All Claims of The Son's Deity

[mikesw]

@Peterlag @amazing grace @Pancho Frijoles @Keiw1 see the table above. Nice isn't it? Feel free to use that. It's a useful tool to demonstrate to fallacies of trinitarianism.

Wow. Bury them in deeper deceit. Wonderful idea.

 

[Runningman]

Great. That reaffirms the points you so desire to disregard. You get deceived by scriptures in the way you study.

It is not the passages that you love that make an argument. It is the passages that you reject that crush your viewpoint.

The point is your doctrines are not found in the Bible. That doesn't bother you?

 

[mikesw]

The point is your doctrines are not found in the Bible. That doesn't bother you?

It does not bother me that God has not written scripture for those who skim the surface. What bothers me is how you neglect the passages that show the divinity of Christ and his pre-existence with the Father.
It bothers me that you rely on gnostic insight that you find makes you the only supposed Christians despite the 100s of millions of Christians who exist before you created your viewpoint.
It bothers me that you then rely on AI to tell you what to think about the Godhead.

It is not the verses you share when trying to make your arguments; it is the passages and testimony of scripture that you disregard that causes you to stumble. There are a times what seems to be two good views that are derived from scripture but opposite findings. This basically means that the text is not understood properly by either one or both sides. In the case of the evidence of the Triune God, there is not ambiguity that allows a reasonable unitarian doctrine. That doctrine just rejects the passages about the divinity of Christ and his pre-existence.

 

[Runningman]

Wow. Bury them in deeper deceit. Wonderful idea.

You should really check what you're saying in context. I just point blank showed you what textbook trinitarianism is compared to what Unitarians say and what the Bible says. We're Biblical, authoritative, and truthful,. Your god and opinions are soundly and explicitly overruled by Scripture.

 

[mikesw]

You should really check what you're saying in context. I just point blank showed you what textbook trinitarianism is compared to what Unitarians say and what the Bible says. We're Biblical, authoritative, and truthful,. Your god and opinions are soundly and explicitly overruled by Scripture.

You proceed like a prosecutor who is trying to prove his case in court while withholding exculpatory evidence that can show the defendant's innocence. That is unfair in a debate.

 

[Runningman]

It does not bother me that God has not written scripture for those who skim the surface. What bothers me is how you neglect the passages that show the divinity of Christ and his pre-existence with the Father.
It bothers me that you rely on gnostic insight that you find makes you the only supposed Christians despite the 100s of millions of Christians who exist before you created your viewpoint.
It bothers me that you then rely on AI to tell you what to think about the Godhead.

It is not the verses you share when trying to make your arguments; it is the passages and testimony of scripture that you disregard that causes you to stumble. There are a times what seems to be two good views that are derived from scripture but opposite findings. This basically means that the text is not understood properly by either one or both sides. In the case of the evidence of the Triune God, there is not ambiguity that allows a reasonable unitarian doctrine. That doctrine just rejects the passages about the divinity of Christ and his pre-existence.

God, Jesus and the other prophets are authoritative. You aren't authoritative. If you can't even match what they say then there is no reason to take you seriously. I have entertained your heresies long enough, giving you a chance to express them using Scripture. You have only proven that you are not a Christian, reject everything truthful, and replace it all with your opinions of what you could only dream the Bible explicitly says. It must get tiring having no Bible to back up all of your claims. Why not just quote non-Scriptural creeds if that's what you believe?

 

[Runningman]

You proceed like a prosecutor who is trying to prove his case in court while withholding exculpatory evidence that can show the defendant's innocence. That is unfair in a debate.

Did you read the table I posted here? It explicitly states trinitarian dogma. Now you want to play like you haven't been represented accurately. In some venues there would be laughter, not with you, but at you. Ole trinitarian with a persecution complex. You all are predictable and easy to read like a book. Let me guess, now you're going to start hurling false accusations again.

 

[mikesw]

God, Jesus and the other prophets are authoritative. You aren't authoritative. If you can't even match what they say then there is no reason to take you seriously. I have entertained your heresies long enough, giving you a chance to express them using Scripture. You have only proven that you are not a Christian, reject everything truthful, and replace it all with your opinions of what you could only dream the Bible explicitly says. It must get tiring having no Bible to back up all of your claims. Why not just quote non-Scriptural creeds if that's what you believe?

Your eisegetical skills are too honed toward making a case for the unitarian heresy. If you can make a sufficient argument denying the Triune God, then make it.
You want me to take the word of someone who acts like he has received gnostic insight that only lets his little cult be defined as the one's who gain righteousness. You rig the game. You have to deny everything that has come ahead of your time. That is just impure pride and gullibility on your part

 

[mikesw]

Did you read the table I posted here? It explicitly states trinitarian dogma. Now you want to play like you haven't been represented accurately. In some venues there would be laughter, not with you, but at you. Ole trinitarian with a persecution complex. You all are predictable and easy to read like a book. Let me guess, now you're going to start hurling false accusations again.

I got the gist of your stacked deck. You neglect the pre-existence of Christ and the testimony of everything that speaks against your view.
I looked again. All your table shows is your failed arguments where you hide half of scripture from the discussion. There is nothing novel or insightful to discount the many errors (or purposeful trickery?) from earlier discussions.

 

[mikesw]

A better table would include a column of the debunking of the points that unitarians try to make against the Triune God.

 

[Peterlag]

@Peterlag @amazing grace @Pancho Frijoles @Keiw1 see the table above. Nice isn't it? Feel free to use that. It's a useful tool to demonstrate to fallacies of trinitarianism.

The Trinitarians have a "Get Out Of Jail" card that they use whenever they need it. It allows them to get free whenever they are in a jam. It's the card that says "Oh that was Jesus in his human part." So nothing even your chart cannot help them.

 

[mikesw]

The Trinitarians have a "Get Out Of Jail" card that they use whenever they need it. It allows them to get free whenever they are in a jam. It's the card that says "Oh that was Jesus in his human part." So nothing even your chart cannot help them.

Duh. The humanity is not the aspect in dispute. The aspect the Schoenheits reject is the testimony of scripture of Jesus as God of the Trinity coming incarnate. How do we do an argument if unitarians just disregard the scriptures that testify against the unitarian belief system?

 

[Runningman]

Your eisegetical skills are too honed toward making a case for the unitarian heresy. If you can make a sufficient argument denying the Triune God, then make it.
You want me to take the word of someone who acts like he has received gnostic insight that only lets his little cult be defined as the one's who gain righteousness. You rig the game. You have to deny everything that has come ahead of your time. That is just impure pride and gullibility on your part

What. No. Trinitarianism is eisegesis, or a reading into the the text ideas that are not actually there. I know you say this and that, yadda yadda, means you think there is a trinity, but that isn't what the Bible says. That is just your idea, a tradition passed down generation after generation in your organization, but not something the Bible says. The Bible clearly states the Unitarian belief which is the Christian belief.

 

[Runningman]

I got the gist of your stacked deck. You neglect the pre-existence of Christ and the testimony of everything that speaks against your view.
I looked again. All your table shows is your failed arguments where you hide half of scripture from the discussion. There is nothing novel or insightful to discount the many errors (or purposeful trickery?) from earlier discussions.

You run your mouth about your beliefs regarding the "pre-existence of Jesus" but have yet to find a working example of his pre-existence. What a disaster. It's really like you don't believe anything the Bible says, then again you spend a lot of time arguing with people that you will never convince. I bet you would argue with the floor if it made a sound when you walked on it.

 

[mikesw]

What. No. Trinitarianism is eisegesis, or a reading into the the text ideas that are not actually there. I know you say this and that, yadda yadda, means you think there is a trinity, but that isn't what the Bible says. That is just your idea, a tradition passed down generation after generation in your organization, but not something the Bible says. The Bible clearly states the Unitarian belief which is the Christian belief.

At anytime you feel capable, create some sort of argument to deny the pre-existence of Christ and Christ as God, as found in John 1:18. We have waited patiently for you to give support to your denial of the divinity of Christ.

 

[Runningman]

A better table would include a column of the debunking of the points that unitarians try to make against the Triune God.

Feel free to make one then, if you can. Can you find verses that were written of God in any defining way the trins do?

 

[Runningman]

At anytime you feel capable, create some sort of argument to deny the pre-existence of Christ and Christ as God, as found in John 1:18. We have waited patiently for you to give support to your denial of the divinity of Christ.

Um, there is really honestly nothing to argue against. Might as well me arguing with a figment of your imagination. I am not concerned with your mythology. I understand you have your religion and you are entitled to believe things as you wish, but you are in my house right now, the house of Scripture, and you have the audacity to tell me there is a trinity when it's nowhere in the Bible, and that the Father isn't the one and only true God when it is explicitly stated in the Bible.

 

[mikesw]

You run your mouth about your beliefs regarding the "pre-existence of Jesus" but have yet to find a working example of his pre-existence. What a disaster. It's really like you don't believe anything the Bible says, then again you spend a lot of time arguing with people that you will never convince. I bet you would argue with the floor if it made a sound when you walked on it.

You are trying to escape from your responsibility to prove that the Jesus did not have pre-existence in the bosom of the Father. Just because you deny all passages like the Angel of the Lord and the Word that came to the prophets, that does not providing anything convincing to your denials of who Jesus is.

 

[mikesw]

Um, there is really honestly nothing to argue against. Might as well me arguing with a figment of your imagination. I am not concerned with your mythology. I understand you have your religion and you are entitled to believe things as you wish, but you are in my house right now, the house of Scripture, and you have the audacity to tell me there is a trinity where it's nowhere in the Bible, and that the Father isn't the one and only true God when it is explicitly stated in the Bible.

Your pretend house of scripture is only your weakly created house of cards. If you cannot make a strong argument to deny the Triune God then you have failed to think your view through sufficiently.

 

[Runningman]

You are trying to escape from your responsibility to prove that the Jesus did not have pre-existence in the bosom of the Father. Just because you deny all passages like the Angel of the Lord and the Word that came to the prophets, that does not providing anything convincing to your denials of who Jesus is.

Burden of proof is squarely on the one who makes the claim - that means you. Get to work then.