Search results

  1. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    8< Saving this thread from the shredder 8<
  2. Future Man

    Phil2:5-11

    Just keeping it out of the shredder :)
  3. Future Man

    John 1 and edpobre

    ..... John8:40 does nothing more than agree with me. Jn17:3 does nothing more than hold you to a double-standard. And even, hypothetically, if John17:3 did "refute" Trinitarianism [which if you had read the link provided you would have found that it does not], how does this exclude...
  4. Future Man

    John 1 and edpobre

    Hello Edpobre and God bless- And as I have demonstrated, there is essentially no difference between "The Word [deity vs1] became flesh [man]" and Jesus came as God in the flesh. I'm not understanding where the problem lies. Because the surrounding context of John1 demands it. Then...
  5. Future Man

    John 1 and edpobre

    Hello Edpobre and God bless- I'm not seeing how you're having a problem with this. Let's compare John1:1 with 1John1:1-2..cf..John1:4..cf..1Jn5:11. See also Rev19:13. Jesus = Word. The Word was God [vs1]. The Word became flesh [vs14]. If Jesus is the 'Word' then John is indeed...
  6. Future Man

    John 1 and edpobre

    Hopefully, Edpobre, we can place all tangent arguments aside and place our focus upon the context of John1. I'm seeing an effort on your part to downplay the divinity of Christ, but little in responding to my points concerning His preexistence. It is the latter I would like to put emphasis on...
  7. Future Man

    John 1 and edpobre

    Hello Edpobre and God bless- Actually it does. You need to address the context of John1. The Logos was with God, the Logos was God, the Logos was made flesh. Notice that the Logos was MADE flesh whereas it was not flesh before. Note the context. Especially vs10 and 12. We are speaking...
  8. Future Man

    John 1 and edpobre

    Hello Edpobre and God bless- Sorry for the long delay. It's been pretty busy for me here lately. If you're still interested, read over the past few pages to refresh your memory (I know I'll have to! :)) and we can continue with our discussion. God bless you edpobre--FM
  9. Future Man

    If there is no Trinity, then

    Undead- Thanks OS for clarifying this. I've always noticed that the plural references [Gen1:26 'us' etc,.] are spoken from the first person view of God, whereas the singular references [Gen1:27] are spoken from the perspective of the author. Anyone can note in the book of Revelation for...
  10. Future Man

    Jesus' message: Not what you would expect.

    Jesus quite emphatically states that belief in Him AND the Father is necessary for eternal life [John17:3]. Period. Unless you want to echo the Jesus Seminar and assert that a very small percentage of the NT was spoken/written accurately, then you are in a rather futile position. In fact if...
  11. Future Man

    Jesus' message: Not what you would expect.

    :( Have they given you the "..the Father is greater than I" ergo Jesus isn't God, yet? Will the deity of Christ be under discussion in this thread? Nice cite of the father's btw :). God bless--FM
  12. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    ....Evangelion failing to address a singe line of context in John's prologue or any argument in relation to such. :rolleyes: More like "*dusts his hands and RUNS away*" :D:D
  13. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    Thanks for the info, Ben. I could use that feature as well. ;) Yeah, but see, "Cir" isn't me [FM], it's you. It's Cirisyou. :D ...and vs 13, vs12, vs11, vs10, vs9 etc,. etc,. He's definitely mistaken. :)
  14. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    Dee Dee, what are you doing online here? :) :wave:
  15. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    His view in summary: John1 verses 1-13 do *not* refer to the 'Son of God' i.e. 'Jesus Christ'. In other words, vs1-13 refer to a 'literal spoken breath' and not a personal being, despite the fact that the context militates against this. :( If you've noticed, even his initial argument dealt...
  16. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    Haha! I forwarded a link to JPH where Gerald S. [their main writer] authored an article criticising the JWs and their use of the Tetra [Jehovah]. Even though it was written *against* the JW theology, even though it *agreed* with us to an extent [proper rendering etc,.], JP *still* didn't want...
  17. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    I personally am waiting for EV to address the context of John1 itself and THEN make unbased allegations that we're using the "Word" in a misty ethereal sense. FM: 'The Sky is Blue' EV: 'No it's not!' FM: 'No really, just look up' EV: 'I don't have to, my next door neighbor...
  18. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    :D Don't you mean... "The context is irrelevant :cry: , it's Pagan!" :D
  19. Future Man

    God's Word in the O.T. and N.T., Logos and Dabar

    Jaltus made an excellent observation, which I will cite here: > Let me show you what I mean: A 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. B 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made...