Grand Canyon University Web Resources

wrote in message
news:170.34.19.05.571719000@srcbs.org...
>
>
> larswilson wrote:
>> wrote in message
>> news:168.26.08.05.884892000@srcbs.org...
>> >
>> >
>> > larswilson wrote:
>> >> The SYNTAX of this in modern concept
>> >
>> > If you feel you know your Greek well enough to post on syntax, the
>> > perhaps you would care to explain for us why the Trinitarian is
>> > required to have John use a definite article in Jn 1:1c.

Thanks Isenders for your information, but as I said, to understand the
absolute RELATIONSIHP between Jesus and God (sorry for the typos!) you do
not go to John 1:1 or elsewhere where it reflects the closeness of the two,
such as "I and my father are one." Intead you go to where you find specific
definition and that specific definition between the two, their
"relationship" is Father and Son. Father...and son.

Father and son.

So Jn 1:1 and all other scritpures must accommodate this, no matter how much
the scriptures allow an overlapping of purpose and identity between God and
Christ.

Jn. 1:1 is a great reference where we learn that both God and Jesus are god
and share the same rulership authority. But it is not conclusive or
preemptive of the idea that they are two separate entities or equal in every
way. That DEFINITION comes from other scriptures which modify this, again,
the chief one being reference to Christ being the "son" of God, the
"firstborn of creation", etc. Jesus as God's "son" does not violate the
point of Jn 1:1's reference to the shared godship of Christ and God.

So if you believe in the Trinity, yes, I agree, John 1:1 works since it
shows Jesus and God share the same godship. But the Trinity doctrine does
not work if you consider Jesus an angelic son of God. Further, there is no
mention of "Holy Spirit" in Jn 1:1. So Jn 1:1 is about a dynamic DUO and
not a trinity.

"Father - Son" You want to make that into a trinity? Fine. Be my guest.
I'll be out taking typing lessons if you don't mind. (smile)

Lars

Father...son. As in....definitely not trinity.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Matthew Johnson wrote:

> In article <82312543-05CB-A2F3-A26C-A4D0F5FB7670@srcbs.org>, Bob Felts says...
> >
[...]
>
> >> > So you didn't answer the question of why we never choose to obey all
> >> > the time. Why has no man (except for Jesus) ever chosen to obey all
> >> > of the Law all of the time?
> >>