John 1:1 - Jesus is the Father or he's not the one true God?

[Wrangler]

Likewise, we, as Paul says in Romans 12:5, though many, are one body in Christ

Do you even grasp the distinction between figurative from literal use of language?

To invoke the body of a person to figuratively express how we are united, is a far cry from saying we are all literally God.

 

[Rich R]

Well, no longer any need to try to make sense of nonsense. :) Or heretical "sense." Though individual, they are one. Likewise, we, as Paul says in Romans 12:5, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

I challenge you to find anything I've said that violates the rules of logic. On the other hand, I can see one right here: "though individual, they are one." Presumably the individual refers to, 1) God, 2) Jesus, 3) the Holy Spirit. That's 3 different people. It defies logic, grammar, common sense, and effective communication to then say they are not three, but one.

Jesus prayed that we would all be one with him and the Father. Are we then to think we are all God? I don't think so. Have you ever read something like, "the crowd was one in their objection to..." We all know what that means. We all know it means many people shared the same concerns, had the same goals, etc. We would never say, "they are many people in one essence" like the trinity doctrine necessitates. That is eisegesis on steroids!

 

[PinSeeker]

Rather than admit you are contradicting yourself, you reveal your mocking spirit. I'll pray for you.

How convenient that you cut out the self-debunking portion of your post. You quoted me, and said you agreed with it, and then said I was twisting your words. Somehow. Quite incredible.

Do you even grasp the distinction between figurative from literal use of language?
Very well, yes. So what you say here...

Wrangler: To invoke the body of a person to figuratively express how we are united, is a far cry from saying we are all literally God.​

​

...is just silly. I mean, I agree with the statement at face value, but presenting it in response to what I said is just utterly silly. I was not in any way saying, figuratively or literally, that we are all God. To suppose or suggest such is quite ridiculous.

What I said is that, quoting from Paul in Romans 12:5, "we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another." We, though many individuals, are members of one another. Likewise, God, though Three, is one God, but individually members one of another. As Jesus said, "(He is) in the Father and the Father is in (Him)." Though not mentioned immediately, the Holy Spirit shares in that.

Unlike the Godhead, though, we are not yet in perfect unity and communion with one another... but we will be, as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have been from all eternity. But again, we are not now and never will be God.

And I'll add ~ and I think you will agree; you should ~ that there is both a figurative and literal aspect to all this.

My goodness.

Grace and peace to you, Wrangler.

 

[PinSeeker]

I challenge you to find anything I've said that violates the rules of logic.

I've never suggested otherwise. The problem is not logic, really, Rich, but rather overly simplistic and rationalistic in nature.

On the other hand, I can see one right here: "though individual, they are one." Presumably the individual refers to, 1) God, 2) Jesus, 3) the Holy Spirit. That's 3 different people. It defies logic, grammar, common sense, and effective communication to then say they are not three, but one.

You might be wise to see my response to Wrangler above. I'll restate it here for convenience's sake:

We, though many individuals, are members of one another. Likewise, God, though Three, is one God, but individually members one of another. As Jesus said, "(He is) in the Father and the Father is in (Him)." Though not mentioned immediately, the Holy Spirit shares in that. Unlike the Godhead, though, we are not yet in perfect unity and communion with one another... but we will be, as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have been from all eternity.

Jesus prayed that we would all be one with him and the Father. Are we then to think we are all God? I don't think so. Have you ever read something like, "the crowd was one in their objection to..." We all know what that means. We all know it means many people shared the same concerns, had the same goals, etc. We would never say, "they are many people in one essence" like the trinity doctrine necessitates.

Ah, I know you don't mean to be doing this, Rich, but you are making God out to be in the image of man, here. I know it's inadvertent, but we cannot do that. But we will, however, be just like Jesus when that great Day comes.

That is eisegesis on steroids!

LOL! Nope. It just is what it is. :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Wrangler]

I was not in any way saying, figuratively or literally, that we are all God.

Oy vey! You were saying in some way that we are all the body of Christ.

I think you know this "Oneness" is figurative. However, when it comes to the "Oneness" of God and Jesus, you assert it is not figurative but literal.

 

[Rich R]

How convenient that you cut out the self-debunking portion of your post. You quoted me, and said you agreed with it, and then said I was twisting your words. Somehow. Quite incredible.

​

...is just silly. I mean, I agree with the statement at face value, but presenting it in response to what I said is just utterly silly. I was not in any way saying, figuratively or literally, that we are all God. To suppose or suggest such is quite ridiculous. What I said is that, quoting from Paul in Romans 12:5, "we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another." We, though many individuals, are members of one another. Likewise, God, though Three, are one God, and individually members one of another. Unlike the Godhead, though, we are not yet in perfect unity and communion with one another... but we will be, as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have been from all eternity. And I'll add ~ and I think you will agree; you should ~ that there is both a figurative and literal aspect to all this.

My goodness.

Grace and peace to you, Wrangler.

It's irrelevant as to whether two or more people agree on something or not. They are still two or more people, or in case of God and Jesus, two people. That much the trinity says, but then the doctrine necessitates we add, "they are not three, but one..." Doing that makes the words "three" and "one" meaningless. If the meaning of those two words change, then who's to say what the words "God" and "Satan" mean?

 

[Rich R]

Ah, I know you don't mean to be doing this, Rich, but you are making God out to be in the image of man, here. I know it's inadvertent, but we cannot do that.

That is eisegesis on steroids!

Here's what I said:

"Jesus prayed that we would all be one with him and the Father. Are we then to think we are all God? I don't think so. Have you ever read something like, "the crowd was one in their objection to..." We all know what that means. We all know it means many people shared the same concerns, had the same goals, etc. We would never say, "they are many people in one essence" like the trinity doctrine necessitates."
​

Could you elaborate on how that makes God to be the image of man? Maybe you're not thinking of the verses I had in mind.

John 17:21-22,

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:​

Given that you call Jesus God and Jesus is called a man several times, wouldn't it actually be you who is making God into the image of man? It would be, and that is precisely the problem with the trinity. It turns God into a man. Or even worse, it makes God into a pagan god/man creature!

 

[PinSeeker]

Oy vey! You were saying in some way that we are all the body of Christ.

Yes, but not literally, of course; His hands and His feet are His own. Wow.

I think you know this "Oneness" is figurative.

Sure. But there is also a literal aspect to it. And it will all be made finally perfect at the Day of Christ.

However, when it comes to the "Oneness" of God and Jesus, you assert it is not figurative but literal.

The oneness of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit has both a figurative and literal aspect to it.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Rich R]

I've never suggested otherwise. The problem is not logic, really, Rich, but rather overly simplistic and rationalistic in nature.

Yes, I am guilty of reading the scriptures as a simple child. I've not yet learned to complicate it with the convolution of words and ideas required by the trinity. I did at one time, but those days are long gone.

Obviously you and I have strong disagreements on this front, but I hope you know I love you as a brother and that will not change. I thank God for our life and I'm blessed to know you! :)

 

[Wrangler]

The oneness of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit has both a figurative and literal aspect to it

The question is, why do you not apply this duality - both a figurative and literal aspect - to the "Oneness" extending to literally making us God?

Trinitarianism is arbitrary. Some things are arbitrarily figurative, literal or both. It just depends on what it takes to make trinitarianism seem like it has some kind of validity.

You start off with your doctrine is right, then use whatever rationalization is necessary to "support" it. Oneness with God and Jesus - literal. Oneness with us and God - figurative. Reason: Cuz d'at be trinitarianism. Trinitarianism is right. It is our limited mind and limited words that is the problem.

 

[PinSeeker]

It's irrelevant as to whether two or more people agree on something or not.

Disagree.

They are still two or more people, or in case of God and Jesus, two people.

Agree.

That much the trinity says, but then the doctrine necessitates we add, "they are not three, but one..." Doing that makes the words "three" and "one" meaningless.

No, but the fact that they are one makes the three that much more significant and meaningful, and vice-versa. Likewise, the fact that we are now all one in Christ Jesus makes the fact that we are many individuals that much more significant and meaningful, and vice-versa.

If the meaning of those two words change, then who's to say what the words "God" and "Satan" mean?

See above.

Could you elaborate on how that makes God to be the image of man?

Yes, sure; you're defining God in the image of His creation... you're thinking of God in terms of creation.

Given that you call Jesus God and Jesus is called a man several times, wouldn't it actually be you who is making God into the image of man?

No, I am acknowledging that Jesus was both in the form of God and in the form of man during His life on earth, just as Paul says in Philippians 2. He took on humanity, even though fully deity. He did this for our sakes. And as Paul also says in Colossians 1, Jesus is the image of the invisible God ~ the very thing itself. In the humanity of Jesus, the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.

It would be, and that is precisely the problem with the trinity. It turns God into a man.

That Jesus, even though fully God, would do this for our sake is stupendous, is it not?

Or even worse, it makes God into a pagan god/man creature!

Meh. Rubbish. It acknowledges Jesus as the Lamb of God. Which... He is.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Yes, I am guilty of reading the scriptures as a simple child.

That's not quite how I would characterize it. :)

I've not yet learned to complicate it with the convolution of words and ideas required by the trinity.

Understanding the triune-ness of God requires no such thing. But it does require a letting go, not of simplicity but of simplistic thinking.

I did at one time, but those days are long gone.

Well, I think if you did so, you did so... poorly. :) Maybe you'll be back. The Holy Spirit is still hard at work... :)

Obviously you and I have strong disagreements on this front, but I hope you know I love you as a brother and that will not change. I thank God for our life and I'm blessed to know you! :)

Right back atcha, Rich.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

The question is, why do you not apply this duality - both a figurative and literal aspect - to the "Oneness" extending to literally making us God?

Because Scripture is clear that God is God, and we are not (and never will be).

Trinitarianism is arbitrary. Some things are arbitrarily figurative, literal or both.

Well, in the sense that God has made things according to His will, maybe, and we just have to accept it as it is.

You start off with your doctrine is right, then use whatever rationalization is necessary to "support" it.

That's exactly what the Watchtower did. You are just bought into it.

Oneness with God and Jesus - literal.

No, literal and figurative.

Oneness with us and God - figurative.

No, literal and figurative.

Reason: Cuz d'at be trinitarianism.

Well, what I said, not what you said.

Trinitarianism is right.

Right.

It is our limited mind and limited words that is the problem.

Well, I'd say it's something other than the mind or the words; those things are not the root cause.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Wrangler]

Because Scripture is clear that God is God, and we are not (and never will be).

And that includes Jesus as "we" who are not God.

 

[PinSeeker]

And that includes Jesus as "we" who are not God.

Nope. It's quite painful to know you think that, but nope.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Wrangler]

Nope. It's quite painful to know you think that, but nope.

Grace and peace to you.

The 1C is that you shall have no other gods before me, which necessarily includes the trinitarian god. It's quite painful that you do not realize singular is not tripping-anything.

 

[Kermos]

Not once we aver,

"...So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty..." ~ Athanasian Creed ~

If we accept that then no need to make sense with anything else. Anything goes, but it does not go. What???? :)

You and @Wrangler are the blind leading the blind (Matthew 15:14).

Jesus is the Word (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #329 in this thread), but you foolishly deny the Word of God.

In the same vein, Luke 1:1-2 identify Jesus is the Word, just like John 1:14 identifies Jesus is the Word (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #394 in this thread), so you intensely persist in your rejection of the Word of God.

You admit "the Word was God" (John 1:1) states that "the Word" is being referred to as "God" with your writing of 'the "word" was God Himself' (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #238 in this thread), but you wickedly proceeded to disassociate John's writing from John's writing in John chapter 1 where John declares Jesus is the Word (John 1:14) your heart evilly disassociates from Jesus being God "the Word was God" (John 1:1) since Jesus is the Word (John 1:14).

You publicly blaspheme against the Holy Spirit (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #421 in this thread) because you call the Holy Spirit a grotesque thing.

You convey that no person was ever created except for Adam in your complete denial of God's sovereignty (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #447 in this thread), yet the Word of God (John 1:1-5, John 1:14) declares "I formed you in the womb" (Jeremiah 1:5), so every person born has been created by God in the person's mother's womb. Jesus, truly God, exists eternally, so Jesus is uncreated.

In a similar vein, You convey that the words "formed" and "created" unrelated with respect to God's creation, yet "formed" and "created" are intimately related (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #449 in this thread) because "All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being" (John 1:3) is John’s writing about Jesus causing everything to "be", that is, to exist for Jesus is the Word (shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #238 in this thread)

Continuing in a similar vein, The words "formed" and "created" are used synonymously in Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:7 for God's creative act of bringing Adam into existence (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #452 in this thread); therefore, God establishes the precedent for the words "formed" and "created" to show God's creative act. Man is created. Man is formed. God is uncreated. Jesus is YHWH God (John 1:1-5, John 1:14)

WAIT, THERE'S MORE:

You demonstrated a staggering level of linguistic errors, omissions, and/or misrepresentations as shown in the following links:

Despite being confronted by the Word of God clearly indicating that Jesus manifesting flesh as truly Man exists with the Word of God clearly indicating that Jesus as truly God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1681 in this ChristianityBoard thread), you foolishly persist in your delusion of destruction that Jesus is not YHWH God.

moreover

You evilly use your flattering tongue to additionally spread lies about Jesus such as your heart's deception that Jesus is not God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1554 in this ChristianityBoard thread), and you deny Apostolic testimony that Jesus is God by your wicked thoughts that clear verses "are ambiguous and don't say outright that Jesus is God", and you disrespect and dishonor the Holy Name of God showing your wolf in sheep's clothing internals.

moreover

You wickedly promote mere humans to being God while you evilly demote Jesus from being God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #848 in this ChristianityBoard thread), and you deceptively try to confuse Jesus' special place as Immanuel, God with us (Matthew 1:23, Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 9:6).

moreover

In your heart, you subtract the Apostle Thomas saying "my God" to Lord Jesus (John 20:28) in the context of Thomas' usage (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #870 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you deny Apostolic testimony.

moreover

You desperately try to change the Word of God into "that they also may be one with us" in John 17:21-22, so you are making yourself out to be greater than the Word of God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1003 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you nullify the Word of God, Jesus (John 1:1, John 1:14) in your heart by exalting your thoughts above God's thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9).

moreover

You foolishly claim the Greek "en" can mean "with", yet "en" truly means "in", and your foolishness targets your thoughts that Jesus does not mean "one" when Jesus says "one" both in John 10:30 and John 17:21-22 (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1213 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you are under the delusion that. Jesus is not one with the Father despite Jesus truthfully declaring of the Father and Himself "We are One" (John 17:22). You are fixated on the temporal instead of the eternal.

moreover

By your writing, your illogic is illuminated, your linguistic foolishness abounds, and you expose your fleshly natural state of being (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1269 in this ChristianityBoard thread); consequently, (1) you deny the personification references of the Father as well as the Christ in scripture, (2) you deny the true meaning of "one" as shown near the pie example, (3) you deny Jesus' sayings of "We are One" (John 17:22) by adulterating His words with your limiting words from your heart, (4) you deny the Spiritual Truth (John 14:6) by imposing your temporal treasure on Jesus, (5) you change the language of Ephesians 1:4, and (6) you deny Jesus is God despite the testimony of scripture indicating that Jesus is God.

moreover

In a bout of linguistic foolishness, you preach that "I will be" is correct for Exodus 3:14 instead of "I AM" (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1280 in this ChristianityBoard thread); therefore, you convey that your heart's treasure is that God does change in direct contradiction to the Word of God saying "I, YHWH, do not change" (Malachi 3:6).

moreover

(1)You adulterate the Word of God recorded in Jeremiah 18:6-10 into the word of Rich R "if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I change" (2) in order to adulterate the Word of God "I, YHWH, do not change" (Malachi 3:6) into the word of Rich R "I, Jehovah, do not change except I will become for Israel" (3) which you extend to adulterate the Word of God "I AM Who I AM" (Exodus 3:14) into the word of Rich R "I will be who I will be" (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1331 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you call the Word of God a LIE, in fact, your word leads you to not know who God is.

moreover


You confusedly lie about writings including Paul's writing that Jesus is not the first man born (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1703 in this ChristianityBoard thread), as is clearly shown between Colossians 1:15 and 1 Corinthians 15:47.

moreover

You show your utter disrespectful contempt for the Word of God by trying to change the meaning of the Hebrew language (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1660 in this ChristianityBoard thread), even after you've been shown the word for Strong's 5162 means "to be sorry, console oneself", not "repent", but truly something akin to "sorrow"; IN EFFECT, YOU LABEL YHWH GOD A CONFUSED FOOL THAT LIES.

moreover

You show a repeated disrespect and dishonor and disregard for the God Most High by misspelling the sacred and Holy Name of God, YHWH, (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1287 in this ChristianityBoard thread) in at least 3 different posts; therefore, you publicly show just how little God means to you as well as your failure to understand God

You have a false god that you created based on your thoughts that you named Jesus, yet your false god is not the Jesus revealed in the Word of God.

 

[PinSeeker]

The 1C is that you shall have no other gods before me...

Which is what "Jesus is not God" folks suppose Thomas to be doing in John 20:28, when He acknowledges and worships Jesus as God. In addition to supposing John and infinitely more importantly Jesus to be doing throughout John's gospel and elsewhere.

...you do not realize singular is not tripping-anything.

You don't realize that this make absolutely no sense with regard to the triune God... or anything else for that matter. :)

Grace and peace to you, Wrangler.

 

[Rich R]

You and @Wrangler are the blind leading the blind (Matthew 15:14).

Jesus is the Word (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #329 in this thread), but you foolishly deny the Word of God.

In the same vein, Luke 1:1-2 identify Jesus is the Word, just like John 1:14 identifies Jesus is the Word (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #394 in this thread), so you intensely persist in your rejection of the Word of God.

You admit "the Word was God" (John 1:1) states that "the Word" is being referred to as "God" with your writing of 'the "word" was God Himself' (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #238 in this thread), but you wickedly proceeded to disassociate John's writing from John's writing in John chapter 1 where John declares Jesus is the Word (John 1:14) your heart evilly disassociates from Jesus being God "the Word was God" (John 1:1) since Jesus is the Word (John 1:14).

You publicly blaspheme against the Holy Spirit (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #421 in this thread) because you call the Holy Spirit a grotesque thing.

You convey that no person was ever created except for Adam in your complete denial of God's sovereignty (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #447 in this thread), yet the Word of God (John 1:1-5, John 1:14) declares "I formed you in the womb" (Jeremiah 1:5), so every person born has been created by God in the person's mother's womb. Jesus, truly God, exists eternally, so Jesus is uncreated.

In a similar vein, You convey that the words "formed" and "created" unrelated with respect to God's creation, yet "formed" and "created" are intimately related (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #449 in this thread) because "All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being" (John 1:3) is John’s writing about Jesus causing everything to "be", that is, to exist for Jesus is the Word (shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #238 in this thread)

Continuing in a similar vein, The words "formed" and "created" are used synonymously in Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:7 for God's creative act of bringing Adam into existence (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #452 in this thread); therefore, God establishes the precedent for the words "formed" and "created" to show God's creative act. Man is created. Man is formed. God is uncreated. Jesus is YHWH God (John 1:1-5, John 1:14)

WAIT, THERE'S MORE:

You demonstrated a staggering level of linguistic errors, omissions, and/or misrepresentations as shown in the following links:

Despite being confronted by the Word of God clearly indicating that Jesus manifesting flesh as truly Man exists with the Word of God clearly indicating that Jesus as truly God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1681 in this ChristianityBoard thread), you foolishly persist in your delusion of destruction that Jesus is not YHWH God.

moreover

You evilly use your flattering tongue to additionally spread lies about Jesus such as your heart's deception that Jesus is not God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1554 in this ChristianityBoard thread), and you deny Apostolic testimony that Jesus is God by your wicked thoughts that clear verses "are ambiguous and don't say outright that Jesus is God", and you disrespect and dishonor the Holy Name of God showing your wolf in sheep's clothing internals.

moreover

You wickedly promote mere humans to being God while you evilly demote Jesus from being God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #848 in this ChristianityBoard thread), and you deceptively try to confuse Jesus' special place as Immanuel, God with us (Matthew 1:23, Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 9:6).

moreover

In your heart, you subtract the Apostle Thomas saying "my God" to Lord Jesus (John 20:28) in the context of Thomas' usage (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #870 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you deny Apostolic testimony.

moreover

You desperately try to change the Word of God into "that they also may be one with us" in John 17:21-22, so you are making yourself out to be greater than the Word of God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1003 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you nullify the Word of God, Jesus (John 1:1, John 1:14) in your heart by exalting your thoughts above God's thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9).

moreover

You foolishly claim the Greek "en" can mean "with", yet "en" truly means "in", and your foolishness targets your thoughts that Jesus does not mean "one" when Jesus says "one" both in John 10:30 and John 17:21-22 (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1213 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you are under the delusion that. Jesus is not one with the Father despite Jesus truthfully declaring of the Father and Himself "We are One" (John 17:22). You are fixated on the temporal instead of the eternal.

moreover

By your writing, your illogic is illuminated, your linguistic foolishness abounds, and you expose your fleshly natural state of being (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1269 in this ChristianityBoard thread); consequently, (1) you deny the personification references of the Father as well as the Christ in scripture, (2) you deny the true meaning of "one" as shown near the pie example, (3) you deny Jesus' sayings of "We are One" (John 17:22) by adulterating His words with your limiting words from your heart, (4) you deny the Spiritual Truth (John 14:6) by imposing your temporal treasure on Jesus, (5) you change the language of Ephesians 1:4, and (6) you deny Jesus is God despite the testimony of scripture indicating that Jesus is God.

moreover

In a bout of linguistic foolishness, you preach that "I will be" is correct for Exodus 3:14 instead of "I AM" (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1280 in this ChristianityBoard thread); therefore, you convey that your heart's treasure is that God does change in direct contradiction to the Word of God saying "I, YHWH, do not change" (Malachi 3:6).

moreover

(1)You adulterate the Word of God recorded in Jeremiah 18:6-10 into the word of Rich R "if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I change" (2) in order to adulterate the Word of God "I, YHWH, do not change" (Malachi 3:6) into the word of Rich R "I, Jehovah, do not change except I will become for Israel" (3) which you extend to adulterate the Word of God "I AM Who I AM" (Exodus 3:14) into the word of Rich R "I will be who I will be" (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1331 in this ChristianityBoard thread), so you call the Word of God a LIE, in fact, your word leads you to not know who God is.

moreover


You confusedly lie about writings including Paul's writing that Jesus is not the first man born (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1703 in this ChristianityBoard thread), as is clearly shown between Colossians 1:15 and 1 Corinthians 15:47.

moreover

You show your utter disrespectful contempt for the Word of God by trying to change the meaning of the Hebrew language (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1660 in this ChristianityBoard thread), even after you've been shown the word for Strong's 5162 means "to be sorry, console oneself", not "repent", but truly something akin to "sorrow"; IN EFFECT, YOU LABEL YHWH GOD A CONFUSED FOOL THAT LIES.

moreover

You show a repeated disrespect and dishonor and disregard for the God Most High by misspelling the sacred and Holy Name of God, YHWH, (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1287 in this ChristianityBoard thread) in at least 3 different posts; therefore, you publicly show just how little God means to you as well as your failure to understand God

You have a false god that you created based on your thoughts that you named Jesus, yet your false god is not the Jesus revealed in the Word of God.

I think this is about the 6th time you've sent this message. I don't mind, but I thought you might want to know. :)

 

[Wrangler]

Which is what "Jesus is not God" folks suppose Thomas to be doing in John 20:20

IF someone thinks I am a billionaire and calls me a billionaire, that's what makes me a billionaire?! Oh my.

You don't realize that this make absolutely no sense with regard to the triune God

Good, since it makes no sense.