John 20:28 and the Trinity

[7djengo7]

I asked you if Satan has ever blinded people's minds, and your answer was:

No.

Now, in Acts 26:15-18 KJV, we read:

15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;

17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,

18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Now, when Jesus spoke of Satan, here, about whom would you say Jesus was speaking? Someone other than Satan?

Here, Jesus (after the cross, by the way!) is telling Paul that He is making Paul into a "minister and a witness...", and that, as such, among other things, Paul is going to be turning people from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan. Again, this is all after the cross, mind you. What, exactly, do you say, is the "darkness" of which Jesus is speaking? And, what is "the power of Satan" to which He refers? In light of your slogan that "Satan was bound at The Cross", what, exactly, is that "power of Satan" which Paul was sent, after the cross, by Jesus, to turn people from? What do you say it is? Notice that Jesus isn't sending Paul to turn people from the power of God unto God, but rather, from the power of Satan unto God?

When you say "Satan was bound at The Cross", do you mean that Satan went from having power to not having power? What, exactly, do you mean?

Now, you say that Satan has never blinded people's minds. In Revelation 20, as you know, we are told that, before Satan is bound (whenever that was/is/shall be), he has deceived the nations; he's "the devil that deceived them". So, Satan has deceived people, in the past, at least (if he doesn't deceive people still). Right? Now, what, if anything, would you say is the difference between blinding a person's mind against truth and deceiving that person?

You say that Christ blinds people, today, and always has blinded people, against truth. Were Christ and Satan working together? Christ blinding people while Satan was deceiving them?

Perhaps you agree with the Bible, that Satan has deceived people, whereas, you say, though, that Satan has never blinded people. So, it seems you make a distinction, somehow, between deceiving people and blinding them. Would you say that, since the cross, Satan has deceived people? Or, at the time of the cross, did Satan cease from deceiving people. Since the cross, has anybody been deceived, or not? If people, in the last 2,000 years since the cross, have been deceived, then, by whom have they been deceived, if not by Satan? Would you say that, at the cross, Christ took over Satan's ministry of deceiving people?

When Christ (as you say) blinds somebody against truth, would you say that He is deceiving that person, also, or not?

Again, what (if anything) would you say is the difference between blinding a person against the truth and deceiving that person?

Again, you should probably just put me on "ignore".

 

[Apple7]

Oh, I actually have studied Greek a little, here and there, over the years. I like it, and perhaps I'll get a little further in it as the years go by. Perhaps not. It's not my number one priority, by any means, nor am I the least bit obligated to make it so. I'm far more driven toward studying logic, and toward sounding out people's claims against their other claims (as well as against Scripture) to find out whether they are coherent. If somebody comes along and claims things that seem fishy to me, like that which you seem to have made a career out of claiming, you'd better believe I'm going to go all Columbo on them. When you, in the first place, can't make your affirmations harmonize amongst themselves, nor with Scripture, in the vernacular, whatever Greek you have (or pretend to have?) is not going to do an iota of service for you.

Further, again, I say, it's not the least bit clear to me that you have any expertise with Greek; not saying you don't, of course. Perhaps you do. It's just that, in all your posts, the best you've achieved with all your copy/pasting of Greek text is to create a general awareness among forum readers that you're a guy who really enjoys copy/pasting Greek text in forums. But, I get the message you're sending out, loud and clear, and my response to you is, Master, we're not worthy! we're not worthy!

More blather.

Put forth a concerted rebuttal...rather than your unreferenced opinion...

 

[Apple7]

I asked you if Satan has ever blinded people's minds, and your answer was:


Now, in Acts 26:15-18 KJV, we read:



Now, when Jesus spoke of Satan, here, about whom would you say Jesus was speaking? Someone other than Satan?

Here, Jesus (after the cross, by the way!) is telling Paul that He is making Paul into a "minister and a witness...", and that, as such, among other things, Paul is going to be turning people from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan. Again, this is all after the cross, mind you. What, exactly, do you say, is the "darkness" of which Jesus is speaking? And, what is "the power of Satan" to which He refers? In light of your slogan that "Satan was bound at The Cross", what, exactly, is that "power of Satan" which Paul was sent, after the cross, by Jesus, to turn people from? What do you say it is? Notice that Jesus isn't sending Paul to turn people from the power of God unto God, but rather, from the power of Satan unto God?

When you say "Satan was bound at The Cross", do you mean that Satan went from having power to not having power? What, exactly, do you mean?

Now, you say that Satan has never blinded people's minds. In Revelation 20, as you know, we are told that, before Satan is bound (whenever that was/is/shall be), he has deceived the nations; he's "the devil that deceived them". So, Satan has deceived people, in the past, at least (if he doesn't deceive people still). Right? Now, what, if anything, would you say is the difference between blinding a person's mind against truth and deceiving that person?

You say that Christ blinds people, today, and always has blinded people, against truth. Were Christ and Satan working together? Christ blinding people while Satan was deceiving them?

Perhaps you agree with the Bible, that Satan has deceived people, whereas, you say, though, that Satan has never blinded people. So, it seems you make a distinction, somehow, between deceiving people and blinding them. Would you say that, since the cross, Satan has deceived people? Or, at the time of the cross, did Satan cease from deceiving people. Since the cross, has anybody been deceived, or not? If people, in the last 2,000 years since the cross, have been deceived, then, by whom have they been deceived, if not by Satan? Would you say that, at the cross, Christ took over Satan's ministry of deceiving people?

When Christ (as you say) blinds somebody against truth, would you say that He is deceiving that person, also, or not?

Again, what (if anything) would you say is the difference between blinding a person against the truth and deceiving that person?

Again, you should probably just put me on "ignore".

You just fully proved my point as to whom BLINDS people.

Acts 9 already declared that Jesus (not your god, Satan) BLINDED Saul!!!

But...you tried unsuccessfully to NOT mention this, why?

Furthermore, the 'power of Satan' refers to his demons...NOT to Satan himself.


Try again...

 

[Apple7]

Greetings again Apple7, When you were born, you were not created either. You partook of the result of your father and mother.

Please show us the verbs employed for Jesus' birth, and your birth.

Jesus had God the Father for his father and Mary for his mother Luke 1:34-35.

Jesus NEVER refers to Mary as His mother.

I have only read a summary of this some time ago, but when the early church fathers were adopting Platoism, immortal souls and incarnation, there was serious discussion that all immortal souls pre-existed. I am not sure of your position on this, as to when you received your immortal soul, or if you agree with the Mormons. But evidently the councils agreed to drop the pre-existence of all souls except in the case of Jesus.
It flows the other way. The WORD was made flesh. Jesus is the name of the child born Matthew 1:20-21.

You just admitted that Jesus was THE WORD.

The Word has always existed.

Now what can you do?

 

[Apple7]

Trinitarians in effect deny the begettal and revert to a faulty manuscript obviously altered to remove the term "begotten" and the NIV uses this manuscript, and is extremely biased here, and also in effect removes it from John 3:16. The KJV draws attention to the begettal, where God is the father and Mary the mother:
John 1:18 (KJV): No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Matthew 1:20-21 (KJV): 20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived (mg Gr: begotten) in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
When you seriously answer the above we can look at the other references, but we are repeating our previous discussions.

Kind regards
Trevor

The NA28 shows the Greek, as thus...

θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο



Translated, we have thus...

Theon oudeis heōraken pōpote monogenēs Theos ho ōn eis ton kolpon tou Patros ekeinos exēgēsato

No one has seen God at any time; but the unique One, Himself God, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.



Poor Trevor....you have no place to run now...

 

[7djengo7]

You just fully proved my point as to whom BLINDS people.

Acts 9 already declared that Jesus (not your god, Satan) BLINDED Saul!!!

But...you tried unsuccessfully to NOT mention this, why?

Wait. What was the result of Jesus' blinding Saul? Oh, that's right...I did miss that; Jesus blinded Saul's MIND so that Saul couldn't believe the gospel, right? I was silly enough, all this time, to think that Jesus had blinded Saul's EYES, whereas, now you've come by and straightened me out, and shown me that Jesus actually blinded Saul's MIND against believing the gospel! Very astute observation from you, indeed. Now, you've made it crystal clear just how relevant Jesus' blinding of Saul's EYES is to the god of this world's blinding the MINDS of them who BELIEVE NOT!

I didn't try to NOT mention Jesus' blinding of Saul, but, indeed, I did NOT mention it, so, had I been trying to NOT mention it, why, I would have been quite successful at NOT mentioning it, now, wouldn't I. I didn't mention Jesus' blinding the EYES of Saul because it has no relevance to the god of this world's blinding the MINDS of unbelievers. Why did YOU mention it, seeing as it is manifestly irrelevant? Why did you mention Jesus' blinding of Saul, but you did NOT mention the fact that Ruth was a Moabitess?

Furthermore, the 'power of Satan' refers to his demons...NOT to Satan himself.

I've seen you parrot that one numerous times already. Are you saying that Satan has no power? Are you saying that the power of Satan is not Satan's power? I don't get what (if anything) you are trying to say. Try to explain whatever it is you think you mean by that, and what relevance (if any) you think it has.

 

[Apple7]

I've seen you parrot that one numerous times already. Are you saying that Satan has no power? Are you saying that the power of Satan is not Satan's power? I don't get what (if anything) you are trying to say. Try to explain whatever it is you think you mean by that, and what relevance (if any) you think it has.

Satan was rendered impotent at The Cross.

The only 'power' of Satan, that exists until he is released from his prison, are his demons.

You try to give Satan deity status, and full power....which is no different than actually worshiping Satan.

 

[Apple7]

Wait. What was the result of Jesus' blinding Saul? Oh, that's right...I did miss that; Jesus blinded Saul's MIND so that Saul couldn't believe the gospel, right? I was silly enough, all this time, to think that Jesus had blinded Saul's EYES, whereas, now you've come by and straightened me out, and shown me that Jesus actually blinded Saul's MIND against believing the gospel! Very astute observation from you, indeed. Now, you've made it crystal clear just how relevant Jesus' blinding of Saul's EYES is to the god of this world's blinding the MINDS of them who BELIEVE NOT!

I didn't try to NOT mention Jesus' blinding of Saul, but, indeed, I did NOT mention it, so, had I been trying to NOT mention it, why, I would have been quite successful at NOT mentioning it, now, wouldn't I. I didn't mention Jesus' blinding the EYES of Saul because it has no relevance to the god of this world's blinding the MINDS of unbelievers. Why did YOU mention it, seeing as it is manifestly irrelevant? Why did you mention Jesus' blinding of Saul, but you did NOT mention the fact that Ruth was a Moabitess?

As you are discovering, it is Jesus who does the blinding (physical or spiritual) in scripture.

Keep searching for blinding passages that you can directly attribute to your god, Satan.

Good luck...

 

[Apple7]

Now, you say that Satan has never blinded people's minds. In Revelation 20, as you know, we are told that, before Satan is bound (whenever that was/is/shall be), he has deceived the nations; he's "the devil that deceived them". So, Satan has deceived people, in the past, at least (if he doesn't deceive people still). Right? Now, what, if anything, would you say is the difference between blinding a person's mind against truth and deceiving that person?

Show us the Greek term rendered as 'deceive', and lexically define it for us.

Good luck...

 

[7djengo7]

Satan was rendered impotent at The Cross.

The only 'power' of Satan, that exists until he is released from his prison, are his demons.

See, this is the sort of gobbledygook you constantly just make up out of thin air, because you can't rationally defend your claim.

You try to give Satan deity status, and full power....which is no different than actually worshiping Satan.

You, here, also say that Satan is a god--you are giving Satan deity status:

Your god, Satan?

or...

Your God, Jesus?

Why do you give Satan deity status? Why do you worship Satan by calling him a god? Why are you such a hypocrite?

The only 'power' of Satan...

Why did YOU put quotes around the word 'power', here? In the NT manuscripts, were there quotes around the Greek word Englished as 'power', in the phrase "the power of Satan"? Oh, that's right, Professor! You already declared that there weren't:

The Greek manuscripts were a continuous flow of characters, without punctuation.

So, because of your addiction to eisegesis, you just stuck some quotes right in there, right around the word 'power'. And all for what? It's just more problems that you are creating with which to further embarrass your false claim by encrusting it within a thicker and thicker shell of incoherence and gobbledygook. And, at the end of the day, you have come out, anyway, and said that Satan is a god, which is the very thing you blame Trinitarians for saying.

 

[Apple7]

Why did YOU put quotes around the word 'power', here? In the NT manuscripts, were there quotes around the Greek word Englished as 'power', in the phrase "the power of Satan"? Oh, that's right, Professor! You already declared that there weren't:

Please show us the Greek word to which you refer...

:darwinsm::darwinsm::darwinsm:

 

[7djengo7]

As you are discovering, it is Jesus who does the blinding (physical or spiritual) in scripture.

Keep searching for blinding passages that you can directly attribute to your god, Satan.

Good luck...

You just keep on tightening those earmuffs you got on, sir. It's come to the point where I've seen everything you've got; I've sounded you out. You just keep repeating yourself, over and over, and that's fine by me.

Why do YOU keep saying that Satan is a god, and condemning me for the same thing you are doing? Why are you such a hypocrite?

 

[7djengo7]

I asked you:

Why did YOU put quotes around the word 'power', here? In the NT manuscripts, were there quotes around the Greek word Englished as 'power', in the phrase "the power of Satan"?

And, instead of answering the question I asked you, you reacted by writing this:

Please show us the Greek word to which you refer...

:darwinsm::darwinsm::darwinsm:

Very well. Stonewall against that question that I asked you, just like you stonewall against all the others!

What, exactly, are you asking me to do when you say "show us the Greek word to which you refer?" You mean just type it here, like this: ἐξουσίας? Is that all you wanted? No problem. I don't understand WHY you are asking me to do that, if that's what you are asking me to do. Are you just throwing more red herrings at me?

Again, WHY did YOU put quotes around the word 'power', here? In the NT manuscripts, were there quotes around the Greek word, ἐξουσίας, Englished as 'power', in the phrase "the power of Satan"? Obviously, as you already affirmed, there were no quotes around the word, 'ἐξουσίας', and yet, you take it upon yourself, as the eisegete you are, to put quotes around the word 'power'. Why do you do that?

You write:

The only 'power' of Satan, that exists until he is released from his prison, are his demons.

whereas, the Holy Spirit wrote:

To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Why do you contradict what the Holy Spirit affirmed? The Holy Spirit affirmed that Paul was being sent, by Jesus, to, in the future from that post-cross point in time, turn people from THE POWER OF SATAN. You contradict what the Holy Spirit wrote, there, by denying that, at that time, Satan had any power.

Go ahead and persist in your hypocrisy and your lying, and keep on stonewalling against my question: Why do YOU put quotes around the word 'power' when the Holy Spirit put no quotes around the word 'power'? Why do you deny that Satan, after the cross, has had the power which the Holy Spirit affirmed Satan has had after the cross?

You contradict the Holy Spirit:

Satan was rendered impotent at The Cross.

Obviously that's false, since, in Acts 26:18 KJV, the Holy Spirit speaks of Satan, AFTER THE CROSS, as having POWER. So, you're a hardened liar.

The only 'power' of Satan, that exists until he is released from his prison, are his demons.

Again, WHY do you put quotes around the word 'power', whereas the Holy Spirit never put quotes around the word 'power'? Why do you despise the Holy Spirit so much as to blatantly contradict what He has plainly stated?

You try to give Satan deity status, and full power....which is no different than actually worshiping Satan.

I don't try to give Satan, or anybody else, deity status, since I have no deity status to give Satan, or anybody else. I don't try to give Satan power; I have no power to give to Satan, or anybody else.

Since you say that to give Satan deity status is "actually worshiping Satan", you are saying that, when you purport to worship Jesus (as you profess to do), you are giving Jesus power and deity status. You are claiming that you have power and deity status, and that you are giving it to Jesus. So, you are blaspheming Jesus by making that claim.

And, observe your phrase "full power". When did I ever say "full power"? I never did. So, you are lying about me, again. And, where did your phrase "full power" come from? Why can't you focus on the question I asked you? Why can't you focus on the fact that the Holy Spirit, in Acts 26:18, attributes POWER to Satan, at a time AFTER the cross. Notice that, in Acts 26:18, we read:

to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God

We don't read:

to turn them from darkness to light, and from the 'power' of Satan unto God

We don't read:

to turn them from darkness to light, and from the full power of Satan unto God

No. Those are terms you've tried to sneak into the discussion, because you despise, and can't deal with, the text as it is, and because you're a hardened liar, and a hypocrite. I haven't brought such things into it. Why? Because I have no need to do so, because I'm on the side of truth, as well as on the side of every other Trinitarian throughout history.

Sorry, you'll have to settle for a regular smiley face; I don't go in for the animated stuff. You can be a juvenile delinquent if you want, but don't expect me to play along.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Apple7,

Please show us the verbs employed for Jesus' birth, and your birth.

Are you suggesting that Jesus was not born?

Jesus NEVER refers to Mary as His mother.

Psalm 22:9–10 (KJV): 9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: Thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts. 10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: Thou art my God from my mother’s belly.
I understand that some aspects of Psalm 22 are Messianic, in other words the Psalm to some extent predicts the words and thoughts and prayers of Jesus, and this is true in the above. Mary was the mother of Jesus Luke 1:30-35. I question what obscure differentiation that you are suggesting. What is your view when the following clearly states that Mary is the mother of Jesus?
Matthew 1:18 (KJV): Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Matthew 2:11–14 (KJV): 11 And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. 12 And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way. 13 And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. 14 When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:

You just admitted that Jesus was THE WORD.

Yes, Jesus is the Word made flesh.

The Word has always existed.

Yes, but Jesus was born 2000 years ago.

Now what can you do?

Wait for the next obscure question or comment. Whoops, here it is in your next post, five minutes later, what a surprise.

The NA28 shows the Greek, as thus...
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
Translated, we have thus...
Theon oudeis heōraken pōpote monogenēs Theos ho ōn eis ton kolpon tou Patros ekeinos exēgēsato
No one has seen God at any time; but the unique One, Himself God, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.
Poor Trevor....you have no place to run now...

The initial comment by the NET Bible is:
“The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh" qeo", “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh" Juio", “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one.”
I am sure most Trinitarians (but not all) will prefer the first as they do not really believe in the conception or begettal of Jesus by God the Father.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[7djengo7]

Please show us the Greek word to which you refer...

:darwinsm::darwinsm::darwinsm:

Since you say that Satan is a god, here:

Your god, Satan?

or...

Your God, Jesus?

Translate your phrase, "Your god, Satan" into New Testament Greek.

Start translating, Professor!
Have fun.

 

[Apple7]

And, observe your phrase "full power". When did I ever say "full power"? I never did. So, you are lying about me, again. And, where did your phrase "full power" come from? Why can't you focus on the question I asked you? Why can't you focus on the fact that the Holy Spirit, in Acts 26:18, attributes POWER to Satan, at a time AFTER the cross. Notice that, in Acts 26:18, we read:

Counter to scripture, you fully believe that Satan is freely roaming the earth.

You continue to defend Satan, and his capabilities....again counter to scripture.

However, you are unable to locate even a single passage of scripture which shows that Satan is present in person AFTER The Cross.

Satan's power (the demons) is all that exists at the present time.

Deal with what Jesus did for you at The Cross...instead of defending your god, Satan...

 

[Apple7]

Greetings again Apple7,Are you suggesting that Jesus was not born?
Psalm 22:9–10 (KJV): 9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: Thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts. 10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: Thou art my God from my mother’s belly.
I understand that some aspects of Psalm 22 are Messianic, in other words the Psalm to some extent predicts the words and thoughts and prayers of Jesus, and this is true in the above. Mary was the mother of Jesus Luke 1:30-35. I question what obscure differentiation that you are suggesting. What is your view when the following clearly states that Mary is the mother of Jesus?
Matthew 1:18 (KJV): Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Matthew 2:11–14 (KJV): 11 And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. 12 And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way. 13 And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. 14 When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:
Yes, Jesus is the Word made flesh.
Yes, but Jesus was born 2000 years ago.
Wait for the next obscure question or comment. Whoops, here it is in your next post, five minutes later, what a surprise.
The initial comment by the NET Bible is:
“The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh" qeo", “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh" Juio", “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one.”
I am sure most Trinitarians (but not all) will prefer the first as they do not really believe in the conception or begettal of Jesus by God the Father.

Kind regards
Trevor

The challenge put forth to you, that you completely and utterly ignored, was to show us the 'birth' verbs employed for YOU, verses HIM.

Don't skirt the issue, as it will utterly destroy your theology...

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Apple7,

The challenge put forth to you, that you completely and utterly ignored, was to show us the 'birth' verbs employed for YOU, verses HIM.
Don't skirt the issue, as it will utterly destroy your theology...

From past experience I suggest that I do not expect much substance in your claim, but I will wait for your great revelation and assertion. I suppose your assertion on John 1:18 has been adequately met, as even the NKJV has "begotten" and I assume that most on the translation committee were Trinitarians. Another one of your arrows that was meant to utterly destroy my theology and subvert the unwary. You had better write urgently to this forum and biblia.com, as the default text that appears when I quote John 1:18 is the NKJV and shock and horror to you they give "begotten". Are they trying to undermine one of your favourite concepts?

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Apple7]

Greetings again Apple7, From past experience I suggest that I do not expect much substance in your claim, but I will wait for your great revelation and assertion. I suppose your assertion on John 1:18 has been adequately met, as even the NKJV has "begotten" and I assume that most on the translation committee were Trinitarians. Another one of your arrows that was meant to utterly destroy my theology and subvert the unwary. You had better write urgently to this forum and biblia.com, as the default text that appears when I quote John 1:18 is the NKJV and shock and horror to you they give "begotten". Are they trying to undermine one of your favourite concepts?

Kind regards
Trevor

As usual, you skirt the issue, and then hyper focus on a redd herring.

The KJV/NKJV are Trinitarian renderings but are based upon inferior manuscripts.

It would be in your best interest to keep yourself abreast of the most scholarly manuscript discoveries, as detailed in the NA28, etc...that way you would look less ignorant in your heretical worldviews...

 

[Rosenritter]

Wait. What was the result of Jesus' blinding Saul? Oh, that's right...I did miss that; Jesus blinded Saul's MIND so that Saul couldn't believe the gospel, right? I was silly enough, all this time, to think that Jesus had blinded Saul's EYES, whereas, now you've come by and straightened me out, and shown me that Jesus actually blinded Saul's MIND against believing the gospel! Very astute observation from you, indeed. Now, you've made it crystal clear just how relevant Jesus' blinding of Saul's EYES is to the god of this world's blinding the MINDS of them who BELIEVE NOT!

I didn't try to NOT mention Jesus' blinding of Saul, but, indeed, I did NOT mention it, so, had I been trying to NOT mention it, why, I would have been quite successful at NOT mentioning it, now, wouldn't I. I didn't mention Jesus' blinding the EYES of Saul because it has no relevance to the god of this world's blinding the MINDS of unbelievers. Why did YOU mention it, seeing as it is manifestly irrelevant? Why did you mention Jesus' blinding of Saul, but you did NOT mention the fact that Ruth was a Moabitess?



I've seen you parrot that one numerous times already. Are you saying that Satan has no power? Are you saying that the power of Satan is not Satan's power? I don't get what (if anything) you are trying to say. Try to explain whatever it is you think you mean by that, and what relevance (if any) you think it has.

The Church of Christ has a doctrine that Satan was bound at the cross, him and all his devils. The reason behind this is because they say that only the Holy Spirit can cast out devils, and they preach that there is no Holy Spirit in the world today. If there were devils then you would likewise need the Holy Spirit.

At least in that case it's the method behind the madness: since the presence of the Holy Spirit is denied then likewise the presence of Satan and devils (and even their influence to deceive the nations) must be denied as well. I'm not sure if that's Apple's background but I was reminded of it.