A Personal Reflection on the Trinity and Salvation

[Runningman]

so you are countering the polytheist view that says there are multiple gods. You are not countering the orthodox recognition of Jesus as the same God and who had glory with the Father before his incarnation as implied in Joh 17:5. Again, your error is that you do not consider John 17:5 or Jesus existing before Abraham or any of the many other passages. How are we to take your arguments seriously when you cannot properly explain those pre-existence passages?

Yet we have John 17:3 debunking the theories that Jesus is God. So in light of that, what is a better way to interpret what comes after it?

 

[civic]

Only means sole, singular, so yeah it refers to exclusivity quite easily. When someone is the only one of something then they're the sole individual. Hence the Father is the exclusive true God.

What's your workaround for 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Ephesians 4:6?

Oh you mean like when it says Jesus is the

ONLY LORD, SOVEREIGN, SAVIOR

Next fallacy

 

[Jay]

I believe in the full doctrine of the Incarnation to the full dogma of the absolute deity of Christ.

‘Perfect God and perfect Man.…
‘Who, although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ.’

 

[Runningman]

Oh you mean like when it says Jesus is the

ONLY LORD, SOVEREIGN, SAVIOR

Next fallacy

I'm still working with you step by step.

What's your explanation for the Lord sending Jesus Christ if Jesus is the only Lord?

Acts 3
20that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send Jesus, the Christ, who has been appointed for you.

 

[Runningman]

I believe in the full doctrine of the Incarnation to the full dogma of the absolute deity of Christ.

‘Perfect God and perfect Man.…
‘Who, although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ.’

At least you rightly identify it as dogma, which I am comfortable with, but some of the others here have the problem of projecting their beliefs onto the Bible.

Are you Catholic btw?

 

[TomL]

Let's grant that Thomas is calling Jesus God here (I don't think he clearly is). That's after God raised Jesus up. So for the vast majority of Jesus ministry there's no evidence they believed he was God. Seems strange, why hide it. And were the disciples saved during those 3+ years?

What is not clear?

John 20:28 (NASB95) — 28 Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

Why does Jesus respond?

John 20:29 (NASB95) — 29 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”

 

[TomL]

Only means sole, singular, so yeah it refers to exclusivity quite easily. When someone is the only one of something then they're the sole individual. Hence the Father is the exclusive true God.

What's your workaround for 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Ephesians 4:6?

Did you not see

1 Corinthians 8:6 (NASB95) — 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

Jesus is called the one Lord.

 

[360watt]

Three of those five points contained scriptures (the other two are human conjecture). None of those three would a person of average intelligence and without preconception take to mean that Jesus is God, much less the trinity.

The father is clearly and undeniably said to be God many times. I wonder why the bible isn't anywhere near as clear about the son being God? I mean, God could have made it just as clear very easily. Perhaps because that's not what the Bible's trying to communicate, because it isn't true. That seems to be the most obvious reason.

If Jesus straight out said He was God early on it would have endangered others and messed with the God ordained timing of the crucifixion and resurrection as people would have immediately taken Him.

Aside from that..if He isnt God..He would have to be mortal. I don't know any mortal that can see someone when they are nowhere them. Jesus saw Nathaneal when He was nowhere near Nathaneal.

Jesus forgave sin of those who hadn’t directly offended Him.. that is the work of God.

Jesus accepted worship from Thomas and others.

He claimed to exist before Abraham as the one who spoke at the burning bush.

It goes on and on


I know you will say these are things given by the Fathers authority..but that doesn't address His powers being above and beyond the disciples and apostles.

 

[Runningman]

Did you not see

1 Corinthians 8:6 (NASB95) — 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

Jesus is called the one Lord.

Context matters. One Lord for the church, yes. One Lord only? No.

What's your explanation for the Lord sending Jesus Christ if Jesus is the only Lord?

Acts 3
20that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send Jesus, the Christ, who has been appointed for you.

 

[Jay]

At least you rightly identify it as dogma, which I am comfortable with, but some of the others here have the problem of projecting their beliefs onto the Bible.

Are you Catholic btw?

The way I use "Dogma" as a core set of beliefs, particularly in a religious context, . I use it mostly to describe my belief in the trinity that is held without questioning.
non denominational

 

[mikesw]

Only means sole, singular, so yeah it refers to exclusivity quite easily. When someone is the only one of something then they're the sole individual. Hence the Father is the exclusive true God.

What's your workaround for 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Ephesians 4:6?

I read these verses often because you post them often. I still do not see these denying Christ Jesus being part of the Godhead. As a hyperliteralist you should expect a verse saying "Jesus is not of the Godhead."
So in Ephesians 4:6 (NASB95)
6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

Then in Colossians 1:17 (NASB95)
17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

These shows the Father and the Son into quite a union. And see also the natural pairing of the Father and his Son. Hard to miss unless you need glasses.

 

[TomL]

Context matters. One Lord for the church, yes. One Lord only? No.

What's your explanation for the Lord sending Jesus Christ if Jesus is the only Lord?

Acts 3
20that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send Jesus, the Christ, who has been appointed for you.

Read the text.

1 Corinthians 8:6 (NASB95) — 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

All things are by the Lord and men exist through him.

Just the church is a phrase that does not appear in the verse.

Christ came and was for the restoration of mankind.



Jesus is called the one Lord.

 

[mikesw]

Read the text.

1 Corinthians 8:6 (NASB95) — 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

All things are by the Lord and men exist through him.

Just the church is a phrase that does not appear in the verse.

Christ came and was for the restoration of mankind.



Jesus is called the one Lord.

I just shared in another one of the threads with unitarian advocates how John 3:16-17 shows that Jesus saved the world. This was not just giving eternally life but is more extensive in a situation that is like the Noah flood. I'm not sure all the dynamics of this, but that saving of the world seems to be represented in John 3:16-17

 

[TomL]

I just shared in another one of the threads with unitarian advocates how John 3:16-17 shows that Jesus saved the world. This was not just giving eternally life but is more extensive in a situation that is like the Noah flood. I'm not sure all the dynamics of this, but that saving of the world seems to be represented in John 3:16-17

Certainly the option is there

John 3:16–17 (NASB95) — 16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

Unfortunately, not all will believe in him.

 

[dwight92070]

No one ever claimed Jesus was the Father. The Father is still His Father even to this day. Jesus, while on earth was the son therefore the Father was greater, just like you are greater and above your very own children.

But I believe the Son is God. The same as the Holy Spirit is God.

If you can give a truly biblical reason of why Jesus, spoke from His very own mouth and said

"Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

That was an order from Jesus. Even though Peter however...On the Day of Pentecost, Peter told the crowd, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). His command concerning baptism was that it be done “in the name of Jesus Christ.”

It has been suggested that Peter said this because in presenting the gospel to the Jews, Peter commands them to be baptized in Jesus' name; that is, to exercise faith in the One they had crucified.

So why did Jesus use all 3 names? What was the purpose? And while you consider this, especially if you are anti-Trin look closely at the wording of the Statement from Jesus...

, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

A single name. Not in the name of the Father, and in the name of the Son, And in the name of the Holy Spirit.

But the SINGLE name.... the single name covers all three. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

God in three persons, each with their own things they had to do. .... not God as three persons in one.

FreeinChrist said: No one ever claimed Jesus was the Father.

Isaiah did! Isaiah 9:6: "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; ... (this is Jesus) And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, ..."

God Himself called His Son "God". Hebrews 1:8 and 9.

So the author of Hebrews also believed the Son was also God the Father.

 

[dwight92070]

No. Scripture teaches that Jesus is a human and that God is not a human.

Numbers 23
19God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

Hosea 11
9I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

If Jesus was human only, then there would have been no need for "the Holy Spirit" to "come upon" Mary or "the power of the Most High" to "overshadow" Mary, when Jesus was supernaturally conceived in her womb - THERE WAS NO HUMAN FATHER, so Jesus could not have been only a human. All humans have BOTH a human mother and a human father. Jesus NEVER HAD A HUMAN FATHER.

 

[mikesw]

If Jesus was human only, then there would have been no need for "the Holy Spirit" to "come upon" Mary or "the power of the Most High" to "overshadow" Mary, when Jesus was supernaturally conceived in her womb - THERE WAS NO HUMAN FATHER, so Jesus could not have been only a human. All humans have BOTH a human mother and a human father. Jesus NEVER HAD A HUMAN FATHER.

Right. I have shared a thread on the virgin birth to that respect. Of course there was no logical reply by unitarians.

 

[Runningman]

The way I use "Dogma" as a core set of beliefs, particularly in a religious context, . I use it mostly to describe my belief in the trinity that is held without questioning.
non denominational

Non-denomination is an oxymoron in trinitarianism because you're attempting to identify with Christianity, but you contradict Christianity. You're in a cult. Tough pill to swallow at first, but it's true. No better way than to just give it to you straight.

Do you believe the Bible is Scripture and that Scripture explains who God is, just as it says of what Jesus did in John 1:18?

 

[Runningman]

I read these verses often because you post them often. I still do not see these denying Christ Jesus being part of the Godhead. As a hyperliteralist you should expect a verse saying "Jesus is not of the Godhead."
So in Ephesians 4:6 (NASB95)
6one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.

Then in Colossians 1:17 (NASB95)
17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

These shows the Father and the Son into quite a union. And see also the natural pairing of the Father and his Son. Hard to miss unless you need glasses.

Ephesians 4:6 explicitly states that Father is the one God who is over all, including over Jesus. So your interpretations of a Jesus as a member of a co-equal, co-eternal, godhead don't make any sense.

This is what I have been trying to get you to understand. Begin with Scripture first and build the doctrines from there. Don't begin with your unsupported beliefs about a trinity first.

 

[Runningman]

If Jesus was human only, then there would have been no need for "the Holy Spirit" to "come upon" Mary or "the power of the Most High" to "overshadow" Mary, when Jesus was supernaturally conceived in her womb - THERE WAS NO HUMAN FATHER, so Jesus could not have been only a human. All humans have BOTH a human mother and a human father. Jesus NEVER HAD A HUMAN FATHER.

Says who? You?