The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

[Runningman]

John 5:26–27 (ESV)
26For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself.
27And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.
There is nothing wrong about a father granting something to his son. This definitely says the Son has life in himself. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. There are not people other than the Son of God who have life in themselves.

This is evidence that Jesus didn't have life before God granted it to him. It means he isn't an eternal being.

 

[Runningman]

ah. you admit to more heresy. You have a works-based religion. So you keep adding heresy upon heresy. It is not surprising though. Once you deny the truth about Christ Jesus, all other doctrine that follows is also corrupted.
By itching ears, I mean that you prey on Christians who have not sufficiently learned about Christ Jesus as being divine in the Godhead. You use that to lead them astray in other doctrines too. At least you are sharing more about the heresy than Peterlag does. But I think he has some other weird Unitarian-derived conception of some sort of alternative spirit involved in the Unitarian's lives.

No. The final judgement is works based according to Scripture. It seems everything I have shown you from the Bible is heresy in your eyes. Pearls before swine at this point, but here it is anyway. Maybe it'll wake you up.

Romans 2
6He will render to each one according to his works: 7to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11For God shows no partiality.

Anyway, are you a Calvinist? I would like to know. You don't have to answer, but I am certain this is probably a hotbed for that cult based on some of the things I've seen you say. By the way, I have already combed through all of his institutes. He scarcely ever talked about the Trinity, but certainly never said belief in it is required.

 

[mikesw]

This is evidence that Jesus didn't have life before God granted it to him. It means he isn't an eternal being.

You mess up again. I am amazed at the distortion here. We look at an analogy in the OT where the blood is the life of man. Now Christ Jesus is the life for those in Christ such that Christ is roughly analogous to blood giving life. But Christ is the greater reality. But, alas, I am throwing pearls before swine.

 

[mikesw]

No. The final judgement is works based according to Scripture. It seems everything I have shown you from the Bible is heresy in your eyes. Pearls before swine at this point, but here it is anyway. Maybe it'll wake you up.

Romans 2
6He will render to each one according to his works: 7to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. 9There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11For God shows no partiality.

Anyway, are you a Calvinist? I would like to know. You don't have to answer, but I am certain this is probably a hotbed for that cult based on some of the things I've seen you say. By the way, I have already combed through all of his institutes. He scarcely ever talked about the Trinity, but certainly never said belief in it is required.

Each new passage your introduce adds another nail in your coffin. I'm not going to explain the passage for you, but you are way off.

I'm not a Calvinist. For whatever that might signify to you.

 

[mikesw]

Just look at all of the points Paul makes in Acts 17:24-31. Paul didn't believe Jesus is God. Paul taught that the God who made everything also gave life to all people. The Scripture teaches that God gave life to Jesus in John 1:9,10 and John 5:26. Additionally, Paul taught that God's children are His offspring. Jesus is also God's offspring. After that, Paul was clear that the Divine Being is not like gold, silver, or stone. So of course his point is that God isn't a material being made of elements, compounds, etc like humans. Paul was very clear here. In other words, Jesus is not God because he's a human. Paul summed it all up and suggested that believing otherwise is a sin that God is commanding all to repent of. So yes there is a powerful argument to make that you are an unrepentant idolator who will come under judgement "by a man whom he has appointed."

I have to repeat what I said before. The use of a preaching message to pagans hardly is a good place to get your doctrine from.

 

[Runningman]

You mess up again. I am amazed at the distortion here. We look at an analogy in the OT where the blood is the life of man. Now Christ Jesus is the life for those in Christ such that Christ is roughly analogous to blood giving life. But Christ is the greater reality. But, alas, I am throwing pearls before swine.

You're working around it because Jesus being someone who was granted life would mean he isn't God. So the face value reading of John 5:26 is a deal breaker for you. There is a lot more in the Bible that teaches the same thing.

According to Paul, Jesus the Son of God died and and resurrected from where he was to where he was not before. He is a resurrected man who was exalted to the highest place by God. When you are able to just read the Bible without reinterpreting it all through you filter you won't have to always be defending it. It'll make all of the arguments for you.

Ephesians 1:20
"He exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms."

 

[Runningman]

Each new passage your introduce adds another nail in your coffin. I'm not going to explain the passage for you, but you are way off.

I'm not a Calvinist. For whatever that might signify to you.

And I believe you have another nail in your coffin. I know you just simply don't believe what the Bible says unless it's in your wheelhouse of verses or you reinterpret them.

 

[Runningman]

I have to repeat what I said before. The use of a preaching message to pagans hardly is a good place to get your doctrine from.

It's fitting. Trinitarianism has roots in paganism, but regardless it's applicable to Christians too. Now you want to brush aside what Paul said?

 

[mikesw]

It's fitting. Trinitarianism has roots in paganism, but regardless it's applicable to Christians too. Now you want to brush aside what Paul said?

You have not shown how Hindus influenced the OT or NT or church overseers. Your theory is debunked.

 

[mikesw]

And I believe you have another nail in your coffin. I know you just simply don't believe what the Bible says unless it's in your wheelhouse of verses or you reinterpret them.

I just do not limit my understanding to your one verse of john 17:3. There are more verses than just that one.