All Claims of The Son's Deity

[Runningman]

Don't you believe that Jesus is the Christ?
This confirm that God the Father does not reveal it to you. (Mat 16:17)
Why? because Arians does not obey God the Father's command to listen to His Son Jesus Christ.
And Christ commanded the believers to baptize new converts in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
This I believe validate that Arians does not have the Almighty God the Father. (2John 1:9)

Mat 16:16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Mat 16:17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

2Jn 1:9 Anyone who goes too far and does not remain in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who remains in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

You seem to have said before that if people don't get baptized according to how you feel is the correct way then they are not Christian. You strongly suggested that atleast. Ok, but Jesus and all of the disicples didn't get baptized that way nor did they baptize anyone that way. Conclusion is you are saying that Jesus and his disciples are not Christian.

Don't get too carried away with your teachings because they are false ones. You can have your beliefs, but don't attack Jesus and us Christians just because you disagree with us.

 

[mikesw]

You're going to have to do a lot better than using arguments that strongly imply "This is in the Bible because I say it is."

The reason your pre-existence argument is bad theology is because the same sort of things you say mean Jesus pre-existed apply to others. Human pre-existence is not a doctrine in Scripture, no matter how much it may seem like it's possible.

For example, one could argue people pre-existed based on Scripture, using your same line of bad reasoning:

Did Jeremiah pre-exist simply because God foreknew him?

Jeremiah 1
5Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Did God intimately know David due to David pre-existing?

Psalm 139
13For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
14I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
15My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
16Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

haha. That is really a shallow argument. The point that should be added is that we have no indication that God became incarnate in the OT. This only happened in the NT and only with the Word incarnate as Christ. Therefore, you are half right in noting there are no cases of pre-existence of someone walking as a human in the OT. We can then recognize that Christ Jesus is unique since he is the only time where God became incarnate and therefore Jesus is able to say "before Abraham was, I Am."

How could God chose people who didn't pre-exist?

Ephesians 1
4According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 5Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

The common denominator is there are no examples of people pre-existing their birth, including Jesus.

Jesus is not said just to be chosen before the foundation of the world. Scripture says all creation was made through him. Maybe you will notice the distinction.
Then the predestination can be a general sense that people would be adopted through Christ Jesus. So you hardly have any basis to deny the Triune God here. It is not a surprise that the Schoenheit belief system led you to that false basis.

 

[mikesw]

The Father has a spirit and a soul, just like we all do, they aren't separate persons from God or us no are our children the same person as us, nor does having something in common with our children mean we are the same being. Trinitarians score an F in sound reasoning.

Did you know they didn't even fully agree that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are members of a trinity until the 4th century?

Did you know you are ignorant of the fact that the divinity of Christ was known in the second century? It hardly makes for an argument against the divinity of Christ by simply noting the Trinitarian deeper explanation of the Trinity was not decided upon centuries later.

 

[mikesw]

You talked about Schoenheit directly after we have quoted Scripture that says the exact same thing we are talking about. So the way it looks is your are blaming an evangelist for what the Bible says. Doesn't the Bible say the Father is the only true God? Do you agree with that or not?

I would blame those who went to the bible school that taught improper interpretation.
You keep wanting to suggest that Jesus would have to be a separate god. But we reject that because monotheism requires that Jesus must be of the same God. Jesus says the Father and I are one. So Jesus explains this.

Anyhow. It has been useful that you introduce an alternative theory of the essence of Jesus and the Father. Otherwise, my awareness of the Triune God would only be by the testimony of scripture. Now you have proven that the unitarian belief lacks consistency and explanatory sufficiency. Thus, you give greater confidence in the scriptural revelation of the Triune God. I know that was not your goal but you still have demonstrated that no sufficient theory undoes the evidence of the Triune God.

 

[Runningman]

haha. That is really a shallow argument. The point that should be added is that we have no indication that God became incarnate in the OT. This only happened in the NT and only with the Word incarnate as Christ. Therefore, you are half right in noting there are no cases of pre-existence of someone walking as a human in the OT. We can then recognize that Christ Jesus is unique since he is the only time where God became incarnate and therefore Jesus is able to say "before Abraham was, I Am."

Jesus is not said just to be chosen before the foundation of the world. Scripture says all creation was made through him. Maybe you will notice the distinction.
Then the predestination can be a general sense that people would be adopted through Christ Jesus. So you hardly have any basis to deny the Triune God here. It is not a surprise that the Schoenheit belief system led you to that false basis.

So there are no examples of anyone pre-existing their birth in the bible and your reasoning is that the same things that apply to Jesus and other humans somehow means Jesus pre-existed and others didn't? Yeah, that is not sound reasoning at all. It's called a double standard.

 

[Runningman]

Did you know you are ignorant of the fact that the divinity of Christ was known in the second century? It hardly makes for an argument against the divinity of Christ by simply noting the Trinitarian deeper explanation of the Trinity was not decided upon centuries later.

There were many other heretical groups in the 2nd century as well, the gnostics were one of them, there are many others. Longevity of the proto-trinitarian heresy doesn't validate it, as it is not an exceptional heresy. What matters is what is true, which is why Unitarianism is the oldest and long-standing theology of God. It is what God directly taught the Jews and what Jesus taught who became us Christians.

 

[Runningman]

I would blame those who went to the bible school that taught improper interpretation.
You keep wanting to suggest that Jesus would have to be a separate god. But we reject that because monotheism requires that Jesus must be of the same God. Jesus says the Father and I are one. So Jesus explains this.

Anyhow. It has been useful that you introduce an alternative theory of the essence of Jesus and the Father. Otherwise, my awareness of the Triune God would only be by the testimony of scripture. Now you have proven that the unitarian belief lacks consistency and explanatory sufficiency. Thus, you give greater confidence in the scriptural revelation of the Triune God. I know that was not your goal but you still have demonstrated that no sufficient theory undoes the evidence of the Triune God.

A common misunderstanding of the trinitarian. The oneness Jesus has with God is equal to the oneness his disciples have with God. Why? Jesus said so. So you have just had another one of your arguments removed from your tool belt. With that being your main point, your comment was not effective to support your beliefs from a Scriptural perspective. See why you are not very convincing? You say "one with God" and "in the trinity" or "godhead" and when we actually examine the Bible, none of what you're saying supports your conclusion.

John 17
21That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

 

[mikesw]

So there are no examples of anyone pre-existing their birth in the bible and your reasoning is that the same things that apply to Jesus and other humans somehow means Jesus pre-existed and others didn't? Yeah, that is not sound reasoning at all. It's called a double standard.

I guess you do not know that God exists differently from you. It sounds like you just have not paid attention to Jesus noting his pre-existence. But you use careful eisegesis to pretend Jesus does not point to that. Your reason for rejecting it is because you see him as merely human and thus pretend that Joseph actually started the birth of Jesus instead of God -- at least that is what you would have to believe for consistency.

 

[mikesw]

There were many other heretical groups in the 2nd century as well, the gnostics were one of them, there are many others. Longevity of the proto-trinitarian heresy doesn't validate it, as it is not an exceptional heresy. What matters is what is true, which is why Unitarianism is the oldest and long-standing theology of God. It is what God directly taught the Jews and what Jesus taught who became us Christians.

You pretend that the knowledge of Jesus' divinity suddenly came up in the 4th century. You have to create a whole pretend history to support your belief system. If you want to believe what Pharisees did, then no wonder you deny Jesus

 

[mikesw]

A common misunderstanding of the trinitarian. The oneness Jesus has with God is equal to the oneness his disciples have with God. Why? Jesus said so. So you have just had another one of your arguments removed from your tool belt. With that being your main point, your comment was not effective to support your beliefs from a Scriptural perspective. See why you are not very convincing? You say "one with God" and "in the trinity" or "godhead" and when we actually examine the Bible, none of what you're saying supports your conclusion.

John 17
21That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

oh wow. So the Son of God loses his divinity through your message. He loses his pre-existence. He loses being of God's Spirit over Mary that begins her pregnancy. You have no need for scriptures. You have no need for history. You just make up stuff today and tell people to disregard what Jesus says.
I even saw where Arius still believed in the divinity of Christ, so the modern unitarians here seem to deny even their spiritual ancestor and have to take denial further.
Please note that the teachings of Christ are not based on free-for-all believe-anything make-it-up-on-the-spot concepts. The unitarians are trying to rewrite history and deny critical scriptures so they can have new doctrines.

 

[360watt]

Thread 'Jesus claimed equality with God'

Aug 1, 2025

Did Jesus really claim to be God incarnate in human flesh? Or, as skeptics argue, did His followers later invent those claims and attribute them to Him? Thankfully, the biblical account of His life and ministry leaves no doubt about who Jesus declared Himself to be.

Jesus frequently spoke of His unique, otherworldly origin, of having preexisted in heaven before coming into this world. To the hostile Jews He declared, "You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world" (John 8:23). "What then," He asked, "if you see the Son of Man ascending to...

• civic
• Replies: 13
• Forum: The Trinity

• 
• 

 

[Peterlag]

 

[mikesw]

View attachment 2444

Since Jesus exhibited both divinity and humanity. He fits in both categories. You just have to recognize how divinity is manifested in Jesus. Of course, you cannot experiment and do this over and over since Jesus is the only Son of God who is begotten of the Father--with the latter term possibly referring to the incarnation being born as a child through Mary. But for the unitarian, the virgin birth has no meaning. I'm not sure why you create novel, experimental, ahistorical doctrines as a sudden discovery 2000 years after the life and death of Jesus and somehow think those doctrines and somehow think you have suddenly become the only ones whose cult has the truth.

 

[Capbook]

You seem to have said before that if people don't get baptized according to how you feel is the correct way then they are not Christian. You strongly suggested that atleast. Ok, but Jesus and all of the disicples didn't get baptized that way nor did they baptize anyone that way. Conclusion is you are saying that Jesus and his disciples are not Christian.

Don't get too carried away with your teachings because they are false ones. You can have your beliefs, but don't attack Jesus and us Christians just because you disagree with us.

Do you consider yourself a Christian? I don't know what you mean by "Christian."
As for me a Christian, followers of Christ should listen, obey and follow what Christ taught us how to baptize new converts.
Just because Peter command a baptism, we have to listen and follow?
And as John do the same, we also have to follow?
But when Christ command Matthew 28:19, Arians would not follow because it contradicts what Peter and John did?
I just believe your teaching are the false ones because you disagree with Christ.

 

[360watt]

View attachment 2444

Jesus was tempted but did not partake. In fact COULD not partake. You need to add more of the verse 'yet was without sin'

A mortal man can be 'without sin'?

No way, no how..this side of eternity.

 

[Runningman]

I guess you do not know that God exists differently from you. It sounds like you just have not paid attention to Jesus noting his pre-existence. But you use careful eisegesis to pretend Jesus does not point to that. Your reason for rejecting it is because you see him as merely human and thus pretend that Joseph actually started the birth of Jesus instead of God -- at least that is what you would have to believe for consistency.

God exists according to the Bible, Mike. Why do you suppose Scripture never talks about God the way you do?

 

[Runningman]

You pretend that the knowledge of Jesus' divinity suddenly came up in the 4th century. You have to create a whole pretend history to support your belief system. If you want to believe what Pharisees did, then no wonder you deny Jesus

So divinity does not mean the same thing as deity. That's another common trinitarian misunderstanding. I assume when you intentional misuse words that you must be up to one of your trick. So for the readers you need to be properly put in your place. Can't have you deceiving others now, can we?

 

[Runningman]

oh wow. So the Son of God loses his divinity through your message. He loses his pre-existence. He loses being of God's Spirit over Mary that begins her pregnancy. You have no need for scriptures. You have no need for history. You just make up stuff today and tell people to disregard what Jesus says.
I even saw where Arius still believed in the divinity of Christ, so the modern unitarians here seem to deny even their spiritual ancestor and have to take denial further.
Please note that the teachings of Christ are not based on free-for-all believe-anything make-it-up-on-the-spot concepts. The unitarians are trying to rewrite history and deny critical scriptures so they can have new doctrines.

Being one with God does not mean someone is God which is why I showed you how others are one with God as well. You're going to need some very robust theology to have any sort of Biblical discussion with me. So far, the limp wristed half-baked one-liners from your trinitarian playbook aren't going to cut it. Nevermind you still can't debunk the Father's sole and exclusive deity, but I will entertain you until you run out of talking points. I also believe this is why you spend so much time out of the Bible, just rehashing your obsession with Christian evangelists like John.

 

[Runningman]

Thread 'Jesus claimed equality with God'

Aug 1, 2025

Did Jesus really claim to be God incarnate in human flesh? Or, as skeptics argue, did His followers later invent those claims and attribute them to Him? Thankfully, the biblical account of His life and ministry leaves no doubt about who Jesus declared Himself to be.

Jesus frequently spoke of His unique, otherworldly origin, of having preexisted in heaven before coming into this world. To the hostile Jews He declared, "You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world" (John 8:23). "What then," He asked, "if you see the Son of Man ascending to...

• civic
• Replies: 13
• Forum: The Trinity

• 
• 

Scripture teaches that those who are born again are "from above." How can someone not come from heaven if they are born from above? As you can see, if you will pay closer attention to the teachings of Jesus, you will see he wasn't teaching them that he is so different than how they should be.

John 3
3Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, except anyone be born from above, he is not able to see the kingdom of God.”

 

[Runningman]

Since Jesus exhibited both divinity and humanity. He fits in both categories. You just have to recognize how divinity is manifested in Jesus. Of course, you cannot experiment and do this over and over since Jesus is the only Son of God who is begotten of the Father--with the latter term possibly referring to the incarnation being born as a child through Mary. But for the unitarian, the virgin birth has no meaning. I'm not sure why you create novel, experimental, ahistorical doctrines as a sudden discovery 2000 years after the life and death of Jesus and somehow think those doctrines and somehow think you have suddenly become the only ones whose cult has the truth.

Amazing blindness. The hypostatic union doctrine was not even created until around the mid 5th century. It arose from debates, not something the Bible actually teaches. And all of the wrinkles aren't even ironed out of it yet because it's a half baked theology that trinitarians called finished before even developing it fully. There are better critics and better scholars nowadays.

There are some things about Jesus that make the trinitarians chase their tails and that's what we will begin with you now. For example, Jesus has both knowledge and ignorance of things yet you claim he is a hypostatic union of "God and Man." Mark 13:32 says "no one knows, not even the Son, but the Father only." Jesus isn't fully God because he doesn't know what God knows. You will blame that on his humanity. Then how can he both know and not know something? Too many unresolved conflicts in your cult of trinitarianism. We'll begin with that one until I'm ready to go on to the next topic.