ECT Our triune God

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I've never once addressed a Unitarian or Arian, etc. to demand they acquiesce to the uncreated eternal inherent divinity of the Son. Why be such a pain in the arse as if non-Unitarians are going to denounce the scriptural deity of Christ because of your nominal attempts at proof-texting?

God ceased creation in Genesis 2:1, so there wasn't any creative act relative to time some 4000 years afterward in Mary's womb.

Nobody cares about your Socinian fallacies of God performing a creative act over four millennia after He rested and desisted from creation.

The express image of a transcendent uncreated divine hypostasis wouldn't be an immanent created non-divine hypostasis. Even creatures all reproduce after their own kind, so to consider the offspring of the Creator as uncreated divinity to be exclusively created and entirely human would be ridiculous and naive.

Please go have a fiesta with all the Unitarians and enjoy the pinata candy while leaving me out of your fantasies of limiting God by Him only being capable of having a wholly human Son.

Do you think God is incapable of begetting a Son with paternal divinity? Is that impossible for the God of all creation? Must He be limited to an anthropomorphic Son? Is He too impotent as God to have a Son that is divinity?

Why do you make God's Son in your own image?

You're not going to convince anyone that doesn't already share your lack of faith and small definition of God's Logos.

We know already. You don't think God was capable of begetting His own divinity in a Son within creation. We know how small you resign God to be. You have to be as a god and make God's own Son in your own image... the express image of YOUR hypostases instead of God's.

Can't you just put me on ignore and go about your demeaning of God's Son without dragging my posts into all that?


I follow scripture, you don't, and you lie as well to try and impose on scripture your own false ideas.

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

Act 2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.


Jesus was the first man to be made in the image of God, without and within.



Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Heb 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Heb 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;


LA
 

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
I follow scripture, you don't, and you lie as well to try and impose on scripture your own false ideas.

No. That would be the lying, blaspheming Unitarians that you've single-handedly provoked me to oppose over the last month or two because of your arrogant and insolent ignorance and trolling. I've always been cordial and supportive of Socinianists in general, but you've shown that to be futile.

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

You forgot verse 2 here, where the Son poieo (that equates to bara in Hebrew from Genesis 1... "In the beginning, God created (bara/poieo). God, by His Logos, brought forth creation from noumenon as subjective phenomenon.

Uh-oh. The Son brought forth into tangible existence (poieo) the tangible aions (ages). Poieo is the verb referring to the doer and the done, with the doing presumed. The doing is the bringing into tangible existence of something intangible within, such as a painter or composer or poet bringing forth something from nothing but His own mind until it's manifested on canvas or paper, etc.

Poieo is the doing of the poietes (poet) with the result being the poiema (poem). NEVER is it about the action of penning words or notes, or about the brush strokes of the artist. It's only to emphasize the doer and the done as the finished work.

The Son is God's Logos bringing forth tangible creation from intangibility. That's because the Son is God's eternal Logos, not just some mental fiat as a plan inscribed on the heart of a human somehow created in Mary's womb over 4 millennia after God rested from creation.

You destroy anything relative to the Sabbath, whether literal or figurative. You leave man with no rest in Christ according to Hebrews 4, and you destroy the means of our partaking of God's divine nature.

You destroy the Gospel with your false concepts.

Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Ginomai may accompany an indication of a creative act, but predominantly doesn't mean that; especially when earlier in this passage He brought forth tangible creation as the literal Logos of God.

Fail. Twice.

Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

Act 2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

Kata (according) doesn't mean what Unitarians want it to mean, either. It includes down from as motion, among other things. It's directional, such as by or upon, through or towards, etc.

Fail. Again. You're an expert in eisegesis. You don't read out of the text, you read your false doctrine INTO the entire text (just like most conventional professing three-"person" Trinitarians who are unwitting Tritheists.)

Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

This is poieo, with God bringing Jesus forth from intangibility to tangibility. Procession, not creation. The internal eternal Logos became the external eternal Son.

Jesus was the first man to be made in the image of God, without and within.

God ceased creation in Genesis 2:1. No belated creation 4 millennia after God rested from creation.

Epic fail.

Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

You don't know what pronoia and proorizo mean, so you sure don't know what this passage is saying.

Heb 5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Heb 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Heb 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

This is the aorist participle passive of teleioo, to complete or finish; of reaching the goal. It was the suffering that brought Him to the maturity in His human nature, and consecrated Him by sufferings to His office and enabled Him to discharge it in His death.

This has nothing to do with Him being created, because God's Logos isn't created. This is about sufferings "making" Him in regards to accomplishing redemption for mankind.

Ridiculous fail.

1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

You make a false binary, since Jesus was both God and man. The Son hypostasized into creation, taking on humanity. Of course He was a man, but not just a human. He emptied Himself of His form as God, taking on the form of a servant.

And you forgot verse 45, where the first man Adam was made (ginomai) a living soul; the last Adam (no reference of man) was made a quickening spirit.

You jack everything up with your rancid eisegetic cherry-picking, while avoiding scriptural truth.

Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Same as above. There was authentic humanity for Theanthropos.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

LA

Same again. Being humanity enables Him to succor us.

You're at least as bad as the multi-hypostatic Trinitarians with your myopic eisegetic nonsense.

ALL passages referring to humanity for the Christ are valid without being exclusional of divinity. ALL of those alleged proof-texts should NEVER be used for your fallacious position, just like 3-"person" Trinitarians should never mention personal pronouns as an apologetic for THEIR eisegesis.

You're dishonest and biased and deluded, just like most professing Trinitarians. Shame on you for being in the other ditch.
 
Last edited:

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
No. That would be the lying, blaspheming Unitarians that you've single-handedly provoked me to oppose over the last month or two because of your arrogant and insolent ignorance and trolling. I've always been cordial and supportive of Socinianists in general, but you've shown that to be futile.



You forgot verse 2 here, where the Son poieo (that equates to bara in Hebrew from Genesis 1... "In the beginning, God created (bara/poieo). God, by His Logos, brought forth creation from noumenon as subjective phenomenon.

Uh-oh. The Son brought forth into tangible existence (poieo) the tangible aions (ages). Poieo is the verb referring to the doer and the done, with the doing presumed. The doing is the bringing into tangible existence of something intangible within, such as a painter or composer or poet bringing forth something from nothing but His own mind until it's manifested on canvas or paper, etc.

Poieo is the doing of the poietes (poet) with the result being the poiema (poem). NEVER is it about the action of penning words or notes, or about the brush strokes of the artist. It's only to emphasize the doer and the done as the finished work.

The Son is God's Logos bringing forth tangible creation from intangibility. That's because the Son is God's eternal Logos, not just some mental fiat as a plan inscribed on the heart of a human somehow created in Mary's womb over 4 millennia after God rested from creation.

You destroy anything relative to the Sabbath, whether literal or figurative. You leave man with no rest in Christ according to Hebrews 4, and you destroy the means of our partaking of God's divine nature.

You destroy the Gospel with your false concepts.



Ginomai may accompany an indication of a creative act, but predominantly doesn't mean that; especially when earlier in this passage He brought forth tangible creation as the literal Logos of God.

Fail. Twice.



Kata (according) doesn't mean what Unitarians want it to mean, either. It includes down from as motion, among other things. It's directional, such as by or upon, through or towards, etc.

Fail. Again. You're an expert in eisegesis. You don't read out of the text, you read your false doctrine INTO the entire text (just like most conventional professing three-"person" Trinitarians who are unwitting Tritheists.)



This is poieo, with God bringing Jesus forth from intangibility to tangibility. Procession, not creation. The internal eternal Logos became the external eternal Son.



God ceased creation in Genesis 2:1. No belated creation 4 millennia after God rested from creation.

Epic fail.



You don't know what pronoia and proorizo mean, so you sure don't know what this passage is saying.



This is the aorist participle passive of teleioo, to complete or finish; of reaching the goal. It was the suffering that brought Him to the maturity in His human nature, and consecrated Him by sufferings to His office and enabled Him to discharge it in His death.

This has nothing to do with Him being created, because God's Logos isn't created. This is about sufferings "making" Him in regards to accomplishing redemption for mankind.

Ridiculous fail.



You make a false binary, since Jesus was both God and man. The Son hypostasized into creation, taking on humanity. Of course He was a man, but not just a human. He emptied Himself of His form as God, taking on the form of a servant.

And you forgot verse 45, where the first man Adam was made (ginomai) a living soul; the last Adam (no reference of man) was made a quickening spirit.

You jack everything up with your rancid eisegetic cherry-picking, while avoiding scriptural truth.



Same as above. There was authentic humanity for Theanthropos.



Same again. Being humanity enables Him to succor us.

You're at least as bad as the multi-hypostatic Trinitarians with your myopic eisegetic nonsense.

ALL passages referring to humanity for the Christ are valid without being exclusional of divinity. ALL of those alleged proof-texts should NEVER be used for your fallacious position, just like 3-"person" Trinitarians should never mention personal pronouns as an apologetic for THEIR eisegesis.

You're dishonest and biased and deluded, just like most professing Trinitarians. Shame on you for being in the other ditch.

Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;


Rev 4:9 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,
Rev 4:10 The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying,
Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

Rev 5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
Rev 5:2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?
Rev 5:3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
Rev 5:4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
Rev 5:5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
Rev 5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
Rev 5:7 And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.
Rev 5:8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
Rev 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
Rev 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
Rev 5:11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;
Rev 5:12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
Rev 5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
Rev 5:14 And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.


Have you obeyed Acts 2:38?

LA
 

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
You jack everything up with your rancid eisegetic cherry-picking, while avoiding scriptural truth.



Same as above. There was authentic humanity for Theanthropos.



Same again. Being humanity enables Him to succor us.

You're at least as bad as the multi-hypostatic Trinitarians with your myopic eisegetic nonsense.

ALL passages referring to humanity for the Christ are valid without being exclusional of divinity. ALL of those alleged proof-texts should NEVER be used for your fallacious position, just like 3-"person" Trinitarians should never mention personal pronouns as an apologetic for THEIR eisegesis.

You're dishonest and biased and deluded, just like most professing Trinitarians. Shame on you for being in the other ditch.

I dont think LA is dishonest.

You have to admit (and have) that the other ditch is a might more comfortable and intelligent than the trinity one.:)

Matter of fact that ditch got me closer to the path.

You know, step in the right direction.

Give it time, meanwhile I applaud yer candor.
 

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;


Rev 4:9 And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth for ever and ever,
Rev 4:10 The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying,
Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

Rev 5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
Rev 5:2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?
Rev 5:3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.

No man in heaven nor in earth nor under the earth.

Rev 5:4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
Rev 5:5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
Rev 5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
Rev 5:7 And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.
Rev 5:8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
Rev 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
Rev 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
Rev 5:11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;
Rev 5:12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
Rev 5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
Rev 5:14 And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.

More fail. You're in the ditch opposite the Trinitarians, and you've made a foe of a previously neutral ally by your beligerant eisegetic proof-texting.

Have you obeyed Acts 2:38?

LA

Yep (not the recitation of Matthew 28). And unlike you, I know what in the onoma (name) of the Lord Jesus Christ actually means, too. Now you're like the UPCers, thinking that's an incantation.
 

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
I dont think LA is dishonest.

You have to admit (and have) that the other ditch is a might more comfortable and intelligent than the trinity one.:)

The behavior of some non-Trinitarians has turned that for me of late. Of all the people for LA to pick a bone with, I should be among the last. But he's been on a mini rampage the last few weeks. Not cool.

Matter of fact that ditch got me closer to the path.

But you're not on lock-down and see many perspectives. I see the same thing in many Unitarians as in most Trinitarians. Blind bias.

You know, step in the right direction.

Yes. :)

Give it time, meanwhile I applaud yer candor.

I've given much neutral support to Unitarians and Arians, never negatively engaging to condescend to them. When they throw me under the bus, candor is what I'll likely display. It's unnecessarily provocational and should be saved for the conceptual Tritheists who think they're Trinitarians.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
You're in the ditch opposite the Trinitarians, and you've made a foe of a previously neutral ally by your beligerant eisegetic proof-texting.

He does it pretty consistently...

So you don't need to feel picked on...

A strange communion in hostility with the MAD insulters...

Arsenios
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
I've never once addressed a Unitarian or Arian, etc. to demand they acquiesce to the uncreated eternal inherent divinity of the Son. Why be such a pain in the arse as if non-Unitarians are going to denounce the scriptural deity of Christ because of your nominal attempts at proof-texting?

God ceased creation in Genesis 2:1, so there wasn't any creative act relative to time some 4000 years afterward in Mary's womb.

Nobody cares about your Socinian fallacies of God performing a creative act over four millennia after He rested and desisted from creation.

The express image of a transcendent uncreated divine hypostasis wouldn't be an immanent created non-divine hypostasis. Even creatures all reproduce after their own kind, so to consider the offspring of the Creator as uncreated divinity to be exclusively created and entirely human would be ridiculous and naive.

Please go have a fiesta with all the Unitarians and enjoy the pinata candy while leaving me out of your fantasies of limiting God by Him only being capable of having a wholly human Son.

Do you think God is incapable of begetting a Son with paternal divinity? Is that impossible for the God of all creation? Must He be limited to an anthropomorphic Son? Is He too impotent as God to have a Son that is divinity?

Why do you make God's Son in your own image?

You're not going to convince anyone that doesn't already share your lack of faith and small definition of God's Logos.

We know already. You don't think God was capable of begetting His own divinity in a Son within creation. We know how small you resign God to be. You have to be as a god and make God's own Son in your own image... the express image of YOUR hypostases instead of God's.

Can't you just put me on ignore and go about your demeaning of God's Son without dragging my posts into all that?

awesome post, LA and the non-trin gang won't get it. it's way over their heads, even though they know now, they have to defend their mistaken positions because of pride, selfishness, fear, individuality and self-righteousness. or limited cognitive ability - :patrol:
 

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
He does it pretty consistently...

So you don't need to feel picked on...

A strange communion in hostility with the MAD insulters...

Arsenios

True. I should just ignore it all and stay focused on the truth.

It's just ridiculous to insist the Christ was only a created human in the womb of Mary when the beginning of the second chapter of Genesis clearly indicates God rested from creation.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
The behavior of some non-Trinitarians has turned that for me of late. Of all the people for LA to pick a bone with, I should be among the last. But he's been on a mini rampage the last few weeks. Not cool.



But you're not on lock-down and see many perspectives. I see the same thing in many Unitarians as in most Trinitarians. Blind bias.



Yes. :)





I've given much neutral support to Unitarians and Arians, never negatively engaging to condescend to them. When they throw me under the bus, candor is what I'll likely display. It's unnecessarily provocational and should be saved for the conceptual Tritheists who think they're Trinitarians.

is there a better label than "trinitarian" to acknowledge to other Christians that we believe the Divinity of Jesus Christ ? what would you call your perspective or "position" ?
 

keypurr

Well-known member
True. I should just ignore it all and stay focused on the truth.

It's just ridiculous to insist the Christ was only a created human in the womb of Mary when the beginning of the second chapter of Genesis clearly indicates God rested from creation.

You seem to assume a lot.

It was Jesus that came from Mary's womb, not Christ.

And both are creations.
 

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
is there a better label than "trinitarian" to acknowledge to other Christians that we believe the Divinity of Jesus Christ ? what would you call your perspective or "position" ?

I've gone through a handful of such labels, trying to simply represent something that is appropriately descriptive.

Tripartitarian Monotheism
Merismos Monotheism
TriUnitarian Monotheism
MonoHypostatic Trinitarianism
UniHypostatic Trinitarianism
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
I've gone through a handful of such labels, trying to simply represent something that is appropriately descriptive.

Tripartitarian Monotheism
Merismos Monotheism
TriUnitarian Monotheism
MonoHypostatic Trinitarianism
UniHypostatic Trinitarianism

yes, there should be, because many of us don't fall into the average "trin" label, which is one of several reasons "non-trins" are determined to refute Jesus' Divinity - :patrol:
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
I dont think LA is dishonest.

You have to admit (and have) that the other ditch is a might more comfortable and intelligent than the trinity one.:)
Matter of fact that ditch got me closer to the path.

You know, step in the right direction.

Give it time, meanwhile I applaud yer candor.

you like bein' comfortable. not thinkin' too much anymore, you been there. i see sparks of intelligence, understanding, reading ability etc., but then it gets warped somewhere in ur head. ur jus ditch hoppin' - :rapture:
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
No man in heaven nor in earth nor under the earth.



More fail. You're in the ditch opposite the Trinitarians, and you've made a foe of a previously neutral ally by your beligerant eisegetic proof-texting.

I use whole passages and chapters.

You use personal insults, and character assignations, because you have none.

Your only attempt at proof so far is that God finished creating at Genesis, but if you take a good look at Genesis then you will see that God only started at Genesis and is still in the process of bringing to pass what He started.

Jesus said He worked and His Father was still working.





Yep (not the recitation of Matthew 28). And unlike you, I know what in the onoma (name) of the Lord Jesus Christ actually means, too. Now you're like the UPCers, thinking that's an incantation.

See there you go again.

You speak as if you know what I believe, and it is apparent that you do not like anyone of any kind, yet I am none of them, that you know of.

LA
 

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
you like bein' comfortable. not thinkin' too much anymore, you been there. i see sparks of intelligence, understanding, reading ability etc., but then it gets warped somewhere in ur head. ur jus ditch hoppin' - :rapture:

Your only contribution to anything on this board has been insults.

Is that how you learned Christ is it?

LA
 
Top