[vladimir998]

“You’re words, vlad....which btw you will see again in future conversations. You’re squirming vlad.”

Quote them often since they are irrefutably true. There was no Jesus before Jesus was formed in the womb. That’s exactly what John 1 tells us. There was the Second Person of the Trinity but no Jesus.

This is basic, orthodox Christianity. And there’s never any squirming on my part. My gosh, do you ever project a lot! Everything I said is entirely orthodox and has been believed in for 2000 years and is enshrined right there in John 1 but you think I’m squirming for siding with God and by quoting inspired and inerrant scripture. Seriously, your floundering is the best laugh I’ll have all day. At this rate you’re be denying the resurrection by the end of the week and claiming I’m “squirming” by citing gospel resurrection accounts! How low into personal comments/attacks/fantasies will you anti-Catholics sink to cover up your own embarrassment?

And I noticed that you completely ignored the verses that irrefutably shows that what I said was true. Gee, what a surprise that an anti-Catholic is ignoring scripture that shows his error is exactly that - error! Here they are again so other people can see you ignore them yet again in apparent desperation.

John 1: 1-3: In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came to be through him,
and without him nothing came to be.

John 1:14: And the Word became flesh
and made his dwelling among us,
and we saw his glory,
the glory as of the Father’s only Son,
full of grace and truth.

The Second Person of the Trinity BECAME FLESH. Only after John says that does he refer to “Jesus Christ” in verse 17.

“That phd you claim to have sure isn’t helping you any.”

John the Evangelist never claimed to have a PhD yet you’re rejecting what he wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Go on, keep ignoring what he wrote. Everyone here will see you reject inspired scripture yet again.

[metmom]

Quote them often since they are irrefutably true. There was no Jesus before Jesus was formed in the womb. That’s exactly what John 1 tells us. There was the Second Person of the Trinity but no Jesus.

So now it reads that you're saying that Jesus is not the Second Person of the Trinity, God Incarnate.

Interesting.......

[Elsie]

Quote them often since they are irrefutably true.

Call no man father.

[boatbums]

Vlad you need a refresher on FR posting guidelines:

Forms of "making it personal" include mind reading, attributing motive, accusing another Freeper of telling a lie (because it attributes motive, the intent to deceive) - making the thread "about" individual Freeper(s), following a Freeper from thread to thread and badgering a Freeper over-and-again with the same question.

The words "prevarication" "dishonesty" "slander" "deceit" "calumny" and "subterfuge" are synonymous with "lie" because they entail intent.

Words such as "false" "error" "wrong" "inaccurate" "misstatement" do not attribute motive and are not "making it personal."

Other words push the envelope of motive but are not synonymous with "lie" for purposes of modding the RF. However, they can be "making it personal" if applied to another Freeper, personally, in such a way the discussion becomes "about" the individual Freeper instead of the issues. Those words include "misrepresentation" "detraction" "disinformation" "distortion" "hyperbole" and "doublespeak."

Another example, calling a group of Freepers "anti-Mormon" attributes motive to them as a group which is not technically "making it personal" - but saying that another Freeper, personally, is anti-Mormon [or anti-Catholic] instead of anti-MormonISM is an ad hominem. It is "making it personal."

Can't you argue for your beliefs without calling others anti-Catholic and accusing them of lying?