All Claims of The Son's Deity

[Runningman]

Scripture teaches the only God is the Father since Jesus received glory from the Father,

John 5
44How can you believe if you accept glory from one another, yet do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?

2 Peter 1
17For He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to Him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

 

[mikesw]

Like trinitarians rejection of a simple bible truth they live by? = John 3:16--God( the only God) sent his son)))= another being was sent= The one sent is NOT God. God did not come down here, he sent another. The Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD( John 17:3) oh but it takes believing Jesus, no trinitarian on Earth will.

you are welcome to join with the unitarians in horrible restatement of beliefs and eisegesis. You offer no actual contradiction of the Triune God in scripture.

 

[mikesw]

Scripture teaches the only God is the Father since Jesus received glory from the Father,

John 5
44How can you believe if you accept glory from one another, yet do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?

2 Peter 1
17For He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to Him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

That says nothing to affirm a unitarian belief system.
John 5:44 only says the people listening do not care about God.
2 Peter 1:17 does not deny that God the Son, as deity incarnate, is undeserving of being glorified by his Father.

You keep confirming failed exegesis.

 

[Runningman]

That says nothing to affirm a unitarian belief system.
John 5:44 only says the people listening do not care about God.
2 Peter 1:17 does not deny that God the Son, as deity incarnate, is undeserving of being glorified by his Father.

You keep confirming failed exegesis.

Sure it affirms Christianity.

1. Glory comes from the only God
2. God the Father gave glory to Jesus

No mention of a trinity anywhere saying or doing anything, giving glory, etc. Scripture upholds Unitarianism flawlessly which is in line with the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Means Jesus isn't God.

 

[mikesw]

Sure it affirms Christianity.

1. Glory comes from the only God
2. God the Father gave glory to Jesus

No mention of a trinity anywhere saying or doing anything, giving glory, etc. Scripture upholds Unitarianism flawlessly which is in line with the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Means Jesus isn't God.

I assume by your response that you have no argument to justify your denial of Jesus as the Son of God.

 

[amazing grace]

Then nothing in scripture convinces you who Jesus is.

There is plenty in scripture that convince me of who Jesus Christ is - He is the Son of God, the Messiah, the servant God glorified [Acts 3:13]; the servant God raised up [Acts 3:26]; . . . God's holy servant whom he anointed and exalted to his own right hand [Acts 4:27] --- and plenty more.

 

[mikesw]

There is plenty in scripture that convince me of who Jesus Christ is - He is the Son of God, the Messiah, the servant God glorified [Acts 3:13]; the servant God raised up [Acts 13:26]; . . . God's holy servant whom he anointed and exalted to his own right hand [Acts 4:27] --- and plenty more.

so then you know Jesus as God -- Son of God. But you missed critical passages. Unitarians keep noting Jesus as Son of God but keep missing what that means.

 

[amazing grace]

so then you know Jesus as God -- Son of God. But you missed critical passages. Unitarians keep noting Jesus as Son of God but keep missing what that means.

Nope, I know Jesus as the Son of God, God's anointed Messiah.

 

[mikesw]

Nope, I know Jesus as the Son of God, God's anointed Messiah.

Funny how you have to admit Jesus is God when you acknowledge this.

 

[Keiw1]

you are welcome to join with the unitarians in horrible restatement of beliefs and eisegesis. You offer no actual contradiction of the Triune God in scripture.

Jesus is 100% clear at John 17:3--The one who sent him= Father=THE ONLY TRUE GOD. The darkness refuses to believe him. He has 100% backing by Gods main NT writer Paul--1Cor 8:6--There is one God to all=The Father.
When ones teachers do not match--RUN FROM THEM

 

[mikesw]

Jesus is 100% clear at John 17:3--The one who sent him= Father=THE ONLY TRUE GOD. The darkness refuses to believe him. He has 100% backing by Gods main NT writer Paul--1Cor 8:6--There is one God to all=The Father.
When ones teachers do not match--RUN FROM THEM

I see you like to make the same faulty arguments as common among
the unitarians

 

[amazing grace]

Funny how you have to admit Jesus is God when you acknowledge this.

Nope, I don't see where I have admitted that Jesus is God by saying this "Nope, I know Jesus as the Son of God, God's anointed Messiah." . . . . You'll have to explain how you come to that conclusion because I surely don't believe God anointed God . . . .

Let's take a look at the pure Apostolic Gospel of the early church - after hanging out with the resurrected Christ for 40 days and after receiving the holy spirit on the day of Pentecost - what did Peter preach? Did he preach about Jesus being God or that God became a man?

No he preached that it was God who worked through a man, Jesus of Nazareth, doing mighty wonders, signs and miracles. The man that God raised up and exalted to his own right hand. . . . the Jesus that God made both Lord and Christ. Exaltation not incarnation!!!!
Then Peter, in the temple, preached the earlier verses I posted from Acts 3:13, 15 & 26. Before the Sanhedrin in Acts 4 and 5 -- at 4:10-12 "let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by him this man is standing before you well. This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” . . . Peter prayed for boldness to speak and for more signs and wonders to be performed through the name of God's holy servant Jesus. [Acts 4:31]

Go ahead and read the book of Acts, the story of the early church - Stephen's witness in Acts 7; preaching in Acts 10 to the house of Cornelius . . . . Paul warns against someone proclaiming another Jesus that the one they proclaimed and also a different gospel . . .

 

[mikesw]

Nope, I don't see where I have admitted that Jesus is God by saying this "Nope, I know Jesus as the Son of God, God's anointed Messiah." . . . . You'll have to explain how you come to that conclusion because I surely don't believe God anointed God . . . .

Let's take a look at the pure Apostolic Gospel of the early church - after hanging out with the resurrected Christ for 40 days and after receiving the holy spirit on the day of Pentecost - what did Peter preach? Did he preach about Jesus being God or that God became a man?

No he preached that it was God who worked through a man, Jesus of Nazareth, doing mighty wonders, signs and miracles. The man that God raised up and exalted to his own right hand. . . . the Jesus that God made both Lord and Christ. Exaltation not incarnation!!!!
Then Peter, in the temple, preached the earlier verses I posted from Acts 3:13, 15 & 26. Before the Sanhedrin in Acts 4 and 5 -- at 4:10-12 "let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by him this man is standing before you well. This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” . . . Peter prayed for boldness to speak and for more signs and wonders to be performed through the name of God's holy servant Jesus. [Acts 4:31]

Go ahead and read the book of Acts, the story of the early church - Stephen's witness in Acts 7; preaching in Acts 10 to the house of Cornelius . . . . Paul warns against someone proclaiming another Jesus that the one they proclaimed and also a different gospel . . .

so you are going to deny Jesus as deity because Peter did not emphasize that in his preaching of repentance.

 

[amazing grace]

so you are going to deny Jesus as deity because Peter did not emphasize that in his preaching of repentance.

That's not the only reason but it seems that if believing Jesus was God was essential for our salvation then it seems probable that the apostles would have presented it in the beginning of the early church.

 

[mikesw]

That's not the only reason but it seems that if believing Jesus was God was essential for our salvation then it seems probable that the apostles would have presented it in the beginning of the early church.

Maybe they do not feel compelled to copy John 1 into every letter they write. Did you consider that?
Why would be he be called "the Son of God" if he truly was not the divine Son incarnate? That hardly would be a proper designation of his unique identity if it were not the reality of who he is.

 

[Runningman]

I assume by your response that you have no argument to justify your denial of Jesus as the Son of God.

That's an odd statement. Why would you think I was denying Jesus as the begotten Son of God as Scripture states? I am sure you probably think that doesn't mean what it plainly says. You have no literal begotten "Son of God" in your religion do you?

 

[mikesw]

That's an odd statement. Why would you think I was denying Jesus as the begotten Son of God as Scripture states? I am sure you probably think that doesn't mean what it plainly says. You have no literal begotten "Son of God" in your religion do you?

I do not doubt that Jesus is the true Son of God born into humanity from his existence in the Godhead. There is no reason to doubt that. But the unitarian has to reject the meaning of who Jesus is. This is one of those instances where hyperliteralist unitarians take a break from a natural reading of the text.

 

[Runningman]

I do not doubt that Jesus is the true Son of God born into humanity from his existence in the Godhead. There is no reason to doubt that. But the unitarian has to reject the meaning of who Jesus is. This is one of those instances where hyperliteralist unitarians take a break from a natural reading of the text.

Your beliefs don't trump Scripture.

 

[amazing grace]

Maybe they do not feel compelled to copy John 1 into every letter they write. Did you consider that?
Why would be he be called "the Son of God" if he truly was not the divine Son incarnate? That hardly would be a proper designation of his unique identity if it were not the reality of who he is.

They wouldn't need to copy John 1 into every letter they write but it just seems that they would have further elaborated, expounded on such an important doctrine which since according to some, the Trinity has to be believed in order to secure salvation.
I don't believe John 1 says that Jesus is God . . . it may be a so-called doctrine of inference but as far as clear, explicit statements stating a clear concise Triune perception of God - there are none.

Why would he be called 'the Son of God' because he is/was the Son of God . . .

"And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.” . . . . And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God......"

Why would that result in "God incarnate"? God caused Mary to conceive . . . God wasn't the one conceived . . . His Son was conceived. God is not HIS SON - God is his God and Father.

 

[mikesw]

Your beliefs don't trump Scripture.

haha. My doctrine and faith come from scripture. That contrasts against the unitarian distortion of the message. You make points contrary to passages showing the divinity of Christ -- esp like john 1:1 and 18. you reject passage that show God in Two Powers.