Originally posted by @sonship
And again, What do you consider "my trinity teaching" ?
And again, What do you define as being filled with the spirit of Christ

You don't seriously expect me to think that only true Christian agree with me on every conceivable utterance in the interpretation of passages about the nature of God.

Instead of forming your thought as a question why not just state what it is that you think I am doing. If you think that I write one hundred sentences on the nature of God and some other Bible reader does not absolutely agree with the very same words with each and every one hundred of those sentences, I say they do not have the Spirit of Christ . .... then just SAY that.

Instead of trying 35 times to skillfully place words in my mouth, stop wasting our time. Just state what it is you think I am saying.

I think I'll give you a demonstration sometime - ie. I think you are saying THIS _____________.

========================================
When you say death is annhilation into oblivion of non-existence then I think you are saying:

When the dead are resurrected it is really an entirely different being God has created. Since there was no continuation whatsoever in any part of their being - body, soul, or spirit, then it is really a different person.

So I ask - Is it just then that a different person answer for the life lived by someone he was NOT ?

I think that is a problem with the concept of physical death being absolute nothingness of non-being of the one who died.

Originally posted by @sonship
You don't seriously expect me to think that only true Christian agree with me on every conceivable utterance in the interpretation of passages about the nature of God.

Instead of forming your thought as a question why not just state what it is that you think I am doing. If you think that I write one hundred sentences on the nature of God and some other ...[text shortened]... with the concept of physical death being absolute nothingness of non-being of the one who died.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Are you going to answer the question or not?

Excuse me Divegeester. The question was quite clear.

Are you going to stop beating your wife now?
Or are you going to cease beating her sometime in the future?

I think I have been more than enough patient with you waiting for an honest reply.

Originally posted by @sonship
Excuse me Divegeester. The question was quite clear.

Are you going to stop beating your wife now?
Or are you going to cease beating her sometime in the future?

I think I have been more than enough patient with you waiting for an honest reply.

Sonship you have deeply held beliefs which you REALLY don’t like being challenged on. How precious is your pride in these beliefs? If I reject one of them, the trinity is the case in point, does that preclude me from being filled with the spirit of Christ? Yes or no.

It’s not a difficult question, but your vanity prevents you being honest.

Originally posted by @sonship
You don't seriously expect me to think that only true Christian agree with me on every conceivable utterance in the interpretation of passages about the nature of God.

Originally posted by @fmf
The question you are dodging is not about "every conceivable utterance in the interpretation of passages about the nature of God", as you well know. The question is specifically about the "Trinity" ideology you propagate.

Originally posted by @sonship

Lets start with where I entered the conversation.

You said that men will be living through an unbelievably blessed time, and still they will rebel against Christ.

I pointed out that in the end of the millennial age there will be a great rebellion. This is obviously of a large number of people unhappy with the bounty and blessings of ...[text shortened]... etween some nations and the Messiah is throughout the entire millennium or just a portion of it.

Originally posted by @rajk999
Paul said - He must reign until he has put down all enemies.

A sycophant will not be able to deduce anything further, He must await for someone else to do the thinking for him.

Pauls statement means:
During Christ's reign as King, there will be continued opposition.
Once this is put down then his reign is over and God takes over

"And there with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him.

And to Him (the One like the Son of MAN) was given a dominion, glory, and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages might serve Him.

His dominion is an eternal dominion, which will not pass away; and His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed." (Dan. 7:13,14)

"For a child is born to us, A son is given to us ...

To the increase of His government and His peace there is no end upon the throne of David

And over His kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it in justice
and righteousness from now to eternity.

The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will accomplish this."

" ... the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ." (Second Peter 1:11)

First Corinthians 15:25 does say that Christ must reign until God puts all His enemies under His feet.

It does not say that He must STOP REIGNING when God puts all Christ's enemies under Christ's feet.

And Rajk999 reads into the phrase "that God may be all in all" - Christ is no longer reigning and no longer has a dominion and kingdom.

Try as he does the kingdom of Christ is "the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2 Pet. 1:11), enemies to still subdue or not.

Originally posted by @rajk999

Pauls statement means:
During Christ's reign as King, there will be continued opposition.
Once this is put down then his reign is over and God takes over

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw those who had been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and of those who had not worshipped the beast nor his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand;

and they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years." (Rev. 20:4)

"And there will be no longer be a curse. And the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His slaves will serve Him; And they will see His face, and His name will be on their foreheads.

And night will be no more and they have no need of the light of a lamp and of the light of the sun, for the Lord God will shine upon them, and they will reign forever and ever." (20:3-5)

Originally posted by @divegeester
Sonship you have deeply held beliefs which you REALLY don’t like being challenged on. How precious is your pride in these beliefs? If I reject one of them, the trinity is the case in point, does that preclude me from being filled with the spirit of Christ? Yes or no.

It’s not a difficult question, but your vanity prevents you being honest.

Originally posted by @sonship
You need a loose paraphrase like Good News to do the thinking for you rather than a good English translation of the Greek, which says [b]"God may be all in all."

You need someone else, who has not yet come forward, to explain how ANY of what you have written here REMOVES the phrase -

" His dominion is an eternal dominion " from the ...[text shortened]... conclude His reigning" or
"reign NO MORE" in any place in First Corinthians 15:24-28.[/b]