A state of being is not, in and of itself, “a thing”. A person, place, or thing all have a state of being. You misrepresent what I say for your own benefit and have thus far failed to correct yourself in the light of my responses to your posts.
Ditto
State of being and status have overlap in meaning. A state of being is a description of how someone or something exists at a specific moment, but a status is the relative social, professional, or other standing of someone or something. So how someone or something exists at a specific moment can also be a status. In your organization you make God out to be a thing.
The blind leading the blind.we are pretty much in agreement with everything as far as God is concerned with His Being/Nature.
but I'm sure @TibiasDad will let you know that is true.
No that’s Unitarianism. You are projecting again.
The Catholics brought the trinity. Not Israel.
they were too late to influence either the OT scriptures or alter the concept of the Trinity. I'm not sure why your pursue anachronistic mention of Catholics, except for possible influence by the JW doctrines.
No, not really. There is a correlation between them, usually the greater the state of being the greater the status, but the term God is defined ultimately in what you are (your nature of being); status is defining what you are in relation to other things.
I don't know what JW doctrine is. The Catholics did not effect Scripture. They brought the trinity that had it's roots in Pagan thinking. The Scriptures do not teach the trinity as I have said a billion times.
Right. you said the same inapplicable point a billion times. The Bible gives the framework which is best represented by the Trinitarian doctrines. So you are narrowly right in what you said a billion times but are wrong in denying that the scriptures give us the context best described as the Trinity.
There has to be a reason why so many people believe in something that is not there. And believe so strongly.
I hope that helps clear it up, but I assume they will read this and say with a straight face that it's correct.
This is a prime example of religious delusion. You can't be wrong about God but instead God must be schizophrenic.
This is a perfect example of Trinitarianism being misinterpreted as Oneness Pentecostalism. The two are radically different than each other and yet you are conflating them. That exposes just how little you understand of Trinitarianism. It's back to the drawing board for you.
But that post is the same argument you use isn't it. If you say Jesus is YHWH, is God, is the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or the I AM then this poster is accurate.
Oneness is just a spin off from the trinity. Same devil.
Yep in his theology
