Recent content by williamjordan

You have a multitude of issues here. None of the texts in Hebrews 1 are ever attributed to Christ's as a result of the incarnation. You need to stop and think: When the NT cites or alludes to Deut. 32 (cf. Heb. 1:6), how does it use it? When the NT cites or alludes to Ps. 104 (cf. Heb. 1:7)...

This is quite unfortunate. You interpret the passage as a reference to Christ's pre-existence, and then (again) to His birth at Bethlehem. However, neither of those interpretations are accurate. Paul actually tells the reader how Ps. 2:7 is fulfilled (Acts 13:30-33), and doesn't apply either...

I think a closer reading of the text is much needed. Jer. 1:4-9 does not speak of the Word being formed or created. Rather, it is speaking about the Word’s participation in the action, just like Isaiah 44:24 does when it speaks of God “who formed you in the womb.” Where Isaiah 44:24 speaks of...

You of all know that I am a Trinitarian of Trinitarians. We have crossed paths before. If you recall, we had previously discussed several passages on another thread ("Omitted Verses"), of which have also been employed in this thread, particularly 1 Peter 3:15. Hopefully that conversation...

Well yes, we know this "colleague" of yours has "big issues with the Gospel of John." But this lady can't even get her story straight. In the context from which John draws from (Isaiah 45), lies an example of how John could have written Jn. 1:1 had he intended an indefinite rendering. Had...

Perhaps you need to re-read Abraham’s “angelic”-like encounter in Gen. 18–19. Nowhere in Gen. 18 does the text indicate that the messengers are “angels” in the sense that you intend it to be taken (that they are created celestial beings from another realm). Gen. 18 identifies these messengers as...

Um, no. 1 Peter places a Christological emphasis on the OT passage in question. I am simply allowing the NT to explain Isaiah 8-9. You, however, are forced to take on an interpretation that stands in contrast from 1 Peter. You made the claim that Isaiah 9 does not refer to Christ as the God...

Yes, the points actually do provide an "answer." But you are either too “unwilling” to accept the response, or are trying everything in your power not to follow the argument, which is why I was hesitant to even spend time responding. Why should anyone expect a ~2,300 word document (Polycarp's...

There's even more problems with this, of which (in anticipation of your response) I addressed in Post #323 and Post #352: Why then, do you go on to cite 1 Cor. 8:6 and Col. 1:16-17, when both are in direct opposition to what you said here? Remember, we want to “interact” with what has been...

But there is just one “small” problem... . Okay, so I lied: It's “big.” Real big. Isaiah 9 is apart of a larger discourse that points back to Isaiah 8. Isaiah 9:1 opens with the words, “But there will be no more gloom…” which suggests the author is finishing a line of thought that stems from...

How do you not see what is so “obviously,” wrong? Let's begin by pointing at the “elephant in the room.” Your post begins by suggesting, The mind of the time – no one at the time of Jesus or before (the Israelites) ever considered the trinity. But then you go on to suggest the following...

Well, maybe you should try inviting me to your "debate group." It looks like I can have it out with whoever it is on that forum that made these comments. There's so many things to respond to, and I'm not too sure you're the right person to deliver my responses back. There's an analogy I often...

I call this “theological swooning.” This is when someone “feels the heat,” but begins “grasping” at other ideologies in attempt to deflect attention away in their moments of “distress.” People of this mindset will attempt all sorts of random “stunts” in order to “get out of jail,” so long as...

One should not rely so heavily on such a “skewed” interpretation of the Sahidic Coptic, but instead try to understand how it could reflect the “mind of the time.” People are “reading” into the Sahidic what may or may not be there, and not asking very significant questions: How else would the...

Let's stop you here: You are simply all over the place. From one post to the next you are throwing ideas into the wind to see if they stick. I am simply asking you to address the objections that I laid out before you. Instead, you are going to a language that you don't know (Sahidic Coptic)...