Runningman
Well-known member
Question, is the Word the True Light who gives light to all men entering the world?The Word was walking among the people publicly for 3 years. Some people cannot comprehend the simplest things in scripture though
Question, is the Word the True Light who gives light to all men entering the world?The Word was walking among the people publicly for 3 years. Some people cannot comprehend the simplest things in scripture though
I’m on record quoting a well-known Trinitarian that denied the Word is actually a person.ruinningman just assented to the shared identity of the Word and Christ by quoting Meyer's commentary and thereby incorporating Meyer's view.
see Meyer on John 1
I'm sorry. I just saw one where you refer to Meyer, whose commentary points to the deity of Christ.I’m on record quoting a well-known Trinitarian that denied the Word is actually a person.
He was correct that the Word doesn’t exist in the OT except in Hebrew poetry as personification. They also personified wisdom in Proverbs 8 & 9.I'm sorry. I just saw one where you refer to Meyer, whose commentary points to the deity of Christ.
He was correct that the Word doesn’t exist in the OT except in Hebrew poetry as personification. They also personified wisdom in Proverbs 8 & 9.
So the precedent before John 1:1 is that the word isn’t a person or a God. None of the others apostles mentioned what John did. It’s not a doctrine. You have a heavy lean toward being a Logos Theologian. It’s like you pick one idea and build the entire Bible around it. The Bible contradicts your Logos Theology.
I don't have to click links from those who embrace a false god.
I don't have to click links from those who embrace a false god.
I think you just get tried of people who show that your bible quotes and references to commentaries all speak against your view. But hopefully you are still willing to learn from the decent Christians who are pointing out your errors.I don't have to click links from those who embrace a false god.
I'm just copying something Fred said from a different thread. He was having a Bible discussion with a Oneness theologian and when the questions got too tough he said "I don't have to answer questions from those who embrace a false god." Don't read too far into it. Maybe you should be talking to Fred about not being a coward.I think you just get tried of people who show that your bible quotes and references to commentaries all speak against your view. But hopefully you are still willing to learn from the decent Christians who are pointing out your errors.
I'm just copying something Fred said from a different thread. He was having a Bible discussion with a Oneness theologian and when the questions got too tough he said "I don't have to answer questions from those who embrace a false god."
I don't know why you would direct link to the section where I trash your talking points about Jesus being prayed to, but thanks for the boost in visibility to your false doctrines being dealt with.No, it didn't "get too tough."
If he wants to reject what a plural pronoun means (and he has done so many times) I am under no obligation to spend time discussing anything else.
The same holds true for you when you have never been able to refute the evidence that Jesus is being prayed to in Acts 1:24-25.
https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/the-bible-does-not-teach-to-pray-to-jesus.2040/#post-111279
Since you keep running away, I am under no obligation to answer any question from you as well.
I don't know why you would direct link to the section where I trash your talking points about Jesus being prayed to,
but thanks
Never forget I hold the scriptural high ground with Matthew 6:6,9 where the only commandment about prayer came directly from the Lord's mouth and he identified explicitly to pray to the Father. All other points are moot. I will never bow to your false teachings that Jesus never taught about. That's the thing about us Christians. You'll learn we only obey Jesus.You dodged the evidence I gave.
No problem.
It was easy to refute your false teaching.
Thanks
Never forget
Are you serious ?You're like a lawyer in a court room trying to prove a point and you forgot all of your evidence. You're essentially saying, "There is a real person named the Word! I have witnesses" and then you can't provide the evidence or testimony of it.
Again, I asked you where the Word is saying or doing anything in Scripture. I already know. You don't have anything.
Sorry actual examples of prayer to Jesus especialy those invoking him to do things only possible of God are not mootNever forget I hold the scriptural high ground with Matthew 6:6,9 where the only commandment about prayer came directly from the Lord's mouth and he identified explicitly to pray to the Father. All other points are moot. I will never bow to your false teachings that Jesus never taught about. That's the thing about us Christians. You'll learn we only obey Jesus.
Such as?Sorry actual examples of prayer to Jesus especialy those invoking him to do things only possible of God are not moot
It says the Word "was" God in the past tense. Fail. God isn't a past tense God. You're missing the point of this chapter. It's already been explained and you didn't believe.Are you serious ?
John 1:1–3 (NASB 2020) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.
Your theology of the Word contradicts John 1:1 where the Word was God and in Colossians 1:15 the Word isn't God, but rather the image of the invisible God. Therefore he isn't God. 1 Timothy 1:17 says the only God is invisible.Colossians 1:15–17 (NIV) — 15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
There is nothing about the nature of God in this verse. The word form means the outward appearance. You also should not exclude verse 5.Philippians 2:6–7 (NIV) — 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; 7 rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
Are you now confessing the word was GodIt says the Word "was" God in the past tense. Fail. God isn't a past tense God. You're missing the point of this chapter. It's already been explained and you didn't believe.
You fail to understand how Theos is used. It can serve as a noun denoting a proper name or as an adjective identifying a class of being -i.e. deityYour theology of the Word contradicts John 1:1 where the Word was God and in Colossians 1:15 the Word isn't God, but rather the image of the invisible God. Therefore he isn't God. 1 Timothy 1:17 says the only God is invisible.
There is nothing about the nature of God in this verse. The word form means the outward appearance. You also should not exclude verse 5.
Christ is the eternal lifeHere's what you need to know. When you believe it you'll have it.
John 17
3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
You already know but receiving the Spirit of the dead is one exampleSuch as?