New nonsense from faithful witness

FW:Manuel you say that "The son is the flesh God(The father) indwelt." So an otherwise inanimate object is the Son of God.

mlculwell Faithful witness(So called) gives us his real view of his doctrine of Antichrist(1st. John 4:3) a clear denial of the real humanity of the son. Jesus is no more inanimate object than I am! But what we clearly see from these folks is a denial of the real humanity of the son.


FW:Does this son have two natures? Is that your way out of the subject-object relationship that the Father and Son share, ie:prayer.

mlculwell: Again I do not ever use that analogy, it is too confusing! I believe Jesus was very man and very God you will not ever hear me say anything about natures! The son really prayed as a real man in subjection to his real God!

BD: So the Son is really two natures. . . I see. Sounds like Dr. Bernards deafeted argument. Manuel you have given me essentially another non answer to my very clear and simple question.

mllculwell All you have done is lied on me! I never use the term nature for God in any of my explanations and that is a fact!Tyndale called the word an *it* in John 1:1 and Paul used the term *word* for two evil individuals not taking into account that you view the term as another person of God, soiling your view of the word as another person of *God the son8 which is not a doctrine taught By Paul, John, or anyone in scripture.

BD:Again what does this phrase mean in John 1:pros ton theon?

mlculwell: I gave you the answer already, you cannot isolate a few Greek words and ask what it means? The word *with8 is the same word *with*(Pros) used in (1st John 1:1-2) ETERNAL LIFE WAS *WITH* THE FATHER(God). Who was God giving eternal life to?



mlculwell:"By the word/Logos of the LORD were the heavens made"

BD:The Son is the agent of creation who carried out the will of His Father. John 1 rules out subordination. The Son's role is of willful submission to His Father. Psalm 33:6 does not indicate word in the sense of John 1. It is a literal word. Are you that bent on scripture twisting? Read this:

Psalm 33:9 For he spoke, and it came to be;
he commanded, and it stood firm.

mlculwell: That is what I have claimed all along! You better go back and read my posts to you! God spoke the worlds into existence by the breath of his mouth! The son is not simply the agent of creation as the son did not exist.(Romans 5:14) Adam came before Jesus and was made in figure of him that was to come.(meaning Jesus was not back there!) (1st. Cor. 15:46) says Howbeit that was not first which spiritual but that which was natural(Adam) and AFTERWARD that which was spiritual. (refuting your false doctrine you insert in John 1:1)

BD:Obviously the context has nothing to do with the scenario in John 1:1. Context, Context, Context!

mlculwell:I just love how you ignore my arguments to simply insert your false doctrine in John 1:1! by the word /Logos of the LORD were the heavens made and* ALL* the host of them by the breath of his mouth! The word is not another person of god with God and you isolating a few Greek words still does not prove your failed doctrine! Any false prophet can do that nonsense you can prove anything doing that but it is not proper exegesis of passage nor is it using context properly either!

BD:By the way JL, why don't you tell me something since you can read greek. What is the time frame of Philippians 2:5-9?

mlculwell: I will let JL talk from himself But I am going to give you my take on how you must see that passage!

This passage proves all trinitarians are polytheists! Because you believe the passage is speaking of the pre-incarnate Jesus(God the son) thus you have god equal to God polytheism according to your view plin and simple.