god according to the bible would ---not--- use text as a form of communication

was there anywhere, anywhere AT ALL in it that stated something to the effect of “I the lord thy god give permission to jesus to have equality to myself and to change my laws, rules and and regulations and he sees fit.”? Um no.If Jesus were God, he wouldn't need to be given permission for equality. He simply would be God.Oh and btw, to utterly prove you wrong and that christ and god are indeed two separate entities well here’s some solid verses for your beady little teeny bopper eyes…I agree they're different entities, but the Bible clearly teaches the doctrine of the Trinity to deal with this issue. Before we go on, the idea of the trinity is foreign to us, so I can't say I know any of it for certain or that I fully understand any of it. What I will do is make some deductions based upon what we observe and see.As shown in the verses of my opponent, Jesus was in one sense different from God. At the same time, Jesus also claimed to be one with God. (John 10:30) The three were clearly taught as equals. (Matthew 28:19) The Trinity isn't just a manmade interpretation, it's Biblical. (1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 1 John 5:7)God the Father says that Jesus is his son. (Matthew 3:16-17) Spirit Beings (Including God) cannot reproduce in a physical manner like men, (Matthew 22:30) so we must conclude that Jesus is not the sexual offspring of God. Instead, this Father Son paradigm could present us with a mental picture of their authoritative position to one another.Matthew 1:23 says Jesus was 'God with us,' by the angels. This would only be true if Jesus were God.Moses - I would be happy to debate the morality of these issues at another time, but that is not the purpose of this discussion.I never claimed Jesus was more powerful than God. I said they were equal. The vast majority of Christians would believe me in that case. Only a small, small percentile of Christians reject the doctrine of the trinity. (17-19)“If Jesus is God,..” You have no proof whatsoever that either of them exists!!! And you mentioned that keyword “if”, which means you don’t know and as usual you are guessing. NEXT!Yep, I said if. It's not that I'm just guessing, but I also don't know for sure. We don't really know much of anything for absolute certain. My goal here is not to prove God exists, however, but to show that if he did he may use text to communicate.Romans - My opponent never showed how these verses were different, only claimed that they were. This difference is not apparent to either me or I would presume the voter.OK I’m ending this until you tell me where and how you come up with your translations of your bible as I have before but you always scat when asked. Typical Buddhist monk christian.I use many translations. Translating text can be difficult, I think we agree on that. Therefore, to get the best idea of what the text says, the christian should use as many sources as he can. It's also important to keep the type of source in mind. Versions with the effort to keep the original intent in mind, (KJV, NKJV, ESV, ASV, etc.) are good translations to use. Versions that translate loosely should be used with that in mind (NIV, NLT, NASB etc.) Versions which totally compromise on the initial intent of the text (MSG, Street Bible etc.) should probably never be used, at least with the belief that it is scripture you are reading. With careful digilance, the original intent of Scripture can be found. We know the manuscripts these texts came from are accurate, and we also know which versions will try to protect that accuracy. There will always be counterfits, but they are generally easy to weed out if desired in an honest manner.Because of the testimony of Christ, and our current accuracy, I see no reason why God would not use text. (Among other means)(17) - https://en.wikipedia.org...(18) - https://www.quora.com...(19) - https://www.thoughtco.com...