Trinitarian Training

[synergy]

No he didn't write that. That's called an English translation, which I have proven dozens of times to be a false one.

Do you believe John when he wrote "Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος"? Yes or no?

 

[Runningman]

You still can't differentiate between the written/spoken word of God (Bible, for example) (λογον) and Jesus? You are lost, my friend.

Where did I say that the word "Pre-incarnate" was in the Greek? You just love your strawmen. You need to understand what the word ἐσκήνωσεν means in John 1:14.

Why are you running away from Rev 19:11-16? Let's tackle that first and then I'll be more than happy to continue to discuss your ignorance of Greek concerning 1 John 1:1-3.

Revelation 19 makes no mention of Jesus. Here's a question... why is the rider on the white horse standing in heaven (Revelation 19:11) while Jesus is standing on earth (Revelation 17:14). Could it be because they aren't in the same place at the same time?

 

[Runningman]

Do you believe John when he wrote "Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος"? Yes or no?

They didn't have upper case and lowercase in koine Greek. An English translation would be "the word was godly" after taking into account everything the Bible says about the word.

 

[mikesw]

Weren't you just using an example of the "word of God" in the Old Testament to say that's Jesus pre-existing? Ok, the word of God is in Revelation as well and it's not Jesus. Where your arguments take a hit is that they are not consistent. There are many things in the Bible that directly contradict your premises, which I keep showing you, and they're all still there. You haven't explained any of it away.

You really are rejecting all sensibility and straightforward passages in your denials. I keep reminding you that it is the ambiguity of Jesus as divine and human that leads to recognize the Triune nature of God. You simply gloss over the passages in our discussions and pretend that a different passage nullifies the passages that show Jesus as God. That type of argument falls short of being convincing.

 

[mikesw]

You do great denials.

I deny your illogical arguments as having sensibility. Duh.

 

[Runningman]

You really are rejecting all sensibility and straightforward passages in your denials. I keep reminding you that it is the ambiguity of Jesus as divine and human that leads to recognize the Triune nature of God. You simply gloss over the passages in our discussions and pretend that a different passage nullifies the passages that show Jesus as God. That type of argument falls short of being convincing.

So what are you not understanding then? John 1:3 says everything was created. John 1:14 says the word became flesh. Therefore the word is not flesh unless you're saying the word is created. Either way you go you're caught in a pickle. You run one way the word is created, you run the other way Jesus was created.

 

[synergy]

They didn't have upper case and lowercase in koine Greek. An English translation would be "the word was godly" after taking into account everything the Bible says about the word.

John wrote "THEOS" (God), not εὐσεβής (godly). So my question again is: Do you believe John when he wrote the Word was God or will you continue to mutilate John's wording of John 1:1?

 

[synergy]

Revelation 19 makes no mention of Jesus. Here's a question... why is the rider on the white horse standing in heaven (Revelation 19:11) while Jesus is standing on earth (Revelation 17:14). Could it be because they aren't in the same place at the same time?

Revelation is a book of visions, not a stage play demanding the characters remain in one physical spot at a time. Earthly and heavenly visions complement each other—they are not chronological contradictions. To say Christ cannot appear in different visions is to misunderstand apocalyptic literature.

So we're back to you not being able to differentiate between the written/spoken word of God (Bible, for example) (λογον) and Jesus.

 

[Runningman]

John wrote "THEOS" (God), not εὐσεβής (godly). So my question again is: Do you believe John when he wrote the Word was God or will you continue to mutilate John's wording of John 1:1?

You should study theology less and Greek more, "Mr. Expert." Care you explain to us what the below verse says?

2 Peter 2​

9if all this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment.​

​

2 Corinthians 1​

12Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially in our relations with you, with integrity and godly sincerity. We have done so, relying not on worldly wisdom but on God’s grace.​

​

2 Corinthians 7​

9As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us.​

And there is more too. The word isn't God as the Bible proves, but rather is godly. I think you know that, too. Next fallacy.

 

[Runningman]

Revelation is a book of visions, not a stage play demanding the characters remain in one physical spot at a time. Earthly and heavenly visions complement each other—they are not chronological contradictions. To say Christ cannot appear in different visions is to misunderstand apocalyptic literature.

So we're back to you not being able to differentiate between the written/spoken word of God (Bible, for example) (λογον) and Jesus.

Jesus and the rider on the white horse aren't in the same location, chronologically speaking. Read From Revelation 17 to 19 and you'll see.

 

[synergy]

You should study theology less and Greek more, "Mr. Expert." Care you explain to us what the below verse says?

2 Peter 2​

9if all this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment.​

​

2 Corinthians 1​

12Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially in our relations with you, with integrity and godly sincerity. We have done so, relying not on worldly wisdom but on God’s grace.​

​

2 Corinthians 7​

9As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us.​

And there is more too. The word isn't God as the Bible proves, but rather is godly. I think you know that, too. Next fallacy.

As usual, you continue to run away from John 1:1 in one way or another. You have forewarned us that you will do that by calling yourself the Running Man. Carry on with your running away antics.

 

[synergy]

Jesus and the rider on the white horse aren't in the same location, chronologically speaking. Read From Revelation 17 to 19 and you'll see.

So what's your point?

 

[Runningman]

So what's your point?

Means Jesus isn't God.

 

[Runningman]

As usual, you continue to run away from John 1:1 in one way or another. You have forewarned us that you will do that by calling yourself the Running Man. Carry on with your running away antics.

No idea what you're talking about. I got you right where I want you because your attempts to pen idolatry into scripture aren't working out the way you thought they would. You can't prove the "Word is God" based on the language on John 1:1 since the Bible uses theos for godly, not only god or God.

 

[synergy]

You should study theology less and Greek more, "Mr. Expert." Care you explain to us what the below verse says?

2 Peter 2​

9if all this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment.​

People are godly, not that the Word is godly.

2 Corinthians 1​

12Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially in our relations with you, with integrity and godly sincerity. We have done so, relying not on worldly wisdom but on God’s grace.​

Paul is godly, not that the Word is godly.

2 Corinthians 7​

9As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us.​

People felt a godly sorrow, not that the Word is godly.

And there is more too. The word isn't God as the Bible proves, but rather is godly. I think you know that, too. Next fallacy.

More proofs that it's not the Word that is godly? I think I've proven my point.

Means Jesus isn't God.

More miserable failures on your part.

As usual, you continue to run away from John 1:1 that proves that the Word was God ("THEOS"), not godly (εὐσεβής). So my question again is: Do you believe John when he wrote the Word was God ("THEOS") or will you continue to mutilate John's wording of John 1:1?

 

[Runningman]

People are godly, not that the Word is godly.

Paul is godly, not that the Word is godly.

People felt a godly sorrow, not that the Word is godly.

More proofs that it's not the Word that is godly? I think I've proven my point.

More miserable failures on your part.

As usual, you continue to run away from John 1:1 that proves that the Word was God ("THEOS"), not godly (εὐσεβής). So my question again is: Do you believe John when he wrote the Word was God ("THEOS") or will you continue to mutilate John's wording of John 1:1?

So you don't believe God's words are godly? God's word can be godly without being God, the bible says so. The "Word" as you call it, isn't actually God. Hence all of the personification surrounding the word as something that comes from God's mouth, or God giving messages to people by sending His word to them, or the Word explicitly being called a thing in 1John 1:1-3. The "Word" is a thing. It's all personification and there is a ton of evidence you would have to just ignore to miss this.

 

[civic]

People are godly, not that the Word is godly.

Paul is godly, not that the Word is godly.

People felt a godly sorrow, not that the Word is godly.

More proofs that it's not the Word that is godly? I think I've proven my point.

More miserable failures on your part.

As usual, you continue to run away from John 1:1 that proves that the Word was God ("THEOS"), not godly (εὐσεβής). So my question again is: Do you believe John when he wrote the Word was God ("THEOS") or will you continue to mutilate John's wording of John 1:1?

Correct Godliness pertains to personhood, not an it.

 

[Runningman]

Correct Godliness pertains to personhood, not an it.

Sorrow is a thing and Scripture says it can be godly.

2 Corinthians 7
10Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation without regret, but worldly sorrow brings death.

 

[civic]

Sorrow is a thing and Scripture says it can be godly.

2 Corinthians 7
10Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation without regret, but worldly sorrow brings death.

Only a person can experience sorrow so thanks for proving my point

 

[Runningman]

Only a person can experience sorrow so thanks for proving my point

Your point was proven wrong. LoL things can be godly. My point about the word in John 1:1 being a godly thing is supported by the Greek and the context of the Bible.