101G
Active Member
you haven't answer any question 101G has put forth. so last time "WHO SITS ON THE ONE THRONE" the Father or the Son.So you have lost pretty much every hole to hide in. Next fallacy please.
1`01G
you haven't answer any question 101G has put forth. so last time "WHO SITS ON THE ONE THRONE" the Father or the Son.So you have lost pretty much every hole to hide in. Next fallacy please.
the final time "who sits on the throne in Revelation 4 and chapter 5 is it the Father, yes or NO?"Then you admit that those who sit on the throne with Jesus are Lord God Almighty. That's heresy, if not blasphemy.
LoL I haven't answered your questions? That's a cop-out Mr. 101 Games.you haven't answer any question 101G has put forth. so last time "WHO SITS ON THE ONE THRONE" the Father or the Son.
1`01G
There are multiple thrones. Already showed you where Jesus said "my throne" and "the Father's throne." Where the elders worshipped was before the throne of God, not the throne of the Lamb. I already answered this.the final time "who sits on the throne in Revelation 4 and chapter 5 is it the Father, yes or NO?"
101G
that's a ERROR of multiple thrones. 101G can care less who throne it is. 101G asked who ... "SITS" ...... on it. and you cannot answer, meaning you are in ERROR. good day, until you can understand the TRUTH.There are multiple thrones. Already showed you where Jesus said "my throne" and "the Father's throne." Where the elders worshipped was before the throne of God, not the throne of the Lamb. I already answered this.
Who existed before John who was 6 months older than him. Your own verse contradicts your view of Jesus and His preexistence.No verse in Scripture says Jesus is worshipped as God. That's the bottom line. Down goes your theology.
Besides, John the baptist says the Lamb is a man. Your "lamb on the throne is god" doctrine doesn't make any sense in Scripture.
John 1
29The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30This is He of whom I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because He was before me.’
Bad reason and logic. For your doctrine to work then you would have the lump the entire church in with being God. Doesn't work. Sharing authority doesn't make someone God. That's what the idea of the thrones are about. Have some class. You are correct about very few things.that's a ERROR of multiple thrones. 101G can care less who throne it is. 101G asked who ... "SITS" ...... on it. and you cannot answer, meaning you are in ERROR. good day, until you can understand the TRUTH.
as said, don't argue with 101G, argue with the scriptures. until you can answer to who sits on the throne, no need to reply.
101G
see post #105Bad reason and logic. For your doctrine to work then you would have the lump the entire church in with being God. Doesn't work. Sharing authority doesn't make someone God. That's what the idea of the thrones are about. Have some class. You are correct about very few things.
The word "before" in John 1:30 refers to being before in the principal or more important sense of the word, not age or pre-existence. What you have proposed is a huge stretch and leap from what John said.Who existed before John who was 6 months older than him. Your own verse contradicts your view of Jesus and His preexistence.
See post #1.see post #105
101G
Your view is 100% your presuppositions and void of proper exegesis of the text.The word "before" in John 1:30 refers to being before in the principal or more important sense of the word, not age or pre-existence. What you have proposed is a huge stretch and leap from what John said.
Your denial is hopelessThe word "before" in John 1:30 refers to being before in the principal or more important sense of the word, not age or pre-existence. What you have proposed is a huge stretch and leap from what John said.
So you have options here then. Either God along isn't good as Jesus already said or there are different senses of the word good that are more nuanced than our english. Yes, this is the case. Jesus spoke of the intrinsic goodness of God as opposed to himself.
In its original contextGod is the source of all goodness and the standard of all goodness. Jesus learned all of his goodness from God and as Immanuel he didn't inherently know the difference between good and evil inherently.
Read Isaiah 7 and you'll understand.
Isaiaih 7
14Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. 15By the time He knows enough to reject evil and choose good, He will be eating curds and honey.
There you go reading your theology into the passageAgain... Hebrews 1:8 is quoted from Psalm 45:6, yes? Then the original context of Psalm 45 needs to be considered. This is very basic scholarly diligence and foundational to rightly dividing Scripture. The human king with a queen in Psalm 45 is not God Almighty. I hope we agree on that much. When the author of Hebrews transferred Psalm 45:6 to Jesus, he was not calling Jesus God Almighty. That doesn't even make sense. He's referring to Jesus as perhaps a god with a little g who has a God.
There is more than one valid way to translate these verses and your premise doesn't match the context. Trinitarianism doesn't assert that God had companions to be anointed above like Hebrews 1:9 says anyway. If anything, you have only provided a strong argument to reject Trinitarianism.
So you do not obeyNo verse in Scripture says Jesus is worshipped as God. That's the bottom line. Down goes your theology.
Then feel free to quote the verse about what Jesus was saying or doing in a pre-existent state. No one has found it yet.Your view is 100% your presuppositions and void of proper exegesis of the text.
John 17:5 for starters.Then feel free to quote the verse about what Jesus was saying or doing in a pre-existent state. No one has found it yet.
Seems denying Scripture is how you keep your doctrines strung together. It's right there in the Greek of John 1:30. Jesus is before John in the sense of importance. John is older than Jesus so what you have presented doesn't make any sense.Your denial is hopeless
John 1:1–2 (NIV) — 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.
Says he was glorified "now" in the present tense. Jesus wasn't doing what he was doing in the present tense before the world was. The only thing that existed was God's plan and foreknowledge. Hence there are no actual verses about Jesus saying or doing anything in your pre-existence doctrine.John 17:5 for starters.
try reading these without your UNITARIAN glasses on and believe what the text declares.Says he was glorified "now" in the present tense. Jesus wasn't doing what he was doing in the present tense before the world was. The only thing that existed was God's plan and foreknowledge. Hence there are no actual verses about Jesus saying or doing anything in your pre-existence doctrine.