What hairs am I splitting? Your declaring Jesus is God does not make him God.Splitting hairs to stay in error ! Nothing to see here, because Jesus is God wether you accept that truth or not changes nothing.
What hairs am I splitting? Your declaring Jesus is God does not make him God.Splitting hairs to stay in error ! Nothing to see here, because Jesus is God wether you accept that truth or not changes nothing.
What hairs am I splitting? Your declaring Jesus is God does not make him God.
Re-read your list you acknowledge if you see Jesus you see God then declare Jesus isn’t God. Your denying that Jesus isn’t God does not mean He isn’t God it just means you are following your own error.What hairs am I splitting? Your declaring Jesus is God does not make him God.
It doesn't say "Jesus is God" and you've already admitted that. It might say something that you want to interpret to mean that, but it doesn't ever say "Jesus is God".No, but the Bible's declaring that Jesus is God does.
So, you can't say and you were mistaken about my splitting hairs.Re-read your list you acknowledge if you see Jesus you see God then declare Jesus isn’t God. Your denying that Jesus isn’t God does not mean He isn’t God it just means you are following your own error.
So, the Bible is an IQ test?Jesus says that if you have seen Him you have seen God.
Only a moron can claim that Jesus did not claim to be God.
Yes. And you failed.So, the Bible is an IQ test?
Actually it is called begging the question.
Yes. That is a possibility.
However, since Jesus usually didn't talk in the third person about himself
I'm also not aware of any place in John's Gospel (the passage in question notwithstanding) where "Son of Man" is recorded as being from either John himself as commentary or by someone who is speaking other than Jesus. In addition: even Matthew, Mark, and Luke record Jesus as referring to Himself in the third person as the "Son of Man," among other things. |
and talking about oneself in the third person is usually a symptom of insanity,
I didn't ask a dead person. I asked you if you held a preconceived belief because the verses were place in red.
"What evidence do you have that Jesus was speaking this passage?"
Is it just that someone decided to put it in red?
1. The Greek verbs which follow verse 12 indicate completed events.
2. "only begotten Son" was not used by Jesus - only John. John 1:14, 18, 1 John 4:9.
3. "in the name of" was not used by Jesus - only John. John 1:12, 2:23, 1 John 5:13.
4. "do the truth" occurs elsewhere only in 1 John 1:6
There is a common mistranslation in verse 14. The tenses for the verbs are the same, yet the second one is commonly changed to fit the trinitarian narrative.
The NIV and other translations have already stopped the red lettering at verse 15.
There are some definite inconsistencies.
The first is that the disciples have not been given this much detail about what was going to happen yet.
However, he was going to spill the beans to the enemy Pharisee first?
No questions asked by Nicodemus as Jesus tells the whole story?
As for 1 John 5:19.
1. It's present tense as oppose to past tense.
2. It is not outside the bounds of normal language and communication. If I'm describing my job as a welder, I may very well be speaking in third person. If I am discussing the relationship between a pastor and a congregation, I may use the third person even if I'm the pastor or the congregation. This is especially true if I am speaking to people who seem to have no clue what a welder does or what the relationship between a pastor and a congregation is like.
It doesn't say "Jesus is God" and you've already admitted that. It might say something that you want to interpret to mean that, but it doesn't ever say "Jesus is God".
No, you just have to believe Philippians 2Well, if you believe that then you have to toss the hypostatic union . . .
No, It was written by Paul in Philippians.The development of Theotokos is cemented in 431 at the council of Ephesus. The hypostatic union doesn't happen until 451 (Chalcedon). Then you have the Third Council of Constantinople in 680-1, and on, and on.
True, every disciple was put to death. John 20:28 Thomas said to Jesus, "You are the Lord and You are the God of me." YOU Unitarians have to explain to God one day why you ignored His scriptures. They are this clear. Sorry. Fact, to your own ignoring demise. "This is my Son, LISTEN to Him!" You don't get to play dumb on that day.Once one starts out with "Jesus is God", they will go through a world of hurt trying to make it work
Ouch! Hilltrot said if Jesus spoke of Himself in the third person, He was insane???It might be today.
Incorrect. There is no indication John 'switched' to commentary mode. That is an EXTRA-BIBLICAL construct.Jesus isn't talking there. Jesus finishes speaking in verse 12. Verse 13 starts John's explanation. So, at the time John was writing this, Jesus was in heaven.
Louis Klopsch was the owner of a printing business and capable editor. The credentials behind the red letters are his ability as editor where grammar is taxed daily as well as his reliability upon scholars and theologians. While these theologians aren't named, Klopsch, as an editor had many contacts through his publishing company and enlisted their help and expertise. Among these were certainly Dr. Talmage and professors at Moody Bible Institute. Not sure if any of this is helpful, but such was the aim of my effort. In Him -LonNo, I'm aware of who came up with the idea and why he decided on red, but I was talking about what method did he use to determine which words should be in red.
Louis Klopsch was the owner of a printing business and capable editor. The credentials behind the red letters are his ability as editor where grammar is taxed daily as well as his reliability upon scholars and theologians. While these theologians aren't named, Klopsch, as an editor had many contacts through his publishing company and enlisted their help and expertise. Among these were certainly Dr. Talmage and professors at Moody Bible Institute. Not sure if any of this is helpful, but such was the aim of my effort. In Him -Lon
If you count the times Jesus spoke about himself in the third person and the number of times he didn't, you'd see he usually did not speak about himself in the third person.False.
You seem to have missed the rest of my post. Here it is again:
If you count the times Jesus spoke about himself in the third person and the number of times he didn't, you'd see he usually did not speak about himself in the third person.
I still stand by what I said Jesus did not usually refer to himself in the third person. He referred to himself in the third person only about 20% of the time.
... and talking about oneself in the third person is usually a symptom of insanity...
So Lon, you know a little about the Old Testament, right?