us.

 

[Danoh]

I suppose that, most of the time, that's the way I feel about it, too. What I know is that Calvinism, of course, fails at it miserably, as does Arminianism, although exponents from both often have very interesting, useful things to say, and I can't help but somewhat appreciate the lot of 'em, even though I have to disagree with them so much. One thing that I like, however, is that, as far as I've been able to tell, at least, the problem of evil seems even way harder, nay impossible to deal with, rationally, for folk who go around barking that "God does not exist" or "I don't believe God exists" than it is for us.

I'd say to you and GD that there isn't any need to put it on the shelf.

That it is...settled.

Acts 9, which is where the following took place, was way after The Cross...

Acts 26:15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. 26:16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; 26:17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Paul himself had once been one of those under the power of Darkness / Satan...

2 Corinthians 4:1 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; 4:2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

And that is just off the top of my head, not even remotely what all Scripture has to say on this that I have asserted, based on passages from Scripture like those cited in this post.

Acts 17:11, 12

 

[God's Truth]

εν οις ο θεος του αιωνος τουτου ετυφλωσεν τα νοηματα των απιστων εις το μη αυγασαι τον φωτισμον του ευαγγελιου της δοξης του χριστου ος εστιν εικων του θεου

en hois ho Theos tou aiōnos toutou etyphlōsen ta noēmata tōn apistōn eis to mē augasai ton phōtismon tou euangeliou tēs doxes tou Christou hos estin eikōn tou Theou

In whom The God of this age has blinded the thoughts of the unbelieving, so that the brightness of the gospel of The Glory, The Christ who is the image of God, should not dawn on them. (2 Cor 4.4)


Contrary to popular modern belief, ‘The God of this age’, (ho Theos tou aiōnos toutou), actually pertains to Jesus Christ and NOT Satan, and provides yet another potent scriptural proof for Jesus’ deity.

Outside of 2 Cor 4.4, the only other inflections of ‘blinded’ (i.e. etyphlōsen & etyphlōken), used in the entire NT, are located in John 12, and 1 John 2, and have Jesus as the subject:

• John 12 records that Isaiah wrote about Jesus, ‘The Arm of God’, ‘His Glory’ as blinding the thoughts of the unbelievers.

• 1 John 2 records without Jesus’ light, the unbelievers are blinded.


Contextually, the epithets contained within 2 Cor 4, including Theos, relate to Jesus…not to Satan.

In the Bible, the devil is identified as "the dragon" and "the old serpent" in the Book of Revelation 12:9, 20:2 and has also been identified as being Satan; as "the prince of this world", and other translations "the ruler of this world" in the book of John 12:31, 14:30; and “the ruler of the kingdom of the air”, and other translations “the prince of the power of the air", "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience" in the letter to the Ephesians 2:2; and "the god of this world" in 2 Corinthians 4:4;and as the tempter in the Gospels.

 

[7djengo7]

εν οις ο θεος του αιωνος τουτου ετυφλωσεν τα νοηματα των απιστων εις το μη αυγασαι τον φωτισμον του ευαγγελιου της δοξης του χριστου ος εστιν εικων του θεου

en hois ho Theos tou aiōnos toutou etyphlōsen ta noēmata tōn apistōn eis to mē augasai ton phōtismon tou euangeliou tēs doxes tou Christou hos estin eikōn tou Theou

In whom The God of this age has blinded the thoughts of the unbelieving, so that the brightness of the gospel of The Glory, The Christ who is the image of God, should not dawn on them. (2 Cor 4.4)


Contrary to popular modern belief, ‘The God of this age’, (ho Theos tou aiōnos toutou), actually pertains to Jesus Christ and NOT Satan, and provides yet another potent scriptural proof for Jesus’ deity.

Outside of 2 Cor 4.4, the only other inflections of ‘blinded’ (i.e. etyphlōsen & etyphlōken), used in the entire NT, are located in John 12, and 1 John 2, and have Jesus as the subject:

• John 12 records that Isaiah wrote about Jesus, ‘The Arm of God’, ‘His Glory’ as blinding the thoughts of the unbelievers.

• 1 John 2 records without Jesus’ light, the unbelievers are blinded.


Contextually, the epithets contained within 2 Cor 4, including Theos, relate to Jesus…not to Satan.

Again, your claim that 1 John 2:11 has Jesus as the subject of the verb "blinded" is patently false.

But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.

In the clause, "because that darkness hath blinded his eyes", the subject is DARKNESS, and the verb is BLINDED. The subject is manifestly NOT Jesus, as you so asininely claim. Anybody able to read English ought to have not a second's trouble about seeing that, but, somehow, you missed it. Same story in the Greek; "ἡ σκοτία", the subject, is darkness, NOT Jesus.

Also, where, exactly, does 1 John 2 (let alone v. 11, specifically) say anything, whatsoever, about unbelievers, or that the one whom "darkness hath blinded his eyes" is an unbeliever? You just put that in there, because you want it there--which, of course, is eisegesis.

So, again: No. 1 John 2 does not record that Jesus blinds unbelievers.

Contextually, the epithets contained within 2 Cor 4, including Theos, relate to Jesus…not to Satan.

Why, exactly, do you choose to say that Paul's phrase, "the god of this world", "relate to Jesus", rather than to say that "the god of this world" relates to God the Father, or to say that it relates to God the Spirit? Why do you try to make the phrase out to be a "potent scriptural proof for Jesus' deity", rather than to make it out to be a "potent scriptural proof" for the Father's deity, or for the Spirit's deity? That is purely arbitrary on your part.

 

[Apple7]

In the Bible, the devil is identified as "the dragon" and "the old serpent" in the Book of Revelation 12:9, 20:2 and has also been identified as being Satan; as "the prince of this world", and other translations "the ruler of this world" in the book of John 12:31, 14:30; and “the ruler of the kingdom of the air”, and other translations “the prince of the power of the air", "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience" in the letter to the Ephesians 2:2; and "the god of this world" in 2 Corinthians 4:4;and as the tempter in the Gospels.

Satan has over as hundred names, titles and epithets in scripture.

But...'God' is NOT one of them.

Cult adherents, such as yourself, embrace this false interpretation of scripture, as it thus allows you to diminish Jesus' deity, as you claim that Satan has the very same title as Jesus.

More disturbing is that some supposedly Orthodox Christians get caught up in false interpretation and heap undue praised upon Satan, making him to be deity, and giving him authority which he most assuredly does NOT have.

Pity...

 

[Apple7]

Why, exactly, do you choose to say that Paul's phrase, "the god of this world", "relate to Jesus", rather than to say that "the god of this world" relates to God the Father, or to say that it relates to God the Spirit? Why do you try to make the phrase out to be a "potent scriptural proof for Jesus' deity", rather than to make it out to be a "potent scriptural proof" for the Father's deity, or for the Spirit's deity? That is purely arbitrary on your part.

You repeatedly claim to be a Trinitarian, and you must ask?

Apparently, you missed the scriptures in which Jesus states that if you have seen Him, then you have seen The Father.

You also missed the scriptures in which Jesus declares that He is The Temple which houses the Holy Spirit, in which we are to give worship to The Father.

What kind of a Trinitarian did you say that you were, again?

An ignorant one...

 

[Apple7]

Again, your claim that 1 John 2:11 has Jesus as the subject of the verb "blinded" is patently false.



In the clause, "because that darkness hath blinded his eyes", the subject is DARKNESS, and the verb is BLINDED. The subject is manifestly NOT Jesus, as you so asininely claim. Anybody able to read English ought to have not a second's trouble about seeing that, but, somehow, you missed it. Same story in the Greek; "ἡ σκοτία", the subject, is darkness, NOT Jesus.

Also, where, exactly, does 1 John 2 (let alone v. 11, specifically) say anything, whatsoever, about unbelievers, or that the one whom "darkness hath blinded his eyes" is an unbeliever? You just put that in there, because you want it there--which, of course, is eisegesis.

So, again: No. 1 John 2 does not record that Jesus blinds unbelievers.

How many times do we need to go over CONTEXT with you?


1 John 2 1 - 12

My little children, I write these things to you so that you do not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation relating to our sins, and not relating to ours only, but also relating to all the world. And by this we know that we have known Him, if we keep His commands. The one saying, I have known Him, and not keeping His commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that one. But whoever keeps His Word, truly in this one the love of God has been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him. The one claiming to rest in Him ought so to walk himself as that One walked. Brothers, I do not write a new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the Word which you have heard from the beginning. Again I write a new commandment to you which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away, and the true Light already shines. The one claiming to be in the light, and hating his brother, is in the darkness until now. The one loving his brother rests in the light, and no offense is in him. But the one hating his brother is in the darkness, and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness blinded his eyes.Little children, I write to you because you have been forgiven your sins through His name.



So....

Who is subject of this passage?

Your god, Satan.

or...

Your God, Jesus?

 

[7djengo7]

You repeatedly claim to be a Trinitarian, and you must ask?

You repeatedly claim to be a Trinitarian, and you must stonewall against the question I asked you?

Again, since you have thus far stonewalled against the question I asked you, I'll just ask it again:

What about Paul's phrase, "the god of this world", made you choose, repeatedly, to say that it is a "potent scriptural proof of Jesus' deity", instead of to say that

A. it is a "potent scriptural proof for [God the Father's] deity"

or

B. it is a "potent scriptural proof for [God the Spirit's] deity"?

Apparently, you missed the scriptures in which Jesus states that if you have seen Him, then you have seen The Father.

You also missed the scriptures in which Jesus declares that He is The Temple which houses the Holy Spirit, in which we are to give worship to The Father.

Apparently, you missed the question I asked you, since you have not answered it, and, instead, have thrown more red herrings at me.

What kind of a Trinitarian did you say that you were, again?

The kind who doesn't libel all but one of the Trinitarians who have lived in the last 2,000 years by accusing them of Satan worship because they understand that Paul refers to Satan as "the god of this world".

The kind who understands that to declare (as you declare) that God the Son causes people to sin against God the Son, is a Christ-blaspheming thing to do.

The kind who understands that, in Apple7's eyes, the highest act of worship that Apple7 can render unto God the Son is to be that one, solitary, oh-so-wise man who addresses and prays to God the Son by the phrase, "the god of this world".

 

[God's Truth]

Satan has over as hundred names, titles and epithets in scripture.

But...'God' is NOT one of them.

Cult adherents, such as yourself, embrace this false interpretation of scripture, as it thus allows you to diminish Jesus' deity, as you claim that Satan has the very same title as Jesus.

More disturbing is that some supposedly Orthodox Christians get caught up in false interpretation and heap undue praised upon Satan, making him to be deity, and giving him authority which he most assuredly does NOT have.

Pity...

You make up lies about me, just as Satan wants you to do.

We are speaking about the Bible and not the "hundreds of names" you get from studying false religions.

You are a bozo, no one is calling Satan a deity.

The Holy Bible does call the devil 'god'.

NIV
Deuteronomy 32:17 They sacrificed to false gods, which are not God-- gods they had not known, gods that recently appeared, gods your ancestors did not fear.

NET Bible
They sacrificed to demons, not God, to gods they had not known; to new gods who had recently come along, gods your ancestors had not known about.

King James Bible
They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.


The devils are called false gods and demons.

 

[Apple7]

You make up lies about me, just as Satan wants you to do.

We are speaking about the Bible and not the "hundreds of names" you get from studying false religions.

You are a bozo, no one is calling Satan a deity.

The Holy Bible does call the devil 'god'.

NIV
Deuteronomy 32:17 They sacrificed to false gods, which are not God-- gods they had not known, gods that recently appeared, gods your ancestors did not fear.

NET Bible
They sacrificed to demons, not God, to gods they had not known; to new gods who had recently come along, gods your ancestors had not known about.

King James Bible
They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.


The devils are called false gods and demons.

The Hebrew term mentioned in this passage is 'elohim', and has a wide breadth of interpretation.

The term that we are discussing is 'Theos'.

Try again...

 

[God's Truth]

The Hebrew term mentioned in this passage is 'elohim', and has a wide breadth of interpretation.

The term that we are discussing is 'Theos'.

Try again...

You don't know English well enough, let alone Hebrew and Greek.

 

[God's Truth]

The Bible is already translated to English.

We don't need to know another language to know God's Truth.

Apple7 has an imaginary dilemma.

 

[Apple7]

What about Paul's phrase, "the god of this world", made you choose, repeatedly, to say that it is a "potent scriptural proof of Jesus' deity", instead of to say that

A. it is a "potent scriptural proof for [God the Father's] deity"

or

B. it is a "potent scriptural proof for [God the Spirit's] deity"?

Scripture.

Rev 1.4 - 6

John to the seven assemblies in Asia: Grace to you, and peace, from the One who is, and who was, and who is coming, and from the seven spirits which are before His throne; even from Jesus Christ the Faithful Witness, the First-born out of the dead, and the Ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him loving us and washing us from our sins by His blood, and made us a kingdom and priests to God, even His Father. To Him is the glory and the might forever and ever. Amen.

This Triune greeting to Rev, mentions Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but specifically gives notice to The Son as being the ruler of this world.

 

[God's Truth]

Scripture.

Rev 1.4 - 6

John to the seven assemblies in Asia: Grace to you, and peace, from the One who is, and who was, and who is coming, and from the seven spirits which are before His throne; even from Jesus Christ the Faithful Witness, the First-born out of the dead, and the Ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him loving us and washing us from our sins by His blood, and made us a kingdom and priests to God, even His Father. To Him is the glory and the might forever and ever. Amen.

This Triune greeting to Rev, mentions Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but specifically gives notice to The Son as being the ruler of this world.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

7djengo7 slammed you.

 

[Apple7]

The kind who understands that, in Apple7's eyes, the highest act of worship that Apple7 can render unto God the Son is to be that one, solitary, oh-so-wise man who addresses and prays to God the Son by the phrase, "the god of this world".

You prefer to steal deity passages that were assigned to Jesus, and apply them to Satan.

What kind of a 'Christian' are you?

 

[7djengo7]

How many times do we need to go over CONTEXT with you?

How many times do you need to be reminded that you mean absolutely nothing when you parrot the word "context"? Just because you type, or utter, a word or phrase, does not entail that you must mean something by it. By "go over CONTEXT", what do you mean, if not "repeatedly type out, in all caps, the word 'CONTEXT'?

1 John 2 1 - 12

My little children, I write these things to you so that you do not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation relating to our sins, and not relating to ours only, but also relating to all the world. And by this we know that we have known Him, if we keep His commands. The one saying, I have known Him, and not keeping His commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that one. But whoever keeps His Word, truly in this one the love of God has been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him. The one claiming to rest in Him ought so to walk himself as that One walked. Brothers, I do not write a new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the Word which you have heard from the beginning. Again I write a new commandment to you which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away, and the true Light already shines. The one claiming to be in the light, and hating his brother, is in the darkness until now. The one loving his brother rests in the light, and no offense is in him. But the one hating his brother is in the darkness, and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness blinded his eyes.Little children, I write to you because you have been forgiven your sins through His name.



So....

Who is subject of this passage?

Which passage do you mean? In the passage, "because that darkness hath blinded his eyes", the subject is "darkness", and the predicate is "hath blinded his eyes". In the passage, "My little children, these things I write unto you", the subject is "I", the predicate is "I write these things unto you", the direct object is "these things", the indirect object is "you". In the passage, 1 John 2:1-12, there are many subjects, and many predicates, and so on; farbeit from me to sit here and diagram all of them for you. I've given a few of them for you, already; perhaps you could enroll in an ESL course, or hire a tutor, if you need help understanding how to distinguish subjects, predicates, and other parts of speech. I'll give you a free lesson, though, right here, right now: the subject of a passage need not even be a who. So, in the passage, 1 John 2:1-12, just tell me, if you can, which predicate you are asking about, and I will be happy to tell you the subject that goes with it.

Your god, Satan.

or...

Your God, Jesus?

Wait. Why do you get to apply the word, 'god' (lower case 'g'), to Satan, as you just now did, whereas, according to you, every Trinitarian in history (excepting yourself) is a Satan worshiper because they apply the phrase "the god (lower case 'g') of this world" to Satan? It must be, then, that you are a Satan worshiper, just as you accuse everybody else of being. No? Oh, well then, it must just be that you are a hypocrite.

(Quick, type out the word 'context' a few times, and copy/paste some Greek text! Yeah, that'll do the trick, won't it? )