Ed Dingess, I am certainly not going to report to you what my linguistic proficiency is, how many languages I speak and at what age I learnt them. It is entirely obvious that you are ignoring the compelling evidence against the trinitarian reading of this text (as supported by highly regarded trinitarian scholars themselves) and you base your understanding on indirect, ambiguous and weak evidence.
The rule is that οὗτός is used as the DP closest to the antecedent and ἐκεῖνός is used when the antecedent is more distant. This is a general rule and does not always hold. But the point is that when you find a place that it does not hold, you must come up with more than theological bias and conjecture as proof that the rule does not hold in that instance.
Aah, exactly! Are you willing to apply your own rule? What will guide YOUR deciding whether the above rule is faithfully upheld in a text, if not “theological bias and conjecture???” Thus far I’ve only seen you doing the latter…mind applying your own rule consistently?…
Secondly, I provided overwhelming TEXTUAL (not doctrinal) evidence which is recognizable in both a written and oral society that would as good as settle the case for a non-trinitarian understanding of the text.
This is enough for me. I am sorry you think I am being immature. From my perspective, I have a responsibility to speak the truth, not only about Scripture but about the consequences of your doctrine.
Yes, it is a pity that your behaviour would have me think you are. If it’s about consequences of doctrine we can have a great deal to speak about. The history of the Church is drenched in bloodshed and faith-crippling atrocities all in an attempt to safeguard an invented and artificially sustained post-biblical doctrine. You are right! A doctrine’s consequences speak for itself…
You bear herertical teachings. You are spreading them across the internet. The Church has dealt with most forms of “oneness” theology from antiquity and it has uniformly, consistently, and expressly excommunicated all heretics that confess it. You happen to be one of them. I urge you to repent and place your faith in the one triune God who is able to save and provide light out of the darkness in which you presently find yourself.
You are a heretic yourself – depending on who you ask. The Roman Church regards you as one; if you couldn’t be bothered by it, what makes you think I should? And you are right again (we agree on quite a few things after all, mind you?) that the history of the Church, particularly since the fourth century, has shown that they couldn’t stand the oneness of the biblical Yahweh. History shows that the Church has simply been infatuated with polytheism and with the insatiable craving to worship as God more than one. This was decided upon by the powerful, and dissenters were persecuted, murdered and tortured for taking a stand for their faith, regardless of how compelling their case. You sound very proud of these achievements. Had it not been for a more sophisticated society, you would probably have followed suit! No wonder you’re a Calvinist.
So thanks for your prayers, but forgive me for being utterly suspicious of your motives. And while you’re at it, better pray for the blood-stained hands of your disgraceful ancestors.