tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23595874.post4285833177015406187..comments2023-09-26T15:22:20.565-05:00Comments on Evidential Faith: Reifying “Natures” = Two Persons by Jason DulleJN Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02324769104234783019noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23595874.post-43824186098342490582014-10-16T14:40:33.081-05:002014-10-16T14:40:33.081-05:00There is no eternal Son.
The Word was with God and...There is no eternal Son.<br />The Word was with God and was that God, but the Son was begotten, made of a woman, born in time, suffered, died and was risen (according to your ilk by two other god!).<br />Quit inserting Son for Word, quit saying what Trinitarians even reject like Walter Martin, Adam Clarke and according to his silence E.CALVIN BEISNER in the 1985 debate with Sabin and Urshan and Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23595874.post-15415462249574020592010-12-01T09:02:07.901-06:002010-12-01T09:02:07.901-06:00I find it hard to believe that this argument is st...I find it hard to believe that this argument is still believed to be tenable by the Oneness movement. Firstly, this explanation relies on a full kenosis. That is not a possibility and has been refuted quite a few times. So too, the evidence for the eternality of the person of the Son with the Father is manifold. Secondly, I refer you to the relevant article on my site. There you'll see that M. R. Burgoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06281360226653432132noreply@blogger.com