“And you still haven’t answered it.”
Yes I have. Many times. And that’s a serious problem.
” Because the Father is in him, and he is in the Father. “
This assertion has already been refuted.
“I gave you over 100 references pointing that out,”
Not only did you give me 100 of your references, which in no way contradicted anything I wrote, you did it 100 times. Why should I regard your position when it is based on the false premise that the Father is ONLY in the Son, and the Son isn’t in the Father, and the two aren’t in us, with the Holy Spirit who is called both the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ? Who Himself is called ‘God’?
All you’ve done is repeat the same things over and over again, asking me to disbelieve the plain words of the scripture in favor of your partial and crooked theology.
“Would you want a cell phone that doesn’t relay the words of the source?”
Huh? How exactly is this a response? I wrote:
“As blasphemous as this is, it’s already been firmly refuted. How does a cell phone have an independent identity of its user?”
“The Son doesn’t have an indepentent DIVINE identity: “
So now you’re saying He has an identity, but He’s not divine? Earlier you said that the Word and God are not separate.
Isa_9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Sounds like the Son is pretty divine to me.
At this point I really wouldn’t be surprised if you’re copying and pasting what you’ve written to me before. It looks so similar that I just kind of glaze over and end up skimming through it. I’ll end this reply at this, and then we’ll repeat it again with your next post where you’ll say the same things for the 101st time.
Aren’t you glad I haven’t forgotten you?
You: Yes I have. Many times. And that’s a serious problem.
Me: ”Because the Father is in him, and he is in the Father.“ The fulness of the Godhead is IN Christ.
“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”. Matt. 3:17
“Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Mark 1:11
“Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.” Luke 3:22
“Behold MY servant, whom I uphold; MINE elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put MY spirit upon him: he bring forth judgment to the Gentiles”. Isa. 42:1
Kinda strange that the Father would have WORDS to say, when He is not God the Word (using trinity logic).
You: **This assertion has already been refuted.**
Refuted? Out of the entire chapter 14 you pull (cherry pick) one verse (20) to declare it to only show a unity of likemindedness when describing the relationship of the Father and the Son (and followers of the Lord). I point out to you that the Christ is telling of the upcoming experience of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and how it will make us similar to him: knowing what it is like to have the Spirit of God (not God the Spirit) in us. You cherry pick the verse and use it to deny the plain reading of 14:7-11; especially 10, where the Son says: “..the Father that dwelleth in me, HE doeth the works.”
“I gave you over 100 references pointing that out,”
**Not only did you give me 100 of your references, which in no way contradicted anything I wrote, you did it 100 times.**
How could you say I’ve given you 100 references when you admit to skipping, skimming, etc. what I’ve written? Oh wait, you said I did it 100 times. You probably do read what I say, but you likely read it over several times, thus multiplying my responses approx. tenfold.
Your ‘trinity’ of equal (somehow, but not equal in abilities) persons of God (or is it ‘God the persons’) seems to be explained by your opinions thus far as:
God the Father is mute, since God the Son is God the Word.
God the Father does no creating, and only displays any power during the 33 yrs of the Christ’s earthly life.
God the Son has the power to do anything himself, but refuses to during his earthly visitation, and calls on God the Father during that time to lend his power to him when needed.
God the Father tells (oops.....gestures to) God the Holy Ghost to attend to this or that. God the Holy Ghost never gets to order God the Father around. Not very equal if you ask me.
** Why should I regard your position when it is based on the false premise that the Father is ONLY in the Son, and the Son isn’t in the Father, and the two aren’t in us, with the Holy Spirit who is called both the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ? Who Himself is called ‘God’?**
Boy, you HAVE been skipping and skimming a lot! I told you (oops....John the baptist told you) that the Son was filled with the Spirit without measure. Only the Christ has that limitless design. But, those that receive the baptism of the Spirit are fellow heirs with Christ, heirs of God, and sons of God. A least you haven’t been using the “phrases ‘God the Son’, and ‘God the Holy Ghost’ in the last few posts. So, we’re making progress on your plain reading claims.
I said: “Would you want a cell phone that doesn’t relay the words of the source?”
You said: **Huh? How exactly is this a response?**
John 12:49,50 gives you a great example. (Oh, I forgot you skip, skim, etc.) “For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he GAVE me commandment, WHAT I should SAY, and WHAT I should SPEAK. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I SPEAK therefore, even as the FATHER SAID unto me, so I SPEAK”.
You wrote: **I wrote: “As blasphemous as this is, it’s already been firmly refuted. How does a cell phone have an independent identity of its user?”**
I said: “The Son doesn’t have an indepentent DIVINE identity:
You said: **“So now you’re saying He has an identity, but He’s not divine? Earlier you said that the Word and God are not separate. Isa_9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Sounds like the Son is pretty divine to me.**
As I’ve said all along: It’s the omnipresent God the Father, by means of HIS Spirit, dwelling without measure in the Son, that makes the Son divine. The Son had his own will of the flesh, which was independent. Yet, with the power of ‘the only true God’ in him (see 17:1-3), his will was willing to obey God the Father, and with that power, overcome the world. The body of the Son was POTENTIALLY corruptible (see Ps 16:10, Acts 2:27). All divinity is sourced back to the Father, otherwise your ‘God the Son’ and ‘God the Holy Ghost’ phrases would be spelled out that way in the scriptures. I’ve probably pointed that out ‘a 100 times’. (lol)
I’ll give you credit for not repasting your excuses for not answering the list of questions I’ve placed at the end of my posts. You just word them differently each time:
**At this point I really wouldn’t be surprised if you’re copying and pasting what you’ve written to me before. It looks so similar that I just kind of glaze over and end up skimming through it. I’ll end this reply at this, and then we’ll repeat it again with your next post where you’ll say the same things for the 101st time.**
**Actually, pretty sure I already responded to most of what you’ve written dozens of posts ago, probably multiple times too.** from #1242
**Looks like back then I couldn’t care less either, and was still frustrated, 200 posts ago, about the repetitious nature of the arguments you present me.** from #1240
**To be honest, I skim through most of your posts and don’t really read them completely. If I don’t respond to every little thing, just assume that I thought it was insignificant or not worth commenting on, since other scriptures make my argument without going through the effort of untangling yours.** from #1216
If my list of questions were easy for you to answer directly, you would have answered them. You manage to reply rather quickly to other comments I’ve made.
For the FIFTH time:
1. Are you and your word two separate and distinct persons? (we are made in the image of God aren’t we?) You say you’ve answered it, by using John 1:1. But you still didn’t answer the question.
2. Who’s greater: The Son says, “My Father, which is GAVE them me, is GREATER than ALL..”. 10:29; and “..for my Father is GREATER than I..”. 14:28.
3. Mat_28:19 “ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:..”. The greatest teacher of all gave the disciples that commandment, and they promptly went about baptizing in the name of JESUS. Now, first of all, note that he says ‘name’ in the singular, not ‘names’. ‘Son’ is a title. “thou shalt call his NAME Jesus”. Luke 1:21. Jesus Christ said that his name is not his own (John 5:43), And Heb. 1:4 says that he inheritted it. The apostles knew what they were doing when they baptized in the name of ‘Jesus’. Do you use his name in water baptism?
4. “The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the FATHER will SEND in MY NAME...”. So, what name are YOU going to use to request the coming of the Holy Ghost?
5. AND........don’t forget Matthew 28:18; Jesus..spake...”All power is GIVEN unto me in heaven and in Earth” (that’s pretty much everywhere, and let’s see, who GAVE it unto him?......could it be the Father that dwelleth in him, and he in the Father?).
6. Jesus praying to the Father (17:1), “And this is life eternal, that they might know THEE the ONLY TRUE GOD, ........AND........JESUS CHRIST, whom THOU hast SENT.” John 17:3. So, do you disagree with the Son, who declares the Father to be the “ONLY TRUE GOD”? (That’s some more ‘plain reading’; just like ‘the ‘Father in me, and I in the Father’)..
And you didn’t deal with this:
Food for thought: 15:1 A vine (Son) and a husbandman (the Father). The husbandman plants the vine and cares for it, etc. The ‘husbandman’ gave the ‘vine’ it’s start, provides all it’s needs, and has the power to prune or even kill the vine. Of itself, the vine has no such power.
Or this: How does a ‘trinitarian’ explain this: “But of that day and hour knoweth....my Father only” (the 2nd and 3rd ‘persons of God’ don’t know??)?