All Claims of The Son's Deity

[Capbook]

I'm saying you don't have a point. It isn't going where you had said it was going in the first place. It doesn't help.

As Peterlag is just following your argument, I believe this response also addressed the point.
Yes, it is just hard to face the truth, seems personal incredulity, Bible Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain defined the word "explained" in John 1:18 in Greek "ἐξηγέομαι exēgeomai," as - to make something fully known by careful explanation or by clear revelation - 'to make fully and clearly known.' 'the only One who is the same as God.
Thus, when the LORD revealed Himself to Samuel by the word of the LORD, it was the pre-incarnate Jesus confirmed by the author of John.

John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

John 1:18 R1NoG3762 oneG3762 has seenG3708 GodG2316 at anyG4455 timeG4455; R2the onlyG3439 begottenG3439 GodG2316 who is R3in the bosomG2859 of the FatherG3962, R4He has explainedG1834 Him.

NT:1834
ἐξηγέομαι exēgeomai
to make something fully known by careful explanation or by clear revelation - 'to make fully and clearly known.'
'the only One who is the same as God ... has made him fully and clearly known' John 1:18.
(from Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain. Copyright © 1988 United Bible Societies, New York. Used by permission.)

 

[Runningman]

you already have shown both hyperliteralist interpretation methods and rejection of key passages. Why continue on that path? You have given me no confidence in your ability to understand scripture.

I would rather be literal about what the Bible says than be non-literal about what the Bible doesn't say. Your interpretations are completely eisegetical as was already pointed out to you. You presumably read it since you responded. So you said before "If you have a better concept than the Trinity, then demonstrate it." which is what we have been doing the whole time. We can begin with Genesis 1 where right off the bat God is referred to as a singular He consistently all the way to Revelation, described with singular names, who alone is the Creator and only God.

Do you consider that relevant? In all languages, when someone referred to with singular pronouns like he, him, his, it's never referring to more than one person. Is that something you reject or agree with?

 

[Affinity]

It's okay to be wrong and move on from it gracefully as it shows maturity and demonstrates you can be responsible for your errors. Blaming others for your failure to deliver isn't a good look.

Yea, you should knock that off.

 

[Runningman]

As Peterlag is just following your argument, I believe this response also addressed the point.
Yes, it is just hard to face the truth, seems personal incredulity, Bible Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain defined the word "explained" in John 1:18 in Greek "ἐξηγέομαι exēgeomai," as - to make something fully known by careful explanation or by clear revelation - 'to make fully and clearly known.' 'the only One who is the same as God.
Thus, when the LORD revealed Himself to Samuel by the word of the LORD, it was the pre-incarnate Jesus confirmed by the author of John.

John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

John 1:18 R1NoG3762 oneG3762 has seenG3708 GodG2316 at anyG4455 timeG4455; R2the onlyG3439 begottenG3439 GodG2316 who is R3in the bosomG2859 of the FatherG3962, R4He has explainedG1834 Him.

NT:1834
ἐξηγέομαι exēgeomai
to make something fully known by careful explanation or by clear revelation - 'to make fully and clearly known.'
'the only One who is the same as God ... has made him fully and clearly known' John 1:18.
(from Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain. Copyright © 1988 United Bible Societies, New York. Used by permission.)

Your point seems to be that Jesus fully explained or made known who God is. Perfect. After that, Jesus only explained the Father as the only true God. You have put the answer directly on the post, read it, digested it, so now I know you understand that Jesus was Unitarian. Why do you still not agree with him then?

 

[Runningman]

Yea, you should knock that off.

If you have a better argument for who God is than what the Bible says then you are free to share it.

 

[Peterlag]

Yes, it is just hard to face the truth, seems personal incredulity, Bible Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain defined the word "explained" in John 1:18 in Greek "ἐξηγέομαι exēgeomai," as - to make something fully known by careful explanation or by clear revelation - 'to make fully and clearly known.' 'the only One who is the same as God.
Therefore, when the LORD revealed Himself to Samuel by the word of the LORD, it was Jesus confirmed by the author of John.

Joh 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

Joh 1:18 R1NoG3762 oneG3762 has seenG3708 GodG2316 at anyG4455 timeG4455; R2the onlyG3439 begottenG3439 GodG2316 who is R3in the bosomG2859 of the FatherG3962, R4He has explainedG1834 Him.

NT:1834
ἐξηγέομαι exēgeomai
to make something fully known by careful explanation or by clear revelation - 'to make fully and clearly known.'
'the only One who is the same as God ... has made him fully and clearly known' John 1:18.
(from Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain. Copyright © 1988 United Bible Societies, New York. Used by permission.)

This sounds about right that Jesus was that close to God that he was able to make God fully known by careful explanation or by clear revelation - to make fully and clearly known. Why you think that makes Jesus God is where I have no clue.

 

[Peterlag]

How to Translate the Trinitarian Bible...​

John 1:1
What is written...... In the beginning was the Word
Trinitarian................. In the beginning was Jesus

John 8:24
What is written...... believe that I am he
Trinitarian................ believe that I am God

Romans 10:9
What is written..... the Lord Jesus
Trinitarian............... the Lord God

Philippians 2:7
What is written......made himself of no reputation
Trinitarian............... gave up his Godhood

What is written..... son of God
Trinitarian.................God the Son

 

[360watt]

How to Translate the Trinitarian Bible...​

John 1:1
What is written...... In the beginning was the Word
Trinitarian................. In the beginning was Jesus

John 8:24
What is written...... believe that I am he
Trinitarian................ believe that I am God

Romans 10:9
What is written..... the Lord Jesus
Trinitarian............... the Lord God

Philippians 2:7
What is written......made himself of no reputation
Trinitarian............... gave up his Godhood

What is written..... son of God
Trinitarian.................God the Son

And the context of each of these verses?

Because that is why the Trinitarian associated the Word as Jesus, son of God as God.. 'Lord' as God etc..


For example:
About Jesus:

Hebrews 1:3 KJV
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Jesus is the express image of the Father.

Holding all things by the word of his power.

Purged our sins.

On the right hand of the Majesty on high.

So.. with a passage like this in mind..you can then compare with John 1:1 and the other verses.

Gotta get into context.

 

[amazing grace]

And the context of each of these verses?

Because that is why the Trinitarian associated the Word as Jesus, son of God as God.. 'Lord' as God etc..
For example:
About Jesus:

Hebrews 1:3 KJV
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Jesus is the express image of the Father.

Holding all things by the word of his power.

Purged our sins.

On the right hand of the Majesty on high.

So.. with a passage like this in mind..you can then compare with John 1:1 and the other verses.

Gotta get into context.

Yet, you didn't address the context of EACH of those verses but brought in another verse altogether!

 

[360watt]

Yet, you didn't address the context of EACH of those verses but brought in another verse altogether!

Which I will do. The point is, these are verses that aren't taken alone. If Jesus is the express image of the Father.. then that lines up with seeing Jesus as the Word.

Another example.. if son of man.. isn't a reference to Jesus being mortal.. then neither is son of God.

But yah.. I will look at the context of each.

 

[amazing grace]

Which I will do. The point is, these are verses that aren't taken alone. If Jesus is the express image of the Father.. then that lines up with seeing Jesus as the Word.

Another example.. if son of man.. isn't a reference to Jesus being mortal.. then neither is son of God.

But yah.. I will look at the context of each.

I believe @Peterlag was just showing how the scripture reads and then the Trinitarian understanding of said scripture, hence his labeling:

How to Translate the Trinitarian Bible...​

 

[mikesw]

This isn't a jab at all and I hope you all don't continue to take it this way. I really want you all to be better. However, as difficult as it is to hear, I don't mind letting you know because you need to be told. The doctrine of the trinity is a textbook example of eisegesis. That's not good.

Why? Because the Trinity is neither explicitly defined or directly stated in any single Biblical passage. Instead, various verses are collected from different books from a variety of unrelated contexts, put together and interpreted to to mean God is three persons when the Bible never actually describes God as three persons to begin with.

So what is eisegesis? Eisegesis is reading one's own ideas into a text instead of drawing meaning from the text. For example, if you start with the idea that "God is triune" (something the Bible doesn't say) and then you search for verses to support that belief, then you are engaging in the dictionary definition of eisegesis.

Exegesis is drawing out the intended meaning from a text based on its context, language, audience, and purpose. This is why we study the Bible so that we can accurately explain what it says, oftentimes not even needing to do anything more than simply quote a verse where the author represented an idea the way they wanted it represented in plain language.

So Unitarians practice exegesis because we take Biblical statements in their plain, direct sense without interpreting what they say. See the difference between what you all do and what Unitarians do?

The Bible clearly declares the Father is the only true God (John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:6) and we are quoting this directly from the Bible, not a later commentator like you do for your beliefs. The Bible is also consistent about the Father being the only true God (Deut. 6:4, John 20:17, 1 Timothy 2:5)

So the difference between the way you explain your god and the way we explain God is that we actually use the words and language the authors of the Bible used by simply quoting what they said. I hope that helps.

I can appreciate that you have expressed a positive interest in our well being. You feel like you have found something new and want to share it with everyone. Okay. I almost was being even-keeled.

 

[Victoria]

@Runningman @mikesw

Even in the midst of disagreements, humility can still shine through. It's so refreshing to see your posts
I can be a goof at times, but that's just my personality. Charity triumphs all!

 

[mikesw]

@Runningman @mikesw

Even in the midst of disagreements, humility can still shine through. It's so refreshing to see your posts
I can be a goof at times, but that's just my personality. Charity triumphs all!

I have not seen Charity around here. Is she a regular poster here?

 

[Victoria]

The Excellence of Love
(1 Corinthians 13:1-13)

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity,
it profiteth me nothing.
Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man,
I put away childish things.
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity

 

[mikesw]

The Excellence of Love
(1 Corinthians 13:1-13)

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity,
it profiteth me nothing.
Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man,
I put away childish things.
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity

That is the type of women I need -- someone who can suffer long.

 

[Victoria]

That is the type of women I need -- someone who can suffer long.

I love you, brother. You always make me laugh!

 

[civic]

Just remember that this is the verse that Runningman loves to avoid quoting:
John 17:5 (NASB95)
5“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

Yes a stumbling block since it places the Son before creation together with the Father

 

[Runningman]

I can appreciate that you have expressed a positive interest in our well being. You feel like you have found something new and want to share it with everyone. Okay. I almost was being even-keeled.

Ok great. That was easy. And you don't want to be a practitioner of eisegesis, especially with the Bible of all things I assume. Kinda seeing how the Bible is a Unitarian book now? We never needed creeds or councils or statements of faith because we have just been depending on the Scriptures alone for thousands of years.

 

[mikesw]

Ok great. That was easy. And you don't want to be a practitioner of eisegesis, especially with the Bible of all things I assume. Kinda seeing how the Bible is a Unitarian book now? We never needed creeds or councils or statements of faith because we have just been depending on the Scriptures alone for thousands of years.

Seriously. Are you trying to be a unitarian comedian?
Unitarianism has been a divergent theology instead of central Christian one. You are pushing a novel version in that, as I understand it, Arius still recognized the divinity of Christ.