Our Lord's God
Well-known member
I gave multiple responses in post 195.
Your turn!
Sorry but I won't be participating in delusions with you today.
I gave multiple responses in post 195.
Your turn!
Sorry but I won't be participating in delusions with you today.
Run away, heretic!
Classic.
The question at the end of post 195 has gone unanswered by you, heretic.You really can't muster anymore than this can you?
How about attempting an intelligent interpretation of 1 John 1:8?
Or are you completely incapable but want us to pretend otherwise?
For starters, Acts 1:24-26.
The Lord Jesus is to be prayed to in that He is YHWH (God). To call upon the name of the Lord means to pray to the Lord - and Paul applies YHWH from Joel 3:5 (LXX) unto the Lord Jesus in Romans 10:13 which demonstrates Jesus is YHWH.
Sorry but for starters, the name and title of Lord Jesus doesn't appear in that passage
There is more than one way to express a truth claim.Show me one verse where it actually says that they prayed to the Lord Jesus in those exact words,
The question at the end of post 195 has gone unanswered by you, heretic.
Keep hiding!
5 You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him. 7 Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous;
It's pretty plain that John is referring to the Father including verse 7.
No, I didn't and if you want to claim that I did, then you have to reveal where exactly and you haven't done this.You already affirmed this is a prayer to the Lord Jesus.
Matthew 6:9 does not forbid praying to the Lord Jesus
Because it proves the Lord Jesus is God. Since all three Trinitarian Persons are omniscient, if you pray to one it means all three will hear you prayer. But if you pray to one, who responds to your prayer? That Person or potentially another Person? I ask because Trinitarians state that the...forums.carm.org
There is more than one way to express a truth claim.
Romans 10:8-13
(8) But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach):
(9) that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
(10) For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
(11) For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”
(12) For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
(13) For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." (NKJV)
The use of "For" in vv. 10-13 connects back to the Lord in reference Jesus in verse 9.
Thus, all the underlined words above refer to the Lord Jesus.
Colossians 1:15 "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".But in verse 5 when it reads, "He appeared in order to take away sins" this refers to Jesus.
No, I didn't and if you want to claim that I did, then you have to reveal where exactly and you haven't done this.
(11) For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”
(12) For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.
(13) For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." (NKJV)
But in verse 5 when it reads, "He appeared in order to take away sins" this refers to Jesus.
Notice that when He (Jesus) appeared in order to take away sins (1 John 3:5) corresponds with the Son of God appearing to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8).
Thanks for your admission that the singular pronoun applies to more than one.There is no "Jesus not the Father" during Jesus' earthly ministry.
Thanks for your admission that the singular pronoun applies to more than one.
You affirmed 1 John 3:7 refers to the Father.I said no such thing.
You affirmed 1 John 3:7 refers to the Father.
It refers to Jesus.
It was easy to refute your confusion.
Yes, the context demands it.
Heretics are easy to refute. See post 208.
Thanks again for making this easy for me.
Show us how your confirmation bias routines amount to anything other than what they are.
None of the evidence I supplied in post 208 was refuted.
Thanks for having such a warped belief system that is so easy to refute.