The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

[synergy]

Your point regarding Revelation 3:21 is dirt poor theology. You are trying to take it one way while ignoring the fact that Christians are sitting on the throne of Jesus. You can't have it both ways. Either Christians are God and Jesus is God or neither of them are God. Basic logic 101. You lost now you're whining.

False dichotomy. You're the one with dirt poor logic. There are Two Thrones. Do you understand that fact? ? On one Throne goes all the worship. That's the Father's Throne. Jesus is there as confirmed by Rev 3:21. If you hate that fact, tough! The other Throne is Jesus' Throne. That's where all believers are, with Jesus. Jesus is on both Thrones. Why are we on Jesus' Throne, to be worshiped? No. We're there through the Power of the Holy Spirit, by being Born Again. Are we worshipped as God because of that? No. Do you understand now? Of course you won't because your Judaizing mind block will refuse everything Biblical. Watch and see.

You have been shown how the throne of Jesus is not the throne of God which is not what Revelation 3:21 is even about.

In Revelation 4,5, and 7 the one on the throne being worshipped is not the Lamb. Go read it if you wish. You are not going to do it until you're ready anyway.

You can continue to deny Rev 3:21 all you want. It won't change the fact that Jesus does in fact sit on his Father's Throne and is therefore a recipient of worship.

(Rev 3:21) To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.

 

[synergy]

According to me you failed to address multiple verses of scripture

That's why he's called the Runningman.

 

[TomL]

That's why he's called the Runningman.

And so it seems

 

[Runningman]

False dichotomy. You're the one with dirt poor logic. There are Two Thrones. Do you understand that fact? ? On one Throne goes all the worship. That's the Father's Throne. Jesus is there as confirmed by Rev 3:21. If you hate that fact, tough! The other Throne is Jesus' Throne. That's where all believers are, with Jesus. Jesus is on both Thrones. Why are we on Jesus' Throne, to be worshiped? No. We're there through the Power of the Holy Spirit, by being Born Again. Are we worshipped as God because of that? No. Do you understand now? Of course you won't because your Judaizing mind block will refuse everything Biblical. Watch and see.

You can continue to deny Rev 3:21 all you want. It won't change the fact that Jesus does in fact sit on his Father's Throne and is therefore a recipient of worship.

(Rev 3:21) To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.

Your explanation is not compatible with Scripture. We have already went over this again. Did you read the part about how those who overcome sit on the throne of Jesus? Jesus didn't sit on those Father's throne until the Father? How is he sitting on the Father's throne when he isn't doing that in Revelation 4, 5, and 7? The right hand of God isn't the same location as the throne of God. You're reading this wrong and taking it way too far.

You have some options here:

1. Those who overcome are God because they sit on Jesus' throne
2. Those who overcome are not God and neither is Jesus

 

[Runningman]

According to me you failed to address multiple verses of scripture

All trinitarians hold Jesus was both God and human and that as a human he had to grow and experience things which are normal for a human

And you are failing to address my verse.

 

[TomL]

And you are failing to address my verse.

You are bearing false witness

and projecting

 

[Runningman]

You are bearing false witness

and projecting

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones Tom. You have not addressed Isaiah 7:14,15.

Your religion is getting debunked Tom. You thought you can argue against Scripture and you're finding it completely refutes Trinitarianism. While on the other hand it fully supports Christianity. When will you believe?

Isaiah 7 (NIV)
14Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin d will conceive and give birth to a son, and e will call him Immanuel. 15He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,

 

[TomL]

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones Tom. You have not addressed Isaiah 7:14,15.

Your religion is getting debunked Tom. You thought you can argue against Scripture and you're finding it completely refutes Trinitarianism. While on the other hand it fully supports Christianity. When will you believe?

Isaiah 7 (NIV)
14Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin d will conceive and give birth to a son, and e will call him Immanuel. 15He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,

Um you have debunked nothing

While I have shown how you ignore scripture and present arguments contrary to your own view

Your repetition of Isa 7:14 has been addressed and you present no new data here

You on the other hand

Failed to rebut 1 Cor 10:4 and 9 which shows the presence of christ in Old Testament events

Contradict your own argument denying Christ's pre-existence with the argument you present for a god reading at John 1:1

With your argument for firstborn in col 1;15

with your argument for beginning at Rev 3:14

you contradict your claim the bible does not state Christ is eternal with your own argument at 1John 1:1

You ignore multiple examples of Christ being worshipped and prayed to

You never deal with the Old Testament messenger of the lord who is called YHWH

ignoring inconvenient scripture and offering bald denial has been your main tactic



sangel of the



or goldyreading at john 1;1

t

6

y


As you have never ben

 

[civic]

Jesus prayed directly to the Father and never lectured him on anything. Where do you see any lecturing. Produce the verse.

You conveniently ran away again from the fact that Trinitarianism can't be the subject here because John 17:1,2,5 clearly supports the fact that Jesus is given exclusive God Glory by the Father, gives eternal life as only God can, and preexisted with the Father, as the Word of God who is God (John 1:1).

In fact, the Father called the Son "God" in Heb 1:8. So Trinitarianism is not what is spoken against in John 17:3. Only if one runs away from the context of John 17:1-5, Heb 1:8, John 8:58, John 1:1-14, and the whole Bible for that matter can one keep this unsupported hostile view of the Trinity.

Furthermore, are you seriously ignorant of the Ten Commandments and the first commandment? Are you seriously ignorant of the polytheism and idolatry of the Pagan Greeks? That shows that you are definitely a novice of history.

Amen

 

[civic]

Um you have debunked nothing

While I have shown how you ignore scripture and present arguments contrary to your own view

Your repetition of Isa 7:14 has been addressed and you present no new data here

You on the other hand

Failed to rebut 1 Cor 10:4 and 9 which shows the presence of christ in Old Testament events

Contradict your own argument denying Christ's pre-existence with the argument you present for a god reading at John 1:1

With your argument for firstborn in col 1;15

with your argument for beginning at Rev 3:14

you contradict your claim the bible does not state Christ is eternal with your own argument at 1John 1:1

You ignore multiple examples of Christ being worshipped and prayed to

You never deal with the Old Testament messenger of the lord who is called YHWH

ignoring inconvenient scripture and offering bald denial has been your main tactic



sangel of the



or goldyreading at john 1;1

t

6

y


As you have never ben

Yes like Jesus Himself declared not only His presence in the OT but also said it’s all about Him in the law , prophets and psalms . It’s about the eternal Son from cover to cover. The shadows/ types are written all over scripture to reveal His real presence in numerous ways throughout the OT.

Amen

 

[Runningman]

Um you have debunked nothing

While I have shown how you ignore scripture and present arguments contrary to your own view

Your repetition of Isa 7:14 has been addressed and you present no new data here

You on the other hand

Failed to rebut 1 Cor 10:4 and 9 which shows the presence of christ in Old Testament events

Contradict your own argument denying Christ's pre-existence with the argument you present for a god reading at John 1:1

With your argument for firstborn in col 1;15

with your argument for beginning at Rev 3:14

you contradict your claim the bible does not state Christ is eternal with your own argument at 1John 1:1

You ignore multiple examples of Christ being worshipped and prayed to

You never deal with the Old Testament messenger of the lord who is called YHWH

ignoring inconvenient scripture and offering bald denial has been your main tactic



sangel of the



or goldyreading at john 1;1

t

6

y


As you have never ben

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. What happened to the end of your comment with the word salad?

Do you want me to keep refuting your talking points repeatedly? There should be progression in a discussion. We need to drill down into every point and turn over every rock. Just pasting the same arguments repeatedly, padding with more of the same verses, adding nothing new, doesn't really get to the root of the issue. You are simply ignoring my comments, falsely accusing, and trying to bury what I already previously said. You are not here for discussion, you are plainly here to indoctrinate and your stratagem seems to be to exhaust the debate by being uncooperative and repetitive. You have proven nothing.

 

[synergy]

Your explanation is not compatible with Scripture. We have already went over this again. Did you read the part about how those who overcome sit on the throne of Jesus?

and?

Jesus didn't sit on those Father's throne until the Father?

I don't understand your question.

How is he sitting on the Father's throne when he isn't doing that in Revelation 4, 5, and 7?

I have an explicit statement (Rev 3:21) that says that Jesus sits on the Father's Throne now that he has overcome. You have just pure conjecture on your side that he is not. I'll go with the explicit statement. You can continue to jump up and down ranting against Rev 3:21 all you want.

The right hand of God isn't the same location as the throne of God. You're reading this wrong and taking it way too far.

Who amputated the Father's hand away from his Throne??? More myths and fairy tales I see from the unitarian side, I see.

You have some options here:

1. Those who overcome are God because they sit on Jesus' throne

Huh? Being born again does not make us God.

2. Those who overcome are not God and neither is Jesus

Huh? Jesus is already the "I Am" OT God. He explicitly said so himself.

 

[Runningman]

and?

I don't understand your question.

I have an explicit statement (Rev 3:21) that says that Jesus sits on the Father's Throne now that he has overcome. You have just pure conjecture on your side that he is not. I'll go with the explicit statement. You can continue to jump up and down ranting against Rev 3:21 all you want.

Who amputated the Father's hand away from his Throne??? More myths and fairy tales I see from the unitarian side, I see.

Huh? Being born again does not make us God.

Huh? Jesus is already the "I Am" OT God. He explicitly said so himself.

Are you hinting that Jesus' throne is not the throne of God?

 

[TomL]

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. What happened to the end of your comment with the word salad?

Do you want me to keep refuting your talking points repeatedly? There should be progression in a discussion. We need to drill down into every point and turn over every rock. Just pasting the same arguments repeatedly, padding with more of the same verses, adding nothing new, doesn't really get to the root of the issue. You are simply ignoring my comments, falsely accusing, and trying to bury what I already previously said. You are not here for discussion, you are plainly here to indoctrinate and your stratagem seems to be to exhaust the debate by being uncooperative and repetitive. You have proven nothing.

I want you to justify why you adopt arguments that refute your own view and then imagine you have a cogent understanding. Your own arguments refute that idea

Um you have debunked nothing

While I have shown how you ignore scripture and present arguments contrary to your own view

Your repetition of Isa 7:14 has been addressed and you present no new data here

You on the other hand

Failed to rebut 1 Cor 10:4 and 9 which shows the presence of christ in Old Testament events

Contradict your own argument denying Christ's pre-existence with the argument you present for a god reading at John 1:1

With your argument for firstborn in col 1;15

with your argument for beginning at Rev 3:14

you contradict your claim the bible does not state Christ is eternal with your own argument at 1John 1:1

You ignore multiple examples of Christ being worshipped and prayed to

You never deal with the Old Testament messenger of the lord who is called YHWH

ignoring inconvenient scripture and offering bald denial has been your main tactic

The rest was leftover characters which had moved down the page during correction and were thus left unnoticed

however it is clear you have much to account for

 

[synergy]

Are you hinting that Jesus' throne is not the throne of God?

Father's Throne, Jesus' Throne, Two Thrones.
Jesus is on both Thrones because as God he is omnipresent.

 

[TomL]

I want you to justify why you adopt arguments that refute your own view and then imagine you have a cogent understanding. Your own arguments refute that idea

You on the other hand

Failed to rebut 1 Cor 10:4 and 9 which shows the presence of christ in Old Testament events

Contradict your own argument denying Christ's pre-existence with the argument you present for a god reading at John 1:1

With your argument for firstborn in col 1;15

with your argument for beginning at Rev 3:14

you contradict your claim the bible does not state Christ is eternal with your own argument at 1John 1:1

You ignore multiple examples of Christ being worshipped and prayed to

You never deal with the Old Testament messenger of the lord who is called YHWH

ignoring inconvenient scripture and offering bald denial has been your main tactic



The rest was leftover characters which had moved down the page during correction and were thus left unnoticed

however it is clear you have much to account for

But you will not be able to account for

 

[synergy]

But you will not be able to account for

He now has a avalanche of verses that destroy Unitarianism. He's beginning to designate them as flat out lies as he just did with "the Word was God" phrase (John 1:1). He's very close to calling Rev 3:21 a lie the way he is revolted by it and what it signifies. His revulsion of the Bible is brewing ...

 

[Runningman]

I want you to justify why you adopt arguments that refute your own view and then imagine you have a cogent understanding. Your own arguments refute that idea

My arguments are Biblical so they don't refute my own view. I wouldn't say something that refuted my own view.

The rest was leftover characters which had moved down the page during correction and were thus left unnoticed

however it is clear you have much to account for

Keep your posts more direct. If you're copying and pasting the same thing you had previously said after it got refuted or addressed then I am not going to read it again. Just saying people are not addressing your posts is false. Many Christians have raised up this forum to inoculate your heresies.

 

[Runningman]

Father's Throne, Jesus' Throne, Two Thrones.
Jesus is on both Thrones because as God he is omnipresent.

Then Christians sit on the throne of God and become God lol. Wow... back to the drawing board.

 

[synergy]

Then Christians sit on the throne of God and become God lol. Wow... back to the drawing board.

There you go again fantasizing that we are God. Are you sure you're not a Mormon with all your talk about everyone being God? Are you going to get your own planet too?