[OBW]

KSA,

I am not necessarily in disagreement with any finding that is clearly true, even if it is in opposition to what I have stated in my previous posts. I am trying to make a point concerning our certainty concerning what any particular verse does or does not mean relative to other verses due to the general silence of scripture as to what they actually mean.

As for the commentary of John Gill, he could be correct. But he is also simply applying his opinion concerning the issue. I may like it (and actually do). But that does not make it right. Also, the fact that others before him may have written the same or similar things is not determinative. If frequency of the opinion in history is a factor, then we have significant problems with the doctrines of the RCC.

I do not disagree that at some level God in his entirety is alway present in everything and in all of the Three of the Trinity. But in some sense there are Three and that distinction is valid. To wash it away where it is recorded is an error. It was one of Lee's more serious errors. I hope we are not ready to repeat it.