All Claims of The Son's Deity

[101G]

Still nothing H3442 in your given verse. Can't you post your verse that contain it here?

Jos 22:4 “And now H6258 R1 the LORD H3068  your God H430  has given H5117  rest H5117  to your brothers H251 , as He spoke H1696  to them; therefore turn H6437  now H6258  and go H1980  to your tents H168 , to the land H776  of your possession H272 , which H834  Moses H4872  the servant H5650  of the LORD H3068  gave H5414  you beyond H5676  the Jordan H3383

GINOLJC, to all.

Read read post #888 again......

• #888

101G.

 

[Runningman]

There's no verse anywhere that says Jesus laid aside his deity...​

And Jesus never taught the trinity. In fact, nobody ever taught the trinity. If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it? I know enough about how the Bible is written in the New Testament and in the Gospels to know if there was a trinity it would have been taught. The Gospels would have clearly said...

Verily, verily I say unto you that I am Jesus and I'm also God.
The Epistles would have writings like...

Yay, I Paul do testify that Jesus who is God came down from heaven to be a man for us. And we do know and testify that this same Jesus who you crucified is God. And so let us bow our knee to the one and only true God-Man Jesus Christ.

And yet there's nothing like that anywhere. Not in the Old or New Testament. Not even one complete verse like that.

This is correct.

 

[Runningman]

Okay. Unitarian kills the Christians who recognize the Triune God. But the difference is that the Christians, like Christ Jesus are resurrected.

Unitarians are the Christians.

I'm not sure if this is fully correct, but Christ being born into human flesh can be called the Son due to being born into humanity while also the Son of God since his essence is divine in his preexistence state.

So Jesus was born a human like everyone else. God was never born a human, He is eternal and uncreated.

Duh. Do you think there was a human body for Christ that just was a fluke of nature? I'm not sure how the Unitarians become unable to see the basic ideas.

This is a weird question. Jesus was descended from Adam.

Uh. Isn't immortality the life that goes on forever? Peterlag seems to deny what resurrection means. Also, Peterlag has to guess the metaphysical situation of what happened to Jesus and his divinity upon death of the body. I bet Peterlag has a passage to explain exactly the related metaphysics since he is a hyperliteralist.

So did you know Jesus died? The Bible says someone else resurrected him after he died. That someone else is God.

Oh my. That is a real show stopper. Jesus emptied himself of something of his divine form and being. Did Peterlag know something about brain development of the incarnated Son and whether that would be an element or not?

So you're claiming Jesus empoted himself of his divine form and being. So Jesus isn't God then?

Uh. Does Peterlag think the Son is going to do things contrary to the Father? This really is a confirmation that he is acting not of a mere man doing as he wants. It is showing he is acting in the will of the Father. Also, Jesus sees what the Father is doing when other people cannot do likewise.

Wow. Imagine Jesus' body not physically being in two places at one time. That is such an amazing discovery by Peterlag. Not!!!!!!

Did you know Jesus is a human?

It is amazing that out of the six verses that Peterlag shared, those all spoke against his unitarian heresy. The more arguments Peterlag shares, the more stronger the Trinitarian view becomes.

Thanks for the comedic relief. You seemed to have intentionally misunderstood them so you can prolong your abiding in darkness.

 

[mikesw]

Unitarians are the Christians.

The picture shows the unitarians persecuting and murdering Christians and putting them in a coffin while not realizing that the death is followed by resurrection.

So Jesus was born a human like everyone else. God was never born a human, He is eternal and uncreated.

Like mentioned so many times... the unitarian thinks only of the human state of the Son of God instead of the Father who initiated the incarnation of the Son. The unitarian misses the whole point of the virgin birth.

This is a weird question. Jesus was descended from Adam.

I had said: "Duh. Do you think there was a human body for Christ that just was a fluke of nature? I'm not sure how the Unitarians become unable to see the basic ideas." This was in response to the Jesus living because of the Father.
Unitarians bring up weird ideas so naturally a question that arises in response to their ideas can seem weird. You are denying that the Father gave life to the human body? I'm not sure what your perception of the world is. It seems to deny the Father at this point. Do you honestly think that Jesus lived on earth without the Father's intent and action?

So did you know Jesus died? The Bible says someone else resurrected him after he died. That someone else is God.

You must have secret sources of ideas of metaphysics to identify exactly what happened upon the Son of God's death on the cross. You are further lacking understanding because you only have the mind of man, not of Christ.

So you're claiming Jesus empoted himself of his divine form and being. So Jesus isn't God then?

I showed the error of Peterlag's ignorance. You wish to pursue his ignorance further? I think Peterlag only explained the idea of Jesus emptying himself of his Messiah status even though Jesus remains Messiah. go figure.

Did you know Jesus is a human?

Hmmm. You do not even know basic knowledge why the Trinitarian doctrine exists? I mean apart from your oddball theories. (Maybe you can explain why people came to the reasoning of God as a Trinity before you state your rejections of it. We can see if you are honest about that detail.) I do not think you even read what people are sharing since you wish to deny the truth.

Thanks for the comedic relief. You seemed to have intentionally misunderstood them so you can prolong your abiding in darkness.

I showed the fallacies of Peterlag's post. Sure, the response to his stupid picture was comedic, but you reject even probable explanations of each thing he posted.

 

[civic]

Unitarians are the Christians.


So Jesus was born a human like everyone else. God was never born a human, He is eternal and uncreated.

This is a weird question. Jesus was descended from Adam.


So did you know Jesus died? The Bible says someone else resurrected him after he died. That someone else is God.

So you're claiming Jesus empoted himself of his divine form and being. So Jesus isn't God then?

Did you know Jesus is a human?

Thanks for the comedic relief. You seemed to have intentionally misunderstood them so you can prolong your abiding in darkness.

So trinitarians are not Christian’s, believers in Christ ? Is that your pov ?

 

[Runningman]

The picture shows the unitarians persecuting and murdering Christians and putting them in a coffin while not realizing that the death is followed by resurrection.

It's a picture with a hammer that says "Unitarianism" not "Unitarians" putting nails in the coffin of "Trinitarians." It's about one theology defeating another, not about murder. Your reply is almost hysterical and makes me think I should leave you alone for a while to let you cool off, but, before I do, one question; are you developing a persecution complex watching Trinitarianism get its theological 'ed by Unitarianism?

 

[mikesw]

It's a picture with a hammer that says "Unitarianism" not "Unitarians" putting nails in the coffin of "Trinitarians." It's about one theology defeating another, not about murder. Your reply is almost hysterical and makes me think I should leave you alone for a while to let you cool off, but, before I do, one question; are you developing a persecution complex watching Trinitarianism get its theological 'ed by Unitarianism?

Okay. So unitarians are not following unitarianism?
I'm not feeling persecuted. I'm just explaining the post by Peterlag.
I see that the hyperliteralist unitarians cannot understand such explanations either.

 

[Peterlag]

Another look at John 1:1...​

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Right away we see a distinction:

The Word was with God.
And the Word was God.

This poses a question: How can the Word be both with God and be God at the same time? The answer lies in the Greek. The second use of “God” (theos) lacks the definite article — it’s qualitative, not identifying. It describes the nature of the Word, not its identity. Many scholars (even Trinitarian ones) acknowledge that this means: “the Word was divine” not “the Word was God Himself.” So the Word is God's expression, not a second person within God.

Then, in John 1:14: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us...”

That’s not saying God became flesh, but that God's Word — His self-expression — became embodied in a man, Jesus the Messiah. This is about agency, not identity. Most importantly: John 1:1 never says “Jesus is God.” It speaks of the Word, which only later becomes flesh. Even then, Jesus himself says again and again that he is not the one true God, but the one sent by God (John 17:3, John 8:40, John 20:17).

 

[Peterlag]

Some of the terms found nowhere in Scripture...

• Co-equal
• Co-eternal
• Eternal son
• 1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person
• God the Holy Spirit
• Eternally begotten
• God the son
• One substance
• Pre-existant Christ
• Pre-incarnate Christ
• Persons of God
• Three persons, three in one
• Trinity
• Triune God
• Tri-unity
• Two nature's
• God became a man
• Infinite son
• Substance
• One substance.

Biblical theology must be based on biblical terminology. Otherwise, you're using religious glasses of church fathers to interpret the Word of God.

 

[Runningman]

Okay. So unitarians are not following unitarianism?
I'm not feeling persecuted. I'm just explaining the post by Peterlag.
I see that the hyperliteralist unitarians cannot understand such explanations either.

Unitarianism and Trinitarianism are theologies. Trinitarians and Unitarians are people. See the difference? Look at the picture again. It is not about what you are imagining.

 

[mikesw]

Unitarianism and Trinitarianism are theologies. Trinitarians and Unitarians are people. See the difference? Look at the picture again. It is not about what you are imagining.

There you are. Trying to back track from Peterlag's horrific picture.

Okay. I'm kidding about the horrific message. It is essentially distasteful but, for those who are hyperliteralists and therefore cannot understand what I was doing, I was doing a comedic evaluation of his picture as a kind way of rejecting the idiocy of the idea conveyed. For those who still might be confused, I do not see this as unitarians persecuting Christians or seeking their harm.

 

[Runningman]

Some of the terms found nowhere in Scripture...

• Co-equal
• Co-eternal
• Eternal son
• 1st person, 2nd person, 3rd person
• God the Holy Spirit
• Eternally begotten
• God the son
• One substance
• Pre-existant Christ
• Pre-incarnate Christ
• Persons of God
• Three persons, three in one
• Trinity
• Triune God
• Tri-unity
• Two nature's
• God became a man
• Infinite son
• Substance
• One substance.

Biblical theology must be based on biblical terminology. Otherwise, you're using religious glasses of church fathers to interpret the Word of God.

Yeah. Words don't mean what they do in Trinitarianism. Everything is redefined to have a theological definition. That's why it's difficult to reach them using common sense and established norms. They have a belief system that defies conventional logic and reason and why they cry foul if we define words literally instead of philosophically like they do.

A belief in anything can exist independent of established facts and sound reasoning. So even if you show them the facts you've mentioned above, it doesn't alter their already-established feelings and beliefs. The same is true for the Trinitarians, Mormons, Muslims, Santa Claus believers, etc. People have their beliefs and if they want to stick with it they can.

They occasionally reveal their hand when they demonstrate awareness of how to count. While it's refreshing to see that normal counting of numbers exists in Trinitarianism, it is disappointing they apply an inconsistent belief when it comes to numbers. So while it's true the Bible is bankrupt of any references to a Trinitarian god, they understand that the Trinity is three persons. However, when they see John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, and Ephesians 4:6 they suddenly cannot count that God is only one person anymore. You're dealing with pure, stone-cold, hard-headed, stiff-necked, obstinate delusion and indoctrination. This must be the strong delusion spell that God has allowed them to trapped in in 2 Thessalonians 2:11.

However, we Christians know that the Father is the only true God. I hope and pray some day they'll join us.

 

[Peterlag]

Yeah. Words don't mean what they do in Trinitarianism. Everything is redefined to have a theological definition. That's why it's difficult to reach them using common sense and established norms. They have a belief system that defies conventional logic and reason and why they cry foul if we define words literally instead of philosophically like they do.

A belief in anything can exist independent of established facts and sound reasoning. So even if you show them the facts you've mentioned above, it doesn't alter their already-established feelings and beliefs. The same is true for the Trinitarians, Mormons, Muslims, Santa Claus believers, etc. People have their beliefs and if they want to stick with it they can.

They occasionally reveal their hand when they demonstrate awareness of how to count. While it's refreshing to see that normal counting of numbers exists in Trinitarianism, it is disappointing they apply an inconsistent belief when it comes to numbers. So while it's true the Bible is bankrupt of any references to a Trinitarian god, they understand that the Trinity is three persons. However, when they see John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, and Ephesians 4:6 they suddenly cannot count that God is only one person anymore. You're dealing with pure, stone-cold, hard-headed, stiff-necked, obstinate delusion and indoctrination. This must be the strong delusion spell that God has allowed them to trapped in in 2 Thessalonians 2:11.

However, we Christians know that the Father is the only true God. I hope and pray some day they'll join us.

It's like you once said... they start with this concept that most were taught in their church and then they work backwards in the Bible to try to prove it. It's why they cannot read John 1:3 and see everything came to be through it. The logos is an “it” not a “him.” Again, it's because they were taught that "it" is a him.

 

[Runningman]

It's like you once said... they start with this concept that most were taught in their church and then they work backwards in the Bible to try to prove it. It's why they cannot read John 1:3 and see everything came to be through it. The logos is an “it” not a “him.” Again, it's because they were taught that "it" is a him.

Yes. On a different forum, I ran a thread about this concept. The challenge was simple: Provide one verse or passage that describes the Trinity doctrine, defines God as a trintiy, explains God is a trinity, etc.

This should be an easy request to fulfill, but after 30+ pages into the thread there have been none to complete the request, but rather just the standard Trinitarian arguments we have already seen. On the one hand I already knew this challenge could not be met, but the purpose of it was an exercise in self-awareness.

We need as many of them as possible to become self-aware that their doctrine does not have a Scriptural premise to begin with. If they can see that much, it may be helpful because if they understand the Bible doesn't say there is a Trinity then we can begin with showing what the Bible does say about the only true God.

On the other hand, they may just invent new philosophical concepts and redfine words and thus completely evade what the Bible plainly says.

 

[Dizerner]

The Fallacy of Precise Wording I call it.

— Find me a verse that says exactly molesting children is a sin.

Reply will require extensive deduction, "Love is treating someone with respect, as you would be treated."

— Yeah, but it doesn't say "molesting is a sin."

— Just show me those words in the Bible.

But we can deduce the truth without the exact words?!

— You're a joke! It's not in the Bible! You can't give me a simple verse! Where is the word "molesting"?!

Another has called this the Fallacy of Exact Words.

Fallacy of Exact Words – Questions and Answers

www.faithbrowser.com

 

[civic]

The Fallacy of Precise Wording I call it.

— Find me a verse that says exactly molesting children is a sin.

Reply will require extensive deduction, "Love is treating someone with respect, as you would be treated."

— Yeah, but it doesn't say "molesting is a sin."

— Just show me those words in the Bible.

But we can deduce the truth without the exact words?!

— You're a joke! It's not in the Bible! You can't give me a simple verse! Where is the word "molesting"?!

Another has called this the Fallacy of Exact Words.

Fallacy of Exact Words – Questions and Answers

www.faithbrowser.com

Well said

 

[Dizerner]

Well said

The same fallacy applies to PSA.

Except you don't like it when it's there.

 

[civic]

The same fallacy applies to PSA.

Except you don't like it when it's there.

lol I knew that was coming, you are so predictable

BTW the Tri- Unity of God refutes PSA

 

[Runningman]

The Fallacy of Precise Wording I call it.

— Find me a verse that says exactly molesting children is a sin.

Reply will require extensive deduction, "Love is treating someone with respect, as you would be treated."

— Yeah, but it doesn't say "molesting is a sin."

— Just show me those words in the Bible.

But we can deduce the truth without the exact words?!

— You're a joke! It's not in the Bible! You can't give me a simple verse! Where is the word "molesting"?!

Another has called this the Fallacy of Exact Words.

Fallacy of Exact Words – Questions and Answers

www.faithbrowser.com

You don't need precise wording, but a description would be fine. Please show where God is described as a Trinity in the Bible. You could even find just one verse/passage that described God as three or an example of someone praying to the "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" or a teaching about worshiping the trinity, praying to the trinity, etc. Please show any sort of clear statement or teaching where one would automatically know that God = Trinity anywhere in the Bible.

 

[mikesw]

Yes. On a different forum, I ran a thread about this concept. The challenge was simple: Provide one verse or passage that describes the Trinity doctrine, defines God as a trintiy, explains God is a trinity, etc.

This should be an easy request to fulfill, but after 30+ pages into the thread there have been none to complete the request, but rather just the standard Trinitarian arguments we have already seen. On the one hand I already knew this challenge could not be met, but the purpose of it was an exercise in self-awareness.

We need as many of them as possible to become self-aware that their doctrine does not have a Scriptural premise to begin with. If they can see that much, it may be helpful because if they understand the Bible doesn't say there is a Trinity then we can begin with showing what the Bible does say about the only true God.

On the other hand, they may just invent new philosophical concepts and redfine words and thus completely evade what the Bible plainly says.

I would probably be content if you unitarians could accept the essential point of the divinity of Christ in John 1. But we have not even heard you recognize that.