^^^ I may beat you to it! There is one I have been planning for you and viaro about the Bible. Better be reading Genesis to Revelation now if you hope to survive because it gonna be ferocious!
Ed: Wasn't trying to get off. If you read my contributions you will see how solidly anchored on the Bible is the position I canvassed and how the Trinitarians have hardly addressed those scriptural points.

MyJoe:

^^^ I may beat you to it! There is one I have been planning for you and viaro about the Bible. Better be reading Genesis to Revelation now if you hope to survive because it gonna be ferocious!

Wahala dey okay, no problemo. And easy pelu volume oh, not all of us are wizards like Viaro  .

JeSoul:

Wahala dey okay, no problemo. And easy pelu volume oh, not all of us are wizards like Viaro  .

Yeah. This I can understand, not being anywhere near his 190 I Q. But I will take my omega H3 before embarking on the project to give me a fighting chance. You will measure up, no doubt. I never underestimate Fringe Scientists, even if I am high on weeds. 

MyJoe:

Yeah. This I can understand, not being anywhere near his 190 I Q. But I will take my omega H3 before embarking on the project to give me a fighting chance. You will measure up, no doubt. I never underestimate Fringe Scientists, even if I am high on weeds. 

Fringe scientist? where? *looking frantically left to right*    Make sure you add some Centrum Silver plus to that Fish Oil  . . . as will I. lol. But beyond kidding, I'm anticipating . . .

JeSoul:

Wahala dey okay, no problemo. And easy pelu volume oh, not all of us are wizards like Viaro  .

Verily, JeSoul, you have spoken truly! [ducks from viaro's shoe thrown in my direction]

Mind me not, I just enjoy embarrassing the guy

InesQor:

[ducks from viaro's shoe thrown in my direction]

Oh shooks, man! How could I have missed??
Better throw next time, I guess - or rather a swing of my baseball club might be just the thing!!

Lol, how are you doing, InesQor?

MyJoe:

Hello again viaro,
I will leave it at that. As to believing, I'm sorry but I was only doing aproko here. I mean I don't actually toe either line and just wanted to enliven your debate which was becoming one-sided at a point. Seriously, though, I cannot see that Christianity owes its Trinity doctrine to the Bible.

Okay, no worries. I just thought my bit was done on what I came to this thread for: that Jesus is God.

___________________

JeSoul:

Oh but it soooo does. You will not get off the hook this easy taking the humpty dumpty stance and sitting on the fence - even if Viaro excuses you lol. I will open a thread in the not too distant future and you will be cordially invited.

Hehe. . . I could excuse MyJoe, lol. although I look forward as an observer to the proposed thread. I trust you're doing very well. Bless up.

I finalize by quoting phil.2.6
He always had the nature of God but he did not think that by force he should try to become equal with God.
and john 14.28- i am going to the father for he is greater than i

I now leave you all to your own thoughts.

I think it's real hard to change one's faith in a situation like this,it real difficult to change someone who is a muslim to a christian likewise de opposite in situation like this,to dangle in between blasphemy and error in belief. But later in time, a still small voice will speak to u,will bring the truth to you, you'll sort those issues out urself. It's happening to me right now,I never knew a medium like this can bring such impact on one's life and belief. I believe truly that Jesus is the son of God, He is our mediator between Us and God, because he has done such a great work of redemption,he is worthy to be praised,worthy to be worship. In every sense of it logical,deductive reasoning name it, a son and father can not be equal hierachy, they might be one though like husband and wife,Father and son(heir) but father is always greater than son and husband greater than wife (but still they are one) there is saying in my tribe (ibo) back in Nigeria that goes likes this (when you see de son, he'll remind you of his father) i believe it's like compared to that of our God and jesus. Yes i now believe Jesus is not God,but by the power and authority vested on him by almighty God including the love God has for him,there is no guilt by giving him de same respect as God. I just spoke to a friend on this issue,she told me there's song and saying that says that when God asked his sons in the heaven who is going to redeem mankind,everywhere remained calmed in heaven, but jesus volunteered to do that work of redemption knowing the price he'll pay. I don't know how true is that(pls don't crucify me!) but hang on a minute,why would devil tried to tempt jesus, if jesus is God. Devil was there in the begining of the creation,especial the creation of man. Nobody has said much on this! Why would it be angels that came and took God away from satan- this sucks. God send his angel to take Jesus away from from satan. Why would a voice in heaven say' This is my beloved son in whom am well pleased' a voice and a son? That's a clue to our mystery of Trinity. Now i believe that Jesus is not God.(GOD save my soul if am wrong, no thanks to karo the author of this topic, lol)

I think it's real hard to change one's faith in a situation like this,it real difficult to change someone who is a muslim to a christian likewise de opposite in situation like this,to dangle in between blasphemy and error in belief. But later in time, a still small voice will speak to u,will bring the truth to you, you'll sort those issues out urself. It's happening to me right now,I never knew a medium like this can bring such impact on one's life and belief. I believe truly that Jesus is the son of God, He is our mediator between Us and God, because he has done such a great work of redemption,he is worthy to be praised,worthy to be worship. In every sense of it logical,deductive reasoning name it, a son and father can not be equal hierachy, they might be one though like husband and wife,Father and son(heir) but father is always greater than son and husband greater than wife (but still they are one) there is saying in my tribe (ibo) back in Nigeria that goes likes this (when you see de son, he'll remind you of his father) i believe it's like compared to that of our God and jesus. Yes i now believe Jesus is not God,but by the power and authority vested on him by almighty God including the love God has for him,there is no guilt by giving him de same respect as God. I just spoke to a friend on this issue,she told me there's song and saying that says that when God asked his sons in the heaven who is going to redeem mankind,everywhere remained calmed in heaven, but jesus volunteered to do that work of redemption knowing the price he'll pay. I don't know how true is that(pls don't crucify me!) but hang on a minute,why would devil tried to tempt jesus, if jesus is God. Devil was there in the begining of the creation,especial the creation of man. Nobody has said much on this! Why would it be angels that came and took God away from satan- this sucks. God send his angel to take Jesus away from from satan. Why would a voice in heaven say' This is my beloved son in whom am well pleased' a voice and a son? That's a clue to our mystery of Trinity. Now i believe that Jesus is not God.(GOD save my soul if am wrong, no thanks to karo the author of this topic, lol)

MyJoe
I said there's a witness party here already. I didn't say anything was right or wrong about it. I have no problems. Good to see a non.witness enter the fray.
You've as I initially remarked, ignored Bible quotes that prove the Trinity and decided to dwell on verses nobody is hardly arguing against. I've mentioned hierarchy on this thread, you've decided not to see that. Nobody has said Jesus is God the Father. What we've said is that Jesus is God the Son, and the Spirit is God the Spirit. The Bible calls them God. The watchtower translation isn't the only translation on earth. Quit acting like it is.
God says in Isaiah that 'I will not give my glory unto another'. According to you now, Jesus is another. It's either God did not regard His Word here or you're wrong. Paul talks about the mystery of godliness but you'ld rather your nut-chewing relative be right than have the inspired word of God. May God open every eye.

viaro:

Oh shooks, man! How could I have missed??
Better throw next time, I guess - or rather a swing of my baseball club might be just the thing!!

Lol, how are you doing, InesQor?

Oh I'm fine, Viaro. How's family? I wish you the best of the rest of the week!

The more we look into the Bible prayerfully and look away from books and watchtower material, the more we'll see biblical quotes that prove that Jesus is God. The book of Revelation is indeed what it is, a revelation, of Jesus. The book goes on to prove indeed that there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
The three are related in a way that no other is or can ever be. The Bible talks of these three as eternal, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. No other shares these attributes. They are uniquely God.
The first thing the book of Revelation speaks of is that it is a signified/symbolized book. It is not all through simplistic or literal i.e it requires more than brain to completely decipher. But of course, there are things that remain clear for all to see, like we all see from the book that it is handwritten by John.

There are innumerable beings in heaven but chapter 1v4,5 talks of grace from the Father, the Spirit and the Son. We know it's only God that give grace, angels or 'messengers' don't. In essence, the passage talks of the trinity sending their greetings to the 7 churches. And that's the way their roles entwine all through this great book. If they were not one, then we would be left in great confusion and contradiction, but we know these three are one. We are with understanding(Romans 1v31).
Rev. 1v8 says "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty . Many Bible translations have this in red letter i.e the words of Jesus. Do I care? It is God that said, I understand. Others who do not understand will say it's not Jesus, it is the Father, it is the 'moving force'(whatever that means). Verse 11 repeats I am Alpha and Omega, the first and last.

We need to ask karo what she makes of Acts 20 v28b

When John turned to see the person speaking, He saw the Son of man (Jesus). His description is sharply like the Ancient of Days (the Father God) in the book of Daniel.
  Revelation 2&3 are the messages to the 7 churches. A recurring statement all through is "He that an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches". Wait a minute, how then can the Spirit be just an active force/power and not a person? How can one lie to a force? How can an active power say things to churches? Who exactly wrote these letters? Was it the Spirit, or Jesus (the beginning of each letter say "These things saith 'Jesus' ". The endings say these things saith the Spirit) Do I care? It is God that spo/ake. Whether God the Father, or God the Son, or God the Spirit, these three are one (1John 5v7), I understand.
 Rev. 4v2 a throne was set in heaven, and One sat on the throne. One sat on the throne? Well, I understand, these three are one. Jesus said(or was it the Spirit) "I AM set down with my Father in his throne"(Rev. 3v21). And you know, Jesus has the seven spirits of God, no wonder John saw one. They are one, not a tritheism.

@toba
i believe you meant to say Acts 20v28b. Blessings

Back to issue.
As things continued to unfold, John began to see that these one are three. He saw the 7 lamps and later, the Lamb(it seems the more you look, the more you see).
Everyone worshiped, and worshipped, and worshippped. God is a Spirit, and they that worship Him, must worship Him in Spirit. O there, the Spirit must be worshipped in Spirit. The Son is seen in chapter 5 taking a book from the Father, why not? They are three in one, not one in one.
I'll say it again. Your spirit, your soul and your body are one You. The body sometimes acts on reflex, many times it draws from your soul/mind to act. The mind draws strength to function effectively from the strength of the body. Your spirit communicates with your flesh/body, though they sometimes act contrary to one another. The same you, acting contrary to one another(one willing, other weak). Well, thank God, there's a marvelous unity in the Trinity. They 'symbiotically' depend on one another always, not like fallen man whose parts can sometimes conveniently act opposingly.

Rev. 22 caps it up. Verse 6 says the Lord God (i.e the Father) of the holy prophets sent his angel as regards this great book. Verse 16 says "I Jesus have sent mine angel" as regards this book. Who sent His angel? Do I care? It is God, I understand.

Acts 20.28
So keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock which the holy spirit has placed in your care.be shephereds of the church of God which he made with the sacrificial death of his son.

phil.2.6
He always had the nature of God but he did not think that by force he should try to become equal with God.

I realised that if we are going to get anywhere we should stick with 'divine sayings' such as those said by jesus, God or heavenly revealation.cos we cant fully trust men.[pls argue this on another thread]

Image123:

  The more we look into the Bible prayerfully and look away from books and watchtower material, the more we'll see biblical quotes that prove that Jesus is God. The book of Revelation is indeed what it is, a revelation, of Jesus. The book goes on to prove indeed that there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

We do not need to resort to lie in order to support our believe, do we? Where did Bible or book of Revelation say, "that there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one"?
That is how some trinitarian try to add to 1 John 5: 7. Apostle John who wrote the Book of Revelation and Gospel of John says at John 20: 31, "But these have been written down that YOU may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, YOU may have life by means of his name." He clear say the purpose of his gospel. If Jesus is Almighty God Bible would have reveal it in clear terms.

Bible is written for those who are meek at heart, people that can humble themselves and accept its guideline. Bible say God is not God of confusion but of orderliness.

It is a known fact that teaching of trinity was introduce to christianity after the death of apostles, that alone has knock it out has a genuine bible teaching. Jesus says at John 17:3 "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent".
And note that knowing the only true God and Jesus Christ is what can lead one to eternal life not knowing Jesus as Almighty God but as Christ and Son of God.

Jesus once asked his followers: Who am I?
His disciple answered: You are Christ (Christ means anointed one) the son of living God.
He did not refute that statement but he commend them for it. (Matthew 16: 16,17)

Christian and true Bible teaching is not just about argument and ego but humbling oneself like a babe, no wonder Jesus told his listeners: “Truly I say to YOU, Unless YOU turn around and become as young children, YOU will by no means enter into the kingdom of the heavens" Matthew 18:3

TrueSeeker:

That is how some trinitarian try to add to 1 John 5: 7. Apostle John who wrote the Book of Revelation and Gospel of John says at John 20: 31, "But these have been written down that YOU may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, YOU may have life by means of his name." He clear say the purpose of his gospel. If Jesus is Almighty God Bible would have reveal it in clear terms.

Jesus is God - that much you cannot controvert. What then does that mean to you?

It is a known fact that teaching of trinity was introduce to christianity after the death of apostles, that alone has knock it out has a genuine bible teaching.

Although the first use of the word Trinity was by Theophilus of Antioch in AD 170, yet Tertullian used it to explain that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are "one in essence—not one in Person". He was not writing a new testament of his own, but pointing to what the apostles had taught long before either Theophilus or Tertullian came on the scene.

Jesus says at John 17:3 "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent".

Read 1 John 5:20 - you will find that Jesus is also called "the true God".

Jesus once asked his followers: Who am I?
His disciple answered: You are Christ (Christ means anointed one) the son of living God.
He did not refute that statement but he commend them for it. (Matthew 16: 16,17)

So also Jesus did not refute Thomas calling Jesus "My Lord and my God" (John 20:28).

Christian and true Bible teaching is not just about argument and ego but humbling oneself like a babe, no wonder Jesus told his listeners: “Truly I say to YOU, Unless YOU turn around and become as young children, YOU will by no means enter into the kingdom of the heavens" Matthew 18:3

True humility is not blinding oneself to what the Bible teaches under the guide of being 'babes' or 'children'.

karo93:

Acts 20.28
So keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock which the holy spirit has placed in your care.be shephereds of the church of God which he made with the sacrificial death of his son.

phil.2.6
He always had the nature of God but he did not think that by force he should try to become equal with God.

I realised that if we are going to get anywhere we should stick with 'divine sayings' such as those said by jesus, God or heavenly revealation.cos we cant fully trust men.[pls argue this on another thread]

Please let us know what versions or translations you're quoting. It seems to me you're twisting quotes to suit your own preconceptions - so let's have the versions to read for ourselves. An example below:

Acts 20:28 - 'Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood' (ESV - English Standard Version)

Phil. 2:6 - 'who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped' (ESV - English Standard Version).

@la_vivi

On John 1: 1

Note, however, that here again the context lays the groundwork for accurate understanding. Even the King James Version says, “The Word was with God.” Someone who is “with” another person cannot be the same as that other person. In agreement with this, the Journal of Biblical Literature, edited by Jesuit Joseph A. Fitzmyer, notes that if the latter part of John 1:1 were interpreted to mean “the” God, this “would then contradict the preceding clause,” which says that the Word was with God.

Notice, too, how other translations render this part of the verse:

1808: “and the word was a god.” The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

1864: “and a god was the word.” The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.

1928: “and the Word was a divine being.” La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.

1935: “and the Word was divine.” The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.

1946: “and of a divine kind was the Word.” Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.

1950: “and the Word was a god.” New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

1958: “and the Word was a God.” The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.

1975: “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.

1978: “and godlike kind was the Logos.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.

At John 1:1 there are two occurrences of the Greek noun the‧os′ (god). The first occurrence refers to Almighty God, with whom the Word was (“and the Word [lo′gos] was with God [a form of the‧os′]”). This first the‧os′ is preceded by the word ton (the), a form of the Greek definite article that points to a distinct identity, in this case Almighty God (“and the Word was with [the] God”).

On the other hand, there is no article before the second the‧os′ at John 1:1. So a literal translation would read, “and god was the Word.” Yet we have seen that many translations render this second the‧os′ (a predicate noun) as “divine,” “godlike,” or “a god.” On what authority do they do this?

The Koine Greek language had a definite article (“the”), but it did not have an indefinite article (“a” or “an”). So when a predicate noun is not preceded by the definite article, it may be indefinite, depending on the context.
The Journal of Biblical Literature says that expressions “with an anarthrous [no article] predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning.” As the Journal notes, this indicates that the lo′gos can be likened to a god. It also says of John 1:1: “The qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun [the‧os′] cannot be regarded as definite.”

So John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word, that he was “divine,” “godlike,” “a god,” but not Almighty God. This harmonizes with the rest of the Bible, which shows that Jesus, here called “the Word” in his role as God’s Agent, was an obedient subordinate sent to earth by his Superior, Almighty God.

There are many other Bible verses in which almost all translators in other languages consistently insert the article “a” when translating Greek sentences with the same structure. For example, at Mark 6:49, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, the King James Version says: “They supposed it had been a spirit.” In the Koine Greek, there is no “a” before “spirit.” But almost all translations in other languages add an “a” in order to make the rendering fit the context. In the same way, since John 1:1 shows that the Word was with God, he could not be God but was “a god,” or “divine.”

Joseph Henry Thayer, a theologian and scholar who worked on the American Standard Version, stated simply: “The Logos was divine, not the divine Being himself.” And Jesuit John L. McKenzie wrote in his Dictionary of the Bible: “Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated . . . ‘the word was a divine being.’”

@viaro
1 John 5:20
"We know that Jesus Christ the Son of God has come and has shown us the true God. And because of Jesus, we now belong to the true God who gives eternal life." - CEV

"We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life." - TNIV

So who is the true God here?
The preceding verse shed more light: "We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one."

On John 20: 28
About the apostle Thomas’ saying, “My Lord and my God!” to Jesus at John 20:28. Thomas may simply have made an emotional exclamation of astonishment, spoken to Jesus but directed to God. In such case, Thomas did not think that Jesus was Almighty God, for he and all the other apostles knew that Jesus never claimed to be God but taught that His Father alone is “the only true God.”—John 17:3.

Again, the context helps us to understand this. A few days earlier the resurrected Jesus had told Mary Magdalene to tell the disciples: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17) Even though Jesus was already resurrected his Father was still his God. And Jesus continued to refer to Him as such even in the last book of the Bible, after he was glorified.—Revelation 1:5, 6; 3:2, 12.

Just three verses after Thomas’ exclamation, at John 20:31, the Bible further clarifies the matter by stating: “These have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God,” not that he was Almighty God. And it meant “Son” in a literal way, as with a natural father and son, not as some mysterious part of a Trinity Godhead.

;d

TrueSeeker:

@viaro
1 John 5:20
"We know that Jesus Christ the Son of God has come and has shown us the true God. And because of Jesus, we now belong to the true God who gives eternal life." - CEV

The CEV (Contemporary English Version) is a paraphrase, not a translation. No serious Bible student uses CEV as a serious tool in Biblical study.

There are other contemporary versions, such as the BBE (Bible in Basic English) which renders that verse thus:

[list]And we are certain that the Son of God has come, and has given us a clear vision, so that we may see him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.[/list]

And so others:

[list]And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him that is true; and we are in Him that is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. ~ EMTV[/list]

[list]And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life - ESV[/list]

This does not contradict what we find declared about the Son Jesus Christ in other references:

(a)  Him who is true - compare with Rev. 3:7 where Jesus calls Himself "he that is holy, he that is true".

(b)  He is. .  eternal life - did Jesus not specifically refer to Himself as "the resurrection, and the life" in John 11:25? Even John in his epistles called Jesus "that eternal life, which was with the Father" (1 John 1:2).

See, I don't have any problems with 1 John 5:20 - the problem is with those who look for every excuse to deny the Deity of Christ, which I can understand was why you rushed to CEV.

So who is the true God here?
The preceding verse shed more light: "We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one."

I just explained above.

On John 20: 28
About the apostle Thomas’ saying, “My Lord and my God!” to Jesus at John 20:28. Thomas may simply have made an emotional exclamation of astonishment, spoken to Jesus but directed to God. In such case, Thomas did not think that Jesus was Almighty God, for he and all the other apostles knew that Jesus never claimed to be God but taught that His Father alone is “the only true God.”—John 17:3.

Thomas was not being emotional or exclaming anything. The Bible says that he directly was referring to Jesus Christ in that confession - and we don't need a special Oxford degree to understand it simply: "And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God." Thomas was directly addressing Him (Jesus) in that confession, and not acting like an emotionally inbalanced person.

Again, the context helps us to understand this. A few days earlier the resurrected Jesus had told Mary Magdalene to tell the disciples: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17) Even though Jesus was already resurrected his Father was still his God. And Jesus continued to refer to Him as such even in the last book of the Bible, after he was glorified.—Revelation 1:5, 6; 3:2, 12.

I have no problem with that - for in Hebrews 1:8, the Son is called "God" by the Father - "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom". That was the Father calling the Son "God" - and no worries there.

Just three verses after Thomas’ exclamation, at John 20:31, the Bible further clarifies the matter by stating: “These have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God,” not that he was Almighty God. And it meant “Son” in a literal way, as with a natural father and son, not as some mysterious part of a Trinity Godhead.

Sorry if you're shooting yourself in the leg. The term "Son" in reference to Jesus Christ is NOT 'son' in any literal sense as a man sires a son. I can't laugh at the hollow statement you're making here. The word 'Son' in reference to Christ points to a number of things - His Deity, His Glorification after His Resurrection, and as God's Representative in Redemption and Divine Governance. It does not mean at all that He is Son in any literal sense as if God gave birth to Him! Please.

@viaro

The CEV (Contemporary English Version) is a paraphrase, not a translation. No serious Bible student uses CEV as a serious tool in Biblical study.

lol, 

It is a paraphrase truly, because it make the text understandable. But as your assertion that no serious bible student uses it is an ambiguous,  it shot you.

Sorry if you're shooting yourself in the leg. The term "Son" in reference to Jesus Christ is NOT 'son' in any literal sense as a man sires a son. I can't laugh at the hollow statement you're making here. The word 'Son' in reference to Christ points to a number of things - His Deity, His Glorification after His Resurrection, and His God's Representative in Redemption and Divine Governance. It does not mean at all that He is Son in any literal sense as if God gave birth to Him! Please.

When I say literal I mean, it meant what it mean son not God the son as you believe but God Son. But someone who originate from God. No hidden meaning or what so ever.

cyao, remain blessed.

TrueSeeker:

@viaro
lol,

It is a paraphrase truly, because it make the text understandable. But as your assertion that no serious bible student uses it is an ambiguous, it shot you.
cyao, remain blessed.

Don't let me laugh.   
You had nothing to say on the other translations I used and analysed the same verse 1 John 5:20? Of course not.

But it is interesting to see how CEV renders John 1:1 - "In the beginning was the one who is called the Word. The Word was with God and was truly God."

Yep, the CEV says that Jesus is "TRULY GOD", and I'll give that to you. Seriously.

__________

TrueSeeker:

When I say literal I mean, it meant what it mean son not God the son as you believe but God Son. No hidden meaning or what so ever.

Dude, quit it. You actually qualified what you meant by "literal" in stating this: 'it meant “Son” in a literal way, as with a natural father and son'. You don't state things to fly like that and expect us to be magicians reading something else!

Now, you are not a serious Bible student, are you?

TrueSeeker:

Now, you are not a serious Bible student, are you?

I don't boast myself to be anything; but I certainly do not let shoddy arguments like yours be waved in our faces.

Lawd. Where have i been and how did i miss this thread?

Viaro decietfully defending his embarrasing worship of a fellow proven mortal human being as God yet again? ? ?

When will this fellow end this pagan trinitarian joke? ? ?

Just to address a few of the posers some honest folks here have raised.

On Jesus being God -

There is no doubt: nor can even the most vociferous pagan trinitarian apostle deny: that Jesus is emphatically and repeatedly said by the Bible to be "begotten." He is referred to as the "only begotten son of God."

Indisputably, being "begotten" connotes a beginning: namely that one who is "begotten" began to exist at a point.

It is well agreed that God himself has ALWAYS existed and thus was not "begotten" at any time.

This alone is sufficient for the discerning mind to understand that Jesus being a "begotten" being, cannot be the eternal and uncreated Almighty God who has no beginning.

This is very simple, lucid and clear. But expect pagan trinitarian apostles to deny the patently obvious, in their rabid and racially-inferior-inspired bid to worship an innocent late jewish teacher - a man like themselves.

Nothing could be more pagan, crude, and emphatically denigrating of the quality of human spirituality.