Jesus is God !

[keypurr]

False claim. The Lord Jesus Christ was not JUST a man. He was PREXISTING His being MADE FLESH.

Jesus was with God (and was God) BEFORE the CREATION. Which makes sense since Jesus IS THE CREATOR.


The rest of the message was thrown in the trash with the rest of the garbage.

Jesus did not preexist, but the spirit he was anointed did. Your half truths do not hold water. Your not to smart to discard what could be truth RD.

 

[keypurr]

Prideful. And arrogant. You actually 'think' that is lovable? Is ignorant, you even misspelled lovable. Nobody thinks you are any kind of scholar. How delusional and self-interested are you? I don't care if you remember Lon. You WILL remember scripture and the Lord Jesus Christ was unable to even get you to listen, however. Arrogance can never be corrected. One day you will stand before Him (as will I) and you will indeed be corrected for this.

Lon your good at spelling and English but not in theology. Your stuck in a rut friend. I have been trying to pull you out.

 

[keypurr]

Try not to start insulting each other please. I had to hard delete some posts. Theology debates just are not worth it.

I am sorry if the truth I have offends anyone but if it gets folks to think I have to express it.
Last time you blocked me it was after I posted twenty verses of scripture. That should tell you something.

 

[keypurr]

Arrogance and defiance. You don't even know what church I belong to, just use it as a dismissal point. Its sloppy and meaningless.


I close my eyes to you. I'm a LOT smarter and better read in scriptures. I can prove it, this isn't arrogance showing. You KNOW I can prove it too! Why then would you posture absurdly? Arrogance and pride is such a sin! You just aren't seen as anybody's guru on TOL, so why do you posture thinking so??? Nobody comes to you and asks "what does this mean, Keypurr?" You are delusional about yourself. Don't believe me? Pride, at this very minute, is trying to gloss over my statements. You even said, just above, that You don't care (even though my education and years of study are far and above your own). You are so arrogant (and ignorant) that you then proceeded to post as if you are a pip on anybody's radar for spiritual matters. :nono: Not at all. You are here as a place-holder for the opportunity of teaching correct theology and showing how bad it is when you don't know what you are talking about. You are simply a commercial we use to point people to correct theology. Your disdain, being .01% of anything even noticeable in every Christian's life. We just don't think much of you. You go ahead and KEEP taking your eyes off of Jesus and make this about me and you, however. You are exactly this arrogant.

You are making a huge assumption. Careful lest it is YOU that He says "Depart, I never knew you." James and John 'presumed' they'd sit on His right and left hand. Such was arrogance, and so is your's.

Says every uneducated JW where they are so ignorant, they don't even know what goes on in seminary. They just make soundbytes against us that other ignorant uneducated JW's who have their dismal pride stroked, believe. : Plain:

Ironic, coming from you. I know my bible incredibly better than you. You just aren't as bright as you think you are AND are too arrogant in your dismal learning to realize you really don't have the skills ESPECIALLY when you've arrogantly separated, thinking you had nothing else to learn from the rest of us. God is really going to judge you for that. I don't know if I can convince you of that, but we all should have a little tremble in our reverence to God and your's is sorely-lacking pride. Your whole post is posturing defending yourself and totally getting in the way of God and His Scriptures all about your 'feigned' superiority that you've literally no right to, you NEVER earned it! God judge between you and I: I've had the years and hard study. You? Not at all. God judge! You are arrogant and wrong and WAY too arrogant that you will not be shown wrong, though I've carefully shown, from scripture, honoring God, that you are wrong. Get over yourself and love the Lord Jesus of your God, not just the God of Him. Your arrogance and shortsighted love and allegiance are yet showing over these past ten years of your wasted time on TOL. YOUR arrogance (in genuine ignorance) is showing.

If your so smart tell me about the Miltha and where did he come from? Show me that there is a three piece God in scripture. You choose to follow the rules of the RCC instead of the most high.

 

[keypurr]

He is rationalizing instead of being informed by scripture: "The Word 'became' flesh and 'made' His dwelling among us." John 1:14

In theology, do we want scripture, or some old guy's thoughts he cobbled together and think are gold? Those who love God will ONLY be persuaded by God, not man's fanciful thoughts or delusions that he is right and scriptures (and the rest of us) are wrong.

Jesus was BORN, that makes him a man, every man is a creature not God.
Even the EXPRESS IMAGE is a creature/creation for ALL IMAGES are creations.
Col 1:15 tells you the son is a creature, not God.
And then there is John 17:3..
I do not see most as idiots, just misguided, as I WAS. How you think of me matters not because I love you all anyway. But your not in the light and I feel maybe I can get some to question their faith which will drive them to learn more.

Human rationalizing. Do you think your every thought is gold? Do you elevate your 'high and mightier than all the rest around me' thoughts above God? You are "MAKING THIS UP!" Do you understand that? You think you are smarter than I am for some very strange odd reason. Why? Have you ever shown yourself apt? I've never seen it. Don't we get to choose our own professors and reject the ones found wanting? Okay, you can reject me. Fine. I DO have the credentials, but you are dismissing EVERY scholar, Keypurr! How arrogant do you have to be?

This is a construct YOU made up. YOU did. Why did you? What in all of creation demands that of you? Moreover, I'm the one who pointed this out to you AND the scripture says "EXACT" image. Do you get that? Do you 'understand' what "exact" means, Keypurr? If you want to teach, you are going to 1) NEED to learn the whole lesson of any particular lesson BEFORE running off and trying to teach it to others and 2) are going to have to pay attention when some other student raises his/her hand and says "er, I think your answer is wrong." How arrogant and willful were you in school, Keypurr? I did actually raise my hand and correct the teacher a few times, but I didn't do it as arrogantly as you do all over the place on TOL. I was humble and asked a question or said "I think I have the right answer..." You? :nono: I don't know if you ever read the verse that says "God opposes the proud but give grace to the humble" or that "the meek shall inherit the earth." You just aren't that guy.

No, you are drawing inference rather than simply reading the text. It does not say that. In your 'speculation' you are trampling all over John 1:14, Philippians 2:6-11. Why do you WANT a theology that tramples God in the first place, Keypurr? What can it possibly do for you, to have a 'god' in your own making rather than the God who is? I don't want God in my image. I want to be in His.

I worry that he CANNOT seem to grasp any scriptures like this, given as scriptures. He just 'reasons' and 'rationalizes' rather than simply adopting scripture truths and being taught to think from them. I can give a simple scripture, like John 1:1 that is so clear, yet 'rationalizations' of men will dismiss the clarity in favor of something they reasoned from their head, instead of took from scriptures in their clarity

Your theology is deductive. Do you know that that means? (It means it is an idea taken from, rather than being implicit, it is time to look at your own head and see how your brain works incorrectly in coming to assumptions you see incorrectly as truths, rather than implicit truths). Generally there is a reason for wanting to hold to truths that really aren't truths. What reason do you have, that you would not look to God, but instead your own rationalizations? What is the draw? Proverbs 3:5-7
Trust in the Lord with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;
6 in all your ways submit to him,
and he will make your paths straight.[a]
7 Do not be wise in your own eyes;
fear the Lord and shun evil.

"Idiots?" Where did that come from? And you see a good many as "idiots" by that admission? How 'intelligent' do you believe you are? Did well in school? Taught your teachers? Do you believe most read "Keypurr" on TOL and think "Brilliant!"? I'm not sure I can ever approach your delusions to bust any of them up. It just never happens, but you are wrong. A lot.


I don't really believe you do. I've never gotten that from you. In fact, just above, I've addressed your 'self-love' arrogance which seems to always be an issue in my discussions with you.


You've been here over ten years. Every happen? Is there perhaps a delusion? Do you, in fact, have a realistic view of yourself and your prowess?

Lon I feel quite comfortable with myself. I feel blessed with an understanding of my creator and his son. I believe in the scriptures and my ability to see what they really say. You need the guidance of tradition. Some day, hopefully you will see truth.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lonster,

2 Samuel 7:14 (KJV): I will be his father, and he shall be my son.

Such is NOT a statement of creation. Position? Sure.

It was not present position as the Trinitarian needs to claim. I read this passage and context as saying that David was in the future to have a son or descendant who would sit upon the Throne of David. As well as being a descendant of David, the child born would also be The Son of God, that is, the One and Only God, Yahweh, God the Father and the child when grown and developed would be like God his father in character. The historical record of the anticipated conception and birth, whereby God the Father became the father and a descendant of David, Mary, became the mother of this child is revealed in Matthew 1:20-21 and Luke 1:34-35.

I know you do, which is the problem here: "The Word became flesh and dwelled among us." It is a poor and contrived comparison for the sole purpose of attempted undergirding of one's derived philosophy. Why not listen to God instead of making it up?

Despite your claim that it reads simply, Trinitarians have conflicting assessments as to what John 1:14 is actually saying. Most seem to suggest that The Second Person of the Trinity, God the Son entered into a state of two natures, one human and the other Divine. John 1:14 states that The Word became flesh, not God and flesh, or that flesh was added onto God the Son, or the Word. I would like to hear what you believe on this. Was Jesus human (flesh) or was he God, or both when he was born? Do you have a reason why "the Second person of the Trinity" or "God the Son" is called "The Word" in John 1:1?

Hebrews 7:3 3 Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.
Read it. Be taught by it, THEN (and only then) make your observations. Your observations trample all over the written word of God.

Is Melchizedek still alive? It says that he was made like the Son of God. Jesus was (to be) a priest after the order of Melchizedek. No mention to say that Jesus is Melchizedek.

Likewise, the tetragrammaton YHWH given to Moses, is defined by what immediately follows in the text. YHWH meant that He was all Moses needed (I will be) and the only true G-d that Pharaoh needed to recognize (I Am (the only One).

I read Yahweh as the future tense, not the future and the present. My Hebrew scholars, Trinitarian and non-Trinitarian, tell me that the present tense is different and is found in the same context in Exodus 3:6 “I am the God of Abraham”. I will hold to “I will be” as backed up by Exodus 3:12 and Exodus 6:1-8 as explained in my “The Yahweh Name” thread and supported by Tyndale and the RV and RSV margins and other scholars, Trinitarian and non-Trinitarian. I suggest that you are the one making up a story here.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Lonster]

Lon your good at spelling and English but not in theology. Your stuck in a rut friend. I have been trying to pull you out.

Nope. You don't know anything else about God and this is your one-trick pony that completely misses the ball. You don't know languages, certainly don't know creed histories or the assembly involved in making them and are ignorant of what Trinitarians actually believe as well. I have a Master's degree and years beyond your couple of years going over Watchtower material in your house. This is all about you and your pride again. There is no 'love the God of Jesus Christ' let alone 'Love the God of "My" Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It all falls very flat and very far from Him. You will stand before Him for this. You just don't have room for this kind of arrogance and pride. Humble yourself a LOT more than you currently are. Nobody on TOL thinks of you as any kind of scholar nor do they value your 'pulling them out' but rather see it as avoiding a poor theology of a hole.

 

[Lonster]

If your so smart tell me about the Miltha

"You're..." Miltha is the Aramaic word for "word." Do I have to be smart or simply well-read? You aren't doing anything special, and certainly aren't teaching anybody anything. If you were a good teacher, I'd have converted 10 years ago if it were true. Plain and simply, it is ALL derivative rationalizations from your head. It makes all your ideas, human, not from God. I don't WANT to follow Keypurr, especially when I'm better at Hebrew, Greek, English, and would be better if I wanted Aramaic in my arsenal as well. Why? Because I'm a good student, not arrogant. I only 'seem' arrogant to those without the wherewithall (people like you who feign and pretend and don't have an ounce of any of this).

and where did he come from?

He wasn't created. You Unitarians make this all up in your odd little heads. You get so far removed from plain scripture with your 'peshitta' and ' 'Miltha' Aramaic that YOU cannot even read, that you cloud perfectly clear scriptures with fancy dances you cannot even do. It is like watching a guy who danced at a barn dance once, trying to teach someone who can walz how to dance. . I 'can' read Hebrew and Greek. You can't. Nor Aramaic. Such is blow-hard posturing. You simply do NOT have the credentials, Keypurr. You have NO room for the arrogance you shoulder. You are NOT above most, in fact. Quite the opposite and delusional about it.

Show me that there is a three piece God in scripture. You choose to follow the rules of the RCC instead of the most high.

Of course there is. I have a thread about 300 pages on this. Did you ever bother to read scripture presentations there? I think not. You don't care and it shows. ALL you care about is your ideas. That isn't theology, Keypurr, it is bias and unwillingness to learn a thing. I simply and only want you to worship God the way HE prescribes. Unitarians and Arians don't and reject the Lord Jesus Christ. You can't even say "I love the God of 'my' Lord and Savior whom I also love." Nope, you separate them out and love God while diminishing the Lord Jesus Christ EVERY TIME you argue in these threads. Your statement leaves love of the Savior out. Did you know that you do that? Did you know it is a huge offense to every Triune believer and every modalist? Did you further know it is even an affront to some Arians/Unitarians? Do you care?

 

[Lonster]

Lon I feel quite comfortable with myself.

I know you do. You shouldn't because you actually don't have the where-with-all, but yeah, I knew that about you. Old people who can no longer change often do. It isn't by any necessity a 'good' thing that you feel comfortable.

I feel blessed with an understanding of my creator and his son.

I feel more so because I've studied, longer, harder, with incredibly prepared professors, and have you beat, 99.9 to 0.01 with checking my theology. You don't. Moreover, it isn't just about the numbers, but absolutely the numbers don't lie --> One thousand men in a room studying and trying to love God all come up with an conclusion and check each other for their work. One in that room of a thousand, first didn't graduate high school, second has no grasp of languages then 3) disagrees with the thousand YET he 'feels quite comfortable with himself' and 'feels blessed' with his very limited grasp that has none of the hard work and effort put in compared to most of the 1000.

I believe in the scriptures and my ability to see what they really say.

I don't. In fact it is highly unlikely given your understanding of English (limited). It simply means the 'best' you can do is delude yourself.

You need the guidance of tradition.

You do too. Guidance is the parameter for knowing God. When Jesus was discussing this with His disciples, He said to listen to the Pharisees because they were right, but not to do what they did, because they didn't practice what they preached. When He confronted the Samaritan, He said "Salvation belongs to the Jews." So, you arrogantly went against all of Christendom much like those Samaritans, in arrogance, went against Jerusalem. "IF" you knew scriptures like you should, You'd have been VERY careful not to side with the Samaritans, but you are not that educated and don't pay that much attention to scripture's lessons. Then? Have the audacity to say you are better at theology than I am. Er, print is here for all to see whether you grasp that you've been bested, or not. Self-delusion is purposeful.

Some day, hopefully you will see truth.

Er, we will both stand before the Lord Jesus Christ and be judged for not only orthodoxy (right grasp) of scripture, but who we led astray. Let me say that again: "WE" will stand before Him. At the VERY least, I'm studied AND have 1000 that I've hammered out my theology with in hard study. Let's discuss any of it instead of you always posturing. John 1:1 is VERY clear that the Word was 'with God' AND 'was God.'
John 20:28 is VERY clear that Thomas called the Lord Jesus Christ his "Lord" and his "God." Scripture says it. Everything 'you' say is 'you' saying it and never comes from scripture. You've NEVER (and never will) show that "image is not God." Not when THE SCRIPTURE FROM GOD says 'exact.' Scripture says it. Not me. Every contradiction YOU give is just YOU saying it, Keypurr. Nobody gets to stand before the Lord Jesus Christ at Judgement day and say "I wrote that part myself." Nobody.

 

[Lonster]

Greetings again Lonster,

2 Samuel 7:14 (KJV): I will be his father, and he shall be my son.

It was not present position as the Trinitarian needs to claim. I read this passage and context as saying that David was in the future to have a son or descendant who would sit upon the Throne of David. As well as being a descendant of David, the child born would also be The Son of God, that is, the One and Only God, Yahweh, God the Father and the child when grown and developed would be like God his father in character. The historical record of the anticipated conception and birth, whereby God the Father became the father and a descendant of David, Mary, became the mother of this child is revealed in Matthew 1:20-21 and Luke 1:34-35.

Yet He had glory 'with His Father' before the earth was formed (Colossians 1:15-20 'by Him' incidentally). Does your narrative account for all of scripture revelation? If not, it isn't going to be accurate, just a postulated idea that scripture can show wrong.

Despite your claim that it reads simply, Trinitarians have conflicting assessments as to what John 1:14 is actually saying.

What do you mean? Link please.

Most seem to suggest that The Second Person of the Trinity, God the Son entered into a state of two natures, one human and the other Divine.

Most of whom? The ones who 'conflict?' They don't, if you follow this.

John 1:14 states that The Word became flesh, not God and flesh, or that flesh was added onto God the Son, or the Word. I would like to hear what you believe on this. Was Jesus human (flesh) or was he God, or both when he was born? Do you have a reason why "the Second person of the Trinity" or "God the Son" is called "The Word" in John 1:1?

Scripture states "was with and was God." The two ideas MUST be reconciled Biblically in such a way that no violence to any revelation occurs and with due reverence to God. The scripture says then, "the Word became flesh." When did that happen? When Jesus entered the world. There is no time before or since that God, who was both 'the word' and 'was with the Word' at the same time, 'became flesh' other than the incarnation. Further, it is grammatically irresponsible to not see the Gospel of John, in entirety, about the Lord Jesus Christ. It means, necessarily, that the first words from the page are about Him. John also calls Jesus the Word of God in both the epistles and in Revelation. Again, it is academically and spiritually irresponsible to make up anything you 'prefer' if it does both academic and spiritual damage (and it does). It is crystal clear that the "Word" is the Lord, my Lord, Jesus Christ.

Is Melchizedek still alive? It says that he was made like the Son of God. Jesus was (to be) a priest after the order of Melchizedek. No mention to say that Jesus is Melchizedek.

'One like him' in comparison. The analogy given is that in very specific manners, the two are alike AND those characters are "priesthood forever" "no beginning or end" and Hebrew 7:16 specifically says compared 'in the power of an indestructible life."

I read Yahweh as the future tense, not the future and the present. My Hebrew scholars, Trinitarian and non-Trinitarian, tell me that the present tense is different and is found in the same context in Exodus 3:6 “I am the God of Abraham”. I will hold to “I will be” as backed up by Exodus 3:12 and Exodus 6:1-8 as explained in my “The Yahweh Name” thread and supported by Tyndale and the RV and RSV margins and other scholars, Trinitarian and non-Trinitarian. I suggest that you are the one making up a story here.

Trevor, you need to 1) reread what I wrote and 2) not be so defensive you make false accusation simply, and only, to barricade Unitarian thought. You literally 'made up a story' about me making up a story. ASK any of your professors to read what I wrote. What Bible seminary are you attending? Which of 'your Hebrew' teachers are you talking about? I need to call your school and talk with your professors directly.

Kind regards
Trevor

No, that wasn't kind at all, Trevor. If you are going to say it, you should actually mean it. You were being presumptuous and arrogant just now. That isn't kind at all and with very little regard and you know it.

 

[Trump Gurl]

Trump girl your only interested in your silly church which I see as evil.

No Christian would say something that colossally ignorant. What is wrong with you.

Ladies and Gentleman, do you see that response? Here is what I posted. Consider this post, and consider that disgusting response:


I have said a billion times, Jesus is fully man, and he is also fully God. . . . // . . . .The union of Christ's humanity and divinity in one hypostasis, or one individual existence, is called the Hypostatic union (from the Greek: ὑπόστασις hypóstasis, "sediment, foundation, substance, subsistence").

Jesus Christ is both God and man. He is both perfectly divine and perfectly human.

Jesus Christ is . . . the Only Begotten Son of God . . . God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made.

I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.​

​

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end.​

​

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.​

​

I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.​

 

[Trump Gurl]

Lon I feel quite comfortable with myself

So does Lucifer.

 

[Nanja]

Jesus is God because ?

Jesus is God because ?

Jesus is God because , because God shall Judge the World by that Man Christ Jesus, in His Person Acts 17:31

31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

That Man is His Son the God Man Mediator 1 Tim 2:5

5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

As Mediator He is Man, as God He is the Eternal Word Jn 1:1

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Now, scripture states that God is said to be the Judge Himself, apart from any other Ps 50:6

6 And the heavens shall declare his righteousness: for God is judge himself. Selah.

Then it must be that the Man ordained of God in Acts 17:31, must also be God, or scripture here in Ps 50:6 must not be accurate in its Testimony, and scripture is very clear that God is to Judge the World Righteously Rom 3:5-6

5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)

6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?

Look here at Ps 96:13

Before the Lord: for he cometh, for he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth.

The Lord here is Jehovah who is to be coming to Judge the Earth !

Is it not therefore the Same Lord Here in Jude 1:14-15

14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

Now who is the Lord here that cometh with a multitude of His Saints to Judge ? Its Christ !

So again, the Man in Acts 17:31, is the God Man, the Jehovah Man Christ !

Amen Brother, all His Elect Saints shall Bless the Name of the Jehovah Man Christ Forever !

 

[Trump Gurl]

the Jehovah Man Christ Forever !

"The Jehovah Man Christ"? What ?

 

[Sherman]

I am sorry if the truth I have offends anyone but if it gets folks to think I have to express it.
Last time you blocked me it was after I posted twenty verses of scripture. That should tell you something.

There is a specific kind of spiritual food I seek - I do not desire food that is covered in dung - Denial of the Deity of Christ. You try to feed me dung. That is why I blocked you - you misuse Scripture to your own destruction.

You may consider me savage - I take my scripture in big chunks - uncut and uncooked. I took Numbers in one big piece the other day.

 

[Sherman]

IOW, you turn your scriptures into confetti - little chopped up bits and then mix it up with your own interpretation. Uuuug!

I swallow mine raw in big pieces.

 

[Nanja]

Is Jesus claiming to be God here ?

Is Jesus claiming to be God here ?

Rev 21:6-7

6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

Now who is saying they are Alpha and Omega here Rev 1:11

Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.

Amen Brother, yes Jesus Christ is Claiming to be God here.

For the Title of Alpha and Omega belongs to Jehovah God.

Isa. 41:4 Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he.

Also, Jesus is the beginning and the end Rev. 21:6-7 which Title belongs to Jehovah:

 

[Trump Gurl]

Most unitarians do not deny the diety of Christ, they deny his is the 'one deity', or better put, the 'one God'. I do not fully know what keypurr believes, but know him well enough to know he doesn't deny Jesus is referred to as a G-god, even as I, a unitarian, do not deny Jesus is G-god in some sense.

Gobbledygook.

 

[Lonster]

I am sorry if the truth I have offends anyone

It does, as any man-made fabrication against scriptural, grammatical clarity, does. Your truth is man-made immature rationalization, not the explicit word. You don't understand something very important about us: our theology isn't as deductive, thus isn't as complex as Arian/Unitarian models of God. You guys have an entire convolution of ideology that 'explains' scripture by commentary, thus a faith based twice-removed from scriptures. There are all kinds of missing gaps in your constructs as well as veneers that ruin conveyances in scripture. You call that "better at theology." We call that "better at making things up that 'seem' on a less educated, less astute level, to 'make sense.'" Just as an arrogant child would try and correct his algebra teacher with a basic math construct: It may make sense to them, but it is completely wrong. This is how bad your childish "I'm better than all of you at theology" actually is. It is dismal and childish arrogance in ignorance. I don't know if you get that: You, keypurr, with your lacking education and academic shortcoming, are completely arrogant and blind in all your ignorance. You'll never grasp how dismal your education actually is, because prideful delusion (a strong one) has made you so arrogant, that your ignorance is untouchable. Even if I had ten MORE years, I cannot break through someone's facade that is so cemented, then metal covered and welded. There is a very strong delusion in the Watchtower and Unitarian shortsighted theology that only God very God can break through. I can't. It is as clear as "Jesus, You are the Lord of Me, and God of Me!" John 20:28

Never-the-less, non-truth is offensive to those who can actually grasp grammatical structures correctly. JW's have it exactly backwards: It isn't offensive because it is true, it is offensive because it is childish and wrong, so much so that even an unbeliever can see it, in grammatical constructs. They think we are all caught in a fantasy, so bin us all together, but they do notice particularly those who have no academic tools for grammatical understanding. Dedicated Reformed, Evangelical, and Catholic scholars are seen 'as scholars' the the community at large. None of this will make a dent in your veneer, I'm sure, but for any 'capable' of learning, it will certainly give pause and a moment to reflect on proper knowledge, ignorance, and the difference.

but if it gets folks to think I have to express it.

Sorry, that is a delusion. The ONLY thing it does, is either exasperates, or in grace, gives yet another opportunity to extend scripture knowledge to those who aren't as astute at reading comprehension.

Last time you blocked me it was after I posted twenty verses of scripture. That should tell you something.

It isn't derivative, Keypurr. You make all kinds of wrong assumptions and then stick with that made-up story (the EXACT same reason nobody trusts or believes your 'ideas' about the Bible). If I remember, it was because you were not civil to a mod, NOT because of scripture. I believe Squeeky received an infraction for scripture spamming, but not because of the scriptures themselves, but because he was asked not to, and to engage a thread with substance rather than repeated spamming, and he would have been the closest I ever remember of anyone receiving an infraction for posting scripture. You make stuff up in your head, then believe what you made-up is true, just the same as you do with the scriptures as well. EVERY idea someone gives regarding scripture is offered up to the rest of those reading their bibles to scrutinize. The difference between you and I is that I love the scrutiny! It allows me to seek the mind of God in another and get their input. I admit I find it a chore and lose joy often, when talking with ignorant arrogant Unitarians, though. You folks simply have a LOT of disdain, very little love, and it always shows. Conversely, I disagree with RD, JR, and Trump girl, but genuinely enjoy the disagreement specifically because I 1) see care and concern for me (genuinely, not just feigned in a passing "kind regards" or "love" from most Unitarians. It reads as 'false' so false teacher sticks specifically because we wonder if you are even capable, let alone sincere with such. You guys(and gals) attack attack, then attack and afterward tape an insincere 'kind regards' sticker on the closing comments. Oddly, as given in thread, there is then a two-faced accusation that the other person is 'mean' or 'hateful' when they respond. Maybe Unitarians truly are oblivious and obtuse to their 'bull in a china shop' damage and destruction, but when a china shop owner (one who preserves God's word) calls on you, the bull, to get your hooves and horns out of the shop, it shouldn't be seen as 'hateful' or 'mean.' That's an inept (means immaturely wrong) assessment. No, Keypurr. You were not 'blocked' for posting scripture verses. You really have juvenile thoughts that need a lot of correcting, both in theology, and in the rest of life in the real world. You don't grasp half of what you believe you do. Mean? No, you are just going to be somebody, for the rest of your life, that actually needs others to tell you what is true, and what is incorrect and made-up incorrectly, in your head. You are wrong. You don't have to believe me. You do have to suffer the consequences, regardless if you put the wrong blame in the wrong places, even with and against the Lord Jesus Christ. Even if none of us can correct you, that day is assured and it is the only comfort I have in talking with the obtus-ion of you.

 

[Lonster]

Most unitarians do not deny the diety of Christ, they deny his is the 'one deity', or better put, the 'one God'. I do not fully know what keypurr believes, but know him well enough to know he doesn't deny Jesus is referred to as a G-god, even as I, a unitarian, do not deny Jesus is G-god in some sense.

Gobbledygook.

More specifically and destructively, it is polytheism against God:
Exodus 20:3 "Hear O Israel, the Lord, Our God is One." Deuteronomy 6:4
Isaiah 45:5 "I alone am the Lord, beside me, there is no other god!"
Hosea 13:4 Isaiah 43: 11 "I am the Lord, there is no other Savior. You shall know of no other God!"

Most unitarians do not deny the diety of Christ, they deny his is the 'one deity', or better put, the 'one God'. I do not fully know what keypurr believes, but know him well enough to know he doesn't deny Jesus is referred to as a G-god, even as I, a unitarian, do not deny Jesus is G-god in some sense.

Do you understand the incredible damage you do to scriptures, in the eyes of Trinitarians? Do you realize how offensive trampling, or seeming at the very least, to trample scripture is to one who holds scriptures as the accurate and grammatically true, conveyance of God to man? One Unitarian told me John 20:28 was Thomas saying "Oh my G--!" That's blasphemy, taking the Lord's name in vain. A good many of you literally believe that Thomas uttered God's name in vain which is 1) absurd because "Oh my G!" is a modern usage of taking His name in vain (invoking His name for a common thus profaned ordinary usage) and 2) that it is accusing Thomas of a grievous sin, all so a Unitarian can deny the absolutely clarity of John 20:28.

It means, literally, that instead of 'believing' a scripture, it is profaned for the SOLE and ONLY purpose of shoring up an man-held construct that .01% of anyone that reads a bible, believes.

That's incredible to me. Can a Unitarian NOT see that is exactly what they are doing (denial or not, that is exactly, grammatically, structurally, the essence of the argument)? Who would want to hold to a man-held idea, SO STRONGLY, they are willing to malign God very God to do so? How does that even make any kind of holy righteous sense, in a Unitarian's mind?

Do Unitarians not care about maligning God and/or Thomas' character? Do they not really care about Holiness and righteousness and standing before a Holy God? How does this even make any kind of 'acceptable' sense in a Unitarians mind? Do Unitarians not see that they become an unholy affront to Trinitarians at that point?

Keypurr doesn't. He has gone on record defending that one who was 1) dirty and 2) actually did say these words he accuses Thomas of ( a blasphemous double-whammy as far as I assess), that Mr. Dirty and blaspheming God Mouth, somehow knows God 'better' than the rest of us :doh:! This Unitarian on here has said a good many foul things in one of my threads. He was rightly banned for both of them YET other Unitarians hold 'dirty blasphemy mouth' in esteem on TOL. That, frankly, shocks me. Mr. dirty mouth represents their ideal of God????

Holiness only goes as far as the most holy example of the teachers of one's flock. If it ain't there, it cannot be found. "Without holiness, no one shall see God." My holiness rests on the One who is Holy, but I dare not lean so heavily on grace, that it excuses, rather than washes away, my unrighteousness. I am ashamed at my unholiness, nor would want to be seen as 'godly' after I knew myself to have ruined a holy testimony of my Lord Jesus Christ, If I'd cast such unholy shadow, I'd leave TOL in shame. I've never said such filthy things, nor has "Oh my G--! passed my lips. How could I ever try to lead another to the Lord Jesus Christ if I'd done that? I'm not talking about my holiness, but humbly representing His,t ever falling into the grace and identity of my Only Holy Savior Isaiah 43:11. Does any of this make sense to you? Do you grasp any of what I'm saying here? -Lon