Why The Trinity is Wrong: Language Usage

[synergy]

It's a bad translation and I provided good points about why that is so. You allegeding my beliefs are "Judaizing" infers that I am a Judaizer. That's an ad hominem. You should tone that down so there is an environment of respect when we talk to each other. You have given me nothing else to reply to except your ad hominem. That's why we are talking about this now.

So we're even by you accusing me of "idolatry". I will reply to your comment #233 shortly.

 

[Runningman]

So we're even by you accusing me of "idolatry". I will reply to your comment #233 shortly.

You attract such comments with the way you talk to people. The difference is I am at least correct and you are not.

 

[synergy]

Grammatically and based on the context, God and Savior Jesus are not the same person. For example, look at the next verse where they clearly are not the same person.
2 Peter 1
2Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,

I was talking about verse 1 and you immediately skipped over it.
Verse 1 is clearly talking about Jesus Christ.
Now if you want to talk about verse 2 I can do that also.
The Trinity allows for multiple Persons as one God so there is no Trinitarian contradiction there at all.

note: to standardize, I will typically use the KJV since most people are familiar with it and comfortable with it.

KJV say the Great God and our savior Jesus aren't the same person.

Titus 2
13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

And? Jesus Christ is both Great God and our Savior. That makes perfect grammatical sense and is clearly Trinitarian.

Not in the KJV and some other versions. I also might add, some Trinitarian commentaries don't agree with your assessment.

Romans 9
5Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

There are no commas in the Greek originals. So either way you want to juggle the words, without the commas Christ is God.

No mention of Jesus being God there. In the immediate context, Jesus said he is a man.

Christ is referring to himself as "I Am" here. Who do you think "I Am" is?
Let me help you out. When Moses asked God what is His name, God responded with "I Am". (Ex 3:14)
Do you need any further help?

(Ex 3:14) And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’

John 8
40But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

And? We already believe that Jesus is man, in addition to him being God. This is perfectly Trinitarian.

This isn't Jesus talking. Him "which is, and which was, and which is to come"in Rev. 1:8 is only mentioned in Revelation 1:4 in distinction from Jesus in Rev. 1:5. I also might add, most modern Bible do not make the words of Revelation 1:8 red letters. Therefore Jesus isn't the Almighty in Revelation 1:8.

Here is more of the context for your benefit.

Revelation 1
4John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; 5And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 6And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. 7Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

8I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

Whose testimony is being said forth? It is Jesus Christ's.

(Rev 1:1) A Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to declare to His servants things which must shortly come to pass. And He signified it by sending His angel to His servant John,
(Rev 1:2) who bore record of the Word of God and of the testimony of Jesus Christ and of all the things that he saw.

So everything being said is the testimony of Christ.

1 John 1:1-2 says the Word is an it, a thing essentially, that was revealed by or manifested in Jesus. A that, which, and it is a thing, not a person.

1 John 1
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us 3That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

Which Bible version are you quoting from? This is the KJV:
(John 1:1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(John 1:2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(John 1:3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
(John 1:4) In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

More Importantly, permit me to introduce you to the Word of God. Do tell us how an "it" can ride a horse, have eyes, have a head, wear a crown, wear a garment, etc... This should be interesting.... This is what John actually saw as a vision.

Rev 19:11 And I saw Heaven opened. And behold, a white horse! And He sitting on him was called Faithful and True. And in righteousness He judges and makes war.
Rev 19:12 And His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head many crowns. And He had a name written, one that no one knew except Himself.
Rev 19:13 And He had been clothed in a garment dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.
Rev 19:14 And the armies in Heaven followed Him on white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Rev 19:15 And out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, so that with it He should strike the nations. And He will shepherd them with a rod of iron. And He treads the winepress of the wine of the anger and of the wrath of Almighty God.
Rev 19:16 And He has on His garment, and on His thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

This verse was proven to be a later addition or alteration to the manuscript. No modern Bibles say God was manifested in the flesh. It isn't an actual argument very many Trinitarian commentators support either.

You don't even say your source. So I'm supposed to take your word for it?

Isaiah 7:14-15 says Immanuel needed "know to refuse the evil, and choose the good." This underscores the fact Immanuel didn't inherently know the different between good and evil like a normal human. God on the other hand already knows these things.

That's his humanity that's being spoken of. That's perfectly in line with the fact that Jesus is human (in addition to the fact that Matt 1:23 describes him as God with us.

(Matt 1:23) "Behold, the virgin shall conceive in her womb, and will bear a son. And they will call His name Emmanuel," which being interpreted is, God with us.

Technically, Thomas didn't say "you" are God and even if that is what Thomas meant, he isn't saying that Jesus is God in the same sense as the Father is. Jesus taught in John 10:34-36 that they are elohim. They are all little gods, even Thomas.

Next you'll want a full notarized statement saying something like "Mr Jesus Christ, I certify that you are both Lord and God". Give me a break.

Tell us more about these "little gods" of yours. Are they goblins?

Conclusion: you are promoting idolatry by saying Jesus is God.

Conclusion: you failed miserably to prove Jesus is not God.

 

[synergy]

You attract such comments with the way you talk to people. The difference is I am at least correct and you are not.

It's so hilarious how you immediately jump to conclusions (perfect example right above) and you cry "ad hominem" when you're proven wrong.

 

[Runningman]

It's so hilarious how you immediately jump to conclusions (perfect example right above) and you cry "ad hominem" when you're proven wrong.

You did use an ad hominem though. You also referred to Judaizers are scum in comment #223 and it is your accusation that my repeating of Jesus' words is Judaizing. You are, in effect, calling both Jesus and myself scum. Maybe rather than doubling down on your bad language, you should have some class and talk to people with respect. It's better for you an the board to act like a mature adult.

 

[synergy]

You did use an ad hominem though. You also referred to Judaizers are scum in comment #223 and it is your accusation that my repeating of Jesus' words is Judaizing. You are, in effect, calling both Jesus and myself scum. Maybe rather than doubling down on your bad language, you should have some class and talk to people with respect. It's better for you an the board to act like a mature adult.

You don't have the moral high ground by accusing me of "idolatry". Now, will you offer any replies to my Comments #243 or will you be true to your name "Runningman" and run away?

 

[Runningman]

I was talking about verse 1 and you immediately skipped over it.
Verse 1 is clearly talking about Jesus Christ.
Now if you want to talk about verse 2 I can do that also.
The Trinity allows for multiple Persons as one God so there is no Trinitarian contradiction there at all.

You have one of the most extreme consistency issues I have ever seen. Your argument seems to be that in 2 Peter 1:1 that Jesus is God then immediately in the next verse Jesus is not God. That's why you were shown the context. Jesus isn't God in one verse and suddenly not God in several dozen other verses.

And? Jesus Christ is both Great God and our Savior. That makes perfect grammatical sense and is clearly Trinitarian.

No verse says that.

There are no commas in the Greek originals. So either way you want to juggle the words, without the commas Christ is God.

Indeed, so your preferred version doesn't help you.

Christ is referring to himself as "I Am" here. Who do you think "I Am" is?
Let me help you out. When Moses asked God what is His name, God responded with "I Am". (Ex 3:14)
Do you need any further help?

(Ex 3:14) And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’

"I am" is ego eimi in the Greek and it translates to "I am the man" in some versions of John 9:9. Since Jesus said he is a man in John 8:40 then the correct way to understand what John 8:58 is that Jesus is the man who was prophesied about before Abraham.

To help support this, Acts 3:13 says that Jesus is the son or servant of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Therefore Jesus is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Exodus 3:14-15 says the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the I AM, YHWH, and that is His name forever.

What you have presented is not sound or compatible with Scripture.

And? We already believe that Jesus is man, in addition to him being God. This is perfectly Trinitarian.

No verse says anything about that.

Whose testimony is being said forth? It is Jesus Christ's.

(Rev 1:1) A Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to declare to His servants things which must shortly come to pass. And He signified it by sending His angel to His servant John,
(Rev 1:2) who bore record of the Word of God and of the testimony of Jesus Christ and of all the things that he saw.

So everything being said is the testimony of Christ.

Verse 1-2 says the revelation of Jesus Christ is what God gave him and that the Word of God is distinct from the testimony of Jesus Christ. In other words, Jesus' testimony isn't God's testimony.

Which Bible version are you quoting from? This is the KJV:
(John 1:1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(John 1:2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(John 1:3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
(John 1:4) In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

John 1:1-4 concerning the Word is personification of a thing. A spoken word is a thing, not a person. For example, in the Old Testament there is no one there named the Word with God saying or doing anything.

More Importantly, permit me to introduce you to the Word of God. Do tell us how an "it" can ride a horse, have eyes, have a head, wear a crown, wear a garment, etc... This should be interesting.... This is what John actually saw as a vision.

Rev 19:11 And I saw Heaven opened. And behold, a white horse! And He sitting on him was called Faithful and True. And in righteousness He judges and makes war.
Rev 19:12 And His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head many crowns. And He had a name written, one that no one knew except Himself.
Rev 19:13 And He had been clothed in a garment dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.
Rev 19:14 And the armies in Heaven followed Him on white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Rev 19:15 And out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, so that with it He should strike the nations. And He will shepherd them with a rod of iron. And He treads the winepress of the wine of the anger and of the wrath of Almighty God.
Rev 19:16 And He has on His garment, and on His thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

According to Scripture that's the Father.

1. And its rider is called Faithful = "the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God" - Deuteronomy 7:9
2. and True = "But the LORD is the true God;" - Jeremiah 10:10, John 17:3
3. With righteousness He judges = 'But God is the judge:' - Psalm 75:7
4. and wages war. = "the LORD your God is he that goeth with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you." - Deuteronomy 20:4
5. He has eyes like blazing fire, and many royal crowns on His head. = This is the Father because the other descriptions about the Father are all the Father.
6. He has a name written on Him that only He Himself knows. = Jesus doesn't know what only God knows. Matthew 24:36
7. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His name is The Word of God. = "their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment." - Isaiah 63:3
8. The armies of heaven, dressed in fine linen, white and pure, follow Him on white horses. = "my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" = Matthew 26:53
9. from His mouth proceeds a sharp sword = "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword," - Hebrews 4:12
10. He will rule them with an iron scepter. = "for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me." - Psalm 23:4
11. He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. = "I have trodden the winepress alone; " - Isaiah 63:3
12. And He has a name written on His robe and on His thigh: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. = "who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;" - 1 Timothy 6:15

You don't even say your source. So I'm supposed to take your word for it?

I'll respond to that soon.

That's his humanity that's being spoken of. That's perfectly in line with the fact that Jesus is human (in addition to the fact that Matt 1:23 describes him as God with us.

(Matt 1:23) "Behold, the virgin shall conceive in her womb, and will bear a son. And they will call His name Emmanuel," which being interpreted is, God with us.

It demonstrates Jesus lacks the divine attribute of omniscience. You want us to believe Jesus is God and yet he doesn't know what God knows?

Next you'll want a full notarized statement saying something like "Mr Jesus Christ, I certify that you are both Lord and God". Give me a break.

Tell us more about these "little gods" of yours. Are they goblins?

Conclusion: you failed miserably to prove Jesus is not God.

You ended this very poor reply with a whimper. Are you already tired?

 

[Runningman]

(1 Tim 3:16) And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among nations, believed on in the world, and received up into glory.

no modern Bible translation, to the best of my knowledge, that has been produced within the past 100-150 years contains "God was manifest in the flesh..." but rather contains something like "He [Jesus Christ] was manifest in the flesh..."

Most scholars attribute the error of "God was manifest in the flesh..." to a scribal error, gracefully calling it accidental, though some believe it could have very well been a deliberate alteration to the manuscript to bolster Trinitarian dogma; these aren't anti-Trinitarians saying these things - no. These are people of reputation, standing, with credentials in theology who have reputations at stake and nothing to gain theologically by rightly confessing that 1 Timothy 3:16 has been altered.

How do they know? Because one of the metrics for determining authenticity is the age of the manuscript. The idea being that if a manuscript is old and they find numerous copies of them all saying "He [Jesus Christ] was manifest in the flesh..." and not "God was manifest in the flesh..." then it stands to reason that the belief circulating in the earliest church, the time in closest proximity to when the first copies were made, then statistical likelihood of it being altered is lower.

That being said, they actually found the earliest and best manuscripts that prove such. Below are some links to the proof where there is nothing being said about God in 1 Timothy 3:16.

For further reading: https://textus-receptus.com/wiki/1_Timothy_3:16

I also recommend these commentaries. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_timothy/3-16.htm

 

[Runningman]

You don't have the moral high ground by accusing me of "idolatry". Now, will you offer any replies to my Comments #243 or will you be true to your name "Runningman" and run away?

I have the moral high ground. You were the one who began with the Judaizing comments and calling people scum. What's wrong, you don't like getting the same kind of flak you dish out? Can you handle it?

 

[360watt]

no modern Bible translation, to the best of my knowledge, that has been produced within the past 100-150 years contains "God was manifest in the flesh..." but rather contains something like "He [Jesus Christ] was manifest in the flesh..."

Most scholars attribute the error of "God was manifest in the flesh..." to a scribal error, gracefully calling it accidental, though some believe it could have very well been a deliberate alteration to the manuscript to bolster Trinitarian dogma; these aren't anti-Trinitarians saying these things - no. These are people of reputation, standing, with credentials in theology who have reputations at stake and nothing to gain theologically by rightly confessing that 1 Timothy 3:16 has been altered.

How do they know? Because one of the metrics for determining authenticity is the age of the manuscript. The idea being that if a manuscript is old and they find numerous copies of them all saying "He [Jesus Christ] was manifest in the flesh..." and not "God was manifest in the flesh..." then it stands to reason that the belief circulating in the earliest church, the time in closest proximity to when the first copies were made, then statistical likelihood of it being altered is lower.

That being said, they actually found the earliest and best manuscripts that prove such. Below are some links to the proof where there is nothing being said about God in 1 Timothy 3:16.

View attachment 820


For further reading: https://textus-receptus.com/wiki/1_Timothy_3:16

I also recommend these commentaries. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_timothy/3-16.htm

The age of manuscripts isn't the only determining factor.

For eg.. for the KJV .. the manuscripts being used were not as old as others. But they agreed with the majority of evidence already there. They also agreed with the testimony of lecturinaries and other types of old creeds.

 

[synergy]

You have one of the most extreme consistency issues I have ever seen. Your argument seems to be that in 2 Peter 1:1 that Jesus is God then immediately in the next verse Jesus is not God. That's why you were shown the context. Jesus isn't God in one verse and suddenly not God in several dozen other verses.

You’re projecting your inconsistency. You continue to skip over (or run away from) verse 1. When will you address verse 1 without skipping over it? You are being true to your name “Runningman” by running away from verse 1.

No verse says that.

Again, Titus 2:13 declares Jesus Christ as Great God and our Savior. That makes perfect grammatical sense and is clearly Trinitarian. I see that you’re at a total loss on how to reply to that fact. Again, you are being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Titus 2:13.

Indeed, so your preferred version doesn't help you.

You’re projecting your ineptitude by running away from having to deal with my reply. Again, you are being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Rom 9:5.

"I am" is ego eimi in the Greek and it translates to "I am the man" in some versions of John 9:9. Since Jesus said he is a man in John 8:40 then the correct way to understand what John 8:58 is that Jesus is the man who was prophesied about before Abraham.

To help support this, Acts 3:13 says that Jesus is the son or servant of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Therefore Jesus is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Exodus 3:14-15 says the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the I AM, YHWH, and that is His name forever.

What you have presented is not sound or compatible with Scripture.

So you want to insert the word “YHWH” into Ex 3:14 so that your heresy can stand? I see that you’ll go to any lengths for your heresy to stand.

(Ex 3:14) And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’

No verse says anything about that.

John 8:58 does. Again, you are being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from John 8:58.

(John 8:58) Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I AM!

Verse 1-2 says the revelation of Jesus Christ is what God gave him and that the Word of God is distinct from the testimony of Jesus Christ. In other words, Jesus' testimony isn't God's testimony.

You missed the point that it’s Christ’s testimony that is being revealed in Rev 1:8. Therefore, Christ is the Almighty. This could very well be another case of you being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Rev 1:8.

(Rev 1:8) I am the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the Ending, says the Lord, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

John 1:1-4 concerning the Word is personification of a thing. A spoken word is a thing, not a person. For example, in the Old Testament there is no one there named the Word with God saying or doing anything.

You are once again you running away from not only the KJV that uses personal pronouns (him, he) but you’re also running away from revealing which Bible version you quoted from. You are true to your name “Runningman”.

According to Scripture that's the Father.

1. And its rider is called Faithful = "the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God" - Deuteronomy 7:9
2. and True = "But the LORD is the true God;" - Jeremiah 10:10, John 17:3
3. With righteousness He judges = 'But God is the judge:' - Psalm 75:7
4. and wages war. = "the LORD your God is he that goeth with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you." - Deuteronomy 20:4
5. He has eyes like blazing fire, and many royal crowns on His head. = This is the Father because the other descriptions about the Father are all the Father.
6. He has a name written on Him that only He Himself knows. = Jesus doesn't know what only God knows. Matthew 24:36
7. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His name is The Word of God. = "their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment." - Isaiah 63:3
8. The armies of heaven, dressed in fine linen, white and pure, follow Him on white horses. = "my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?" = Matthew 26:53
9. from His mouth proceeds a sharp sword = "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword," - Hebrews 4:12
10. He will rule them with an iron scepter. = "for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me." - Psalm 23:4
11. He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. = "I have trodden the winepress alone; " - Isaiah 63:3
12. And He has a name written on His robe and on His thigh: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. = "who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;" - 1 Timothy 6:15

According to Rev 19:13 that is explicitly the Word of God. Are you so blind that you cannot read Rev 19:13? I even highlighted that verse for you so that you can catch it. This is a perfect example of who are true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Rev 1:8.

Rev 19:13 And He had been clothed in a garment dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

I'll respond to that soon.

It demonstrates Jesus lacks the divine attribute of omniscience. You want us to believe Jesus is God and yet he doesn't know what God knows?

You possess a dirt poor understanding of the kenosis of Christ.

Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
Php 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
Php 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

You ended this very poor reply with a whimper. Are you already tired?

You offered not even a whimper, in fact no reply, to the fact that Thomas declared Christ as “My Lord and My God”. I’ve lost count as to how many times you’ve run away from Bible verses. I couldn’t have named you better than what you named yourself “Runningman”, even if I tried.

 

[Runningman]

The age of manuscripts isn't the only determining factor.

For eg.. for the KJV .. the manuscripts being used were not as old as others. But they agreed with the majority of evidence already there. They also agreed with the testimony of lecturinaries and other types of old creeds.

I didn't suggest otherwise. I said "one of the metrics for determining authenticity is the age of the manuscript." I didn't say it was the only factor.

The KJV writers were wrong about 1 Timothy 3:16 is my point.

 

[Runningman]

You’re projecting your inconsistency. You continue to skip over (or run away from) verse 1. When will you address verse 1 without skipping over it? You are being true to your name “Runningman” by running away from verse 1.

Again, Titus 2:13 declares Jesus Christ as Great God and our Savior. That makes perfect grammatical sense and is clearly Trinitarian. I see that you’re at a total loss on how to reply to that fact. Again, you are being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Titus 2:13.

You’re projecting your ineptitude by running away from having to deal with my reply. Again, you are being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Rom 9:5.

So you want to insert the word “YHWH” into Ex 3:14 so that your heresy can stand? I see that you’ll go to any lengths for your heresy to stand.

(Ex 3:14) And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’

John 8:58 does. Again, you are being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from John 8:58.

(John 8:58) Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I AM!

You missed the point that it’s Christ’s testimony that is being revealed in Rev 1:8. Therefore, Christ is the Almighty. This could very well be another case of you being true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Rev 1:8.

(Rev 1:8) I am the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the Ending, says the Lord, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.

You are once again you running away from not only the KJV that uses personal pronouns (him, he) but you’re also running away from revealing which Bible version you quoted from. You are true to your name “Runningman”.

According to Rev 19:13 that is explicitly the Word of God. Are you so blind that you cannot read Rev 19:13? I even highlighted that verse for you so that you can catch it. This is a perfect example of who are true to your name ”Runningman” by running away from Rev 1:8.

Rev 19:13 And He had been clothed in a garment dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

You possess a dirt poor understanding of the kenosis of Christ.

I already replied to these. You did not offer a rebuttal to the things I said. Stop being a coward. man up, and address the points I made.

Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
Php 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
Php 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Philippians 2:5 begins with Paul telling them to have the mind of Jesus and Paul goes on to describe what the mind of Jesus is. The mind of Jesus is something that would be attainable for the church of Philippi. So what Paul is describing here has nothing to do with your imagined kenosis. For example, Paul was not teaching the church of Philippi to have it in their mind that they have kenosis. It says Jesus was a man who died. God isn't a man who died because God is immortal. Oops.

 

[synergy]

I already replied to these. You did not offer a rebuttal to the things I said. Stop being a coward. man up, and address the points I made.

So your rebuttal is to project your ineptitude and to run away once more from having to address my arguments, I see. As I said before, I couldn't have named you better than what you named yourself, a Runningman!

Run Runningman Run!!!

Philippians 2:5 begins with Paul telling them to have the mind of Jesus and Paul goes on to describe what the mind of Jesus is. The mind of Jesus is something that would be attainable for the church of Philippi. So what Paul is describing here has nothing to do with your imagined kenosis. For example, Paul was not teaching the church of Philippi to have it in their mind that they have kenosis. It says Jesus was a man who died. God isn't a man who died because God is immortal. Oops.

It's Jesus' kenosis that is being mentioned here, not "their kenosis". You have a hard time comprehending English I see. It's Jesus who humbled himself by taking on the likeness of men, not that they did so. That shows you the uniqueness of Jesus that you refuse to acknowledge.

BTW, nobody claims that God dies. That's your strawman. Jesus as a human died but his Divinity didn't.

 

[Runningman]

So your rebuttal is to project your ineptitude and to run away once more from having to address my arguments, I see. As I said before, I couldn't have named you better than what you named yourself, a Runningman!

Run Runningman Run!!!

Wasted comment and you still didn't address the points I made.

It's Jesus' kenosis that is being mentioned here, not "their kenosis". You have a hard time comprehending English I see. It's Jesus who humbled himself by taking on the likeness of men, not that they did so. That shows you the uniqueness of Jesus that you refuse to acknowledge.

BTW, nobody claims that God dies. That's your strawman. Jesus as a human died but his Divinity didn't.

Then you have a reading comprehension problem. The whole point of Philippians 2:5-8 is to teach the church of Philippi to have the mind of Jesus. If the mind of Jesus contains the kenosis then your teaching becomes a teaching for the church of Philippi to believe they have they kenosis. You're wrong.

Continue with verse 6 where it says Jesus is in the form of God. The word form here refers to the outward appearance of what is visual to the eyes. Not that God is a human, but rather God is godly, holy, righteous. These are things Jesus is and things church members can be too. The later verses simply make my point for me. They directly call Jesus a servant and a man who obeyed God to the point of death. These are all things the people in the church can have and do. Sorry but you don't have any points here!

Now that you seem to have ran through the trinitarian playbook (all recycled points I have seen probably hundreds of times) got anything else to try?

 

[jeremiah1five]

The Judaize term comes straight from your favorite Apostle of all times, Paul, who used the Koine Greek word Ἰουδαΐζειν in Gal 2:14. That's when Paul publicly chastised Peter for compelling Gentile converts live like Jews. Paul would rebuke you and every other Judaizer the same way with your multiple heresies concerning the Diety of Christ.

(Gal 2:14) But when I saw that they are not walking in line according to the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before all, "If you being a Jew live like a Gentile, and not like a Jew, why do you compel the Gentiles to Judaize (Ἰουδαΐζειν)?

Not even, steven
Saul, Peter, James, John, and the rest of the born-again of God were men who obeyed the Law of Moses as Jewish Christians:

Jews who became born-again...

20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: Acts 21:20.

And Saul in particular was obedient to the Law of Moses after meeting Jesus on the road who lived his life under the Law in newness of life:

24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. Acts 21:24.

And take notice of what Saul was asked to do, and that was to perform his Nazarene vow. After all, Saul did say he was "separated at birth unto the Law" which means he could shave his head (which he did) and perform his Nazarene vows before the Lord.

They would not ask him to observe these vows unless they KNEW he was a Nazarene.

Judaism wins again! Praise God for those who live according to His Law, which if the Law was abolished or obsolete or "ready to vanish away" (except they never said WHEN it would vanish away.)

The Law of Moses was given to the children of Israel TO OBEY not reject as "obsolete" as you believe. This means you are antinomian (against God's Law), the Law upon which true biblical Christians live unto God and obey.

23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 1 Pete 1:23.

And without God's Law no true born-again Christian can live before God in righteousness and purity which if one does not possess cannot see God.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable
for doctrine,
for reproof,
for correction,
for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Ti 3:16–17.

Why do you reject God's reign over you? By saying the Law and the Psalms and the Prophets are obsolete or abolished you are in effect saying "I WILL NOT live under your rule, O God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Jesus.