All Claims of The Son's Deity

mikesw said:
You have already rejected it by claiming to be a unitarian.
Click to expand...
I beleive I rejected the Trinity, I didn't reject the Binity. If you're referring to John 1:1, all arguments and interpretations aside, and just take the words for what they say then that's a Binity.
 
Runningman said:
I beleive I rejected the Trinity, I didn't reject the Binity. If you're referring to John 1:1, all arguments and interpretations aside, and just take the words for what they say then that's a Binity.
Click to expand...
Ok. So that is a start since you accept the divinity of Christ in the Godhead. I had posted a thread a year ago looking for those who accepted the divinity of Christ but not the Trinity. No one confessed to that view in that discussion.
 
mikesw said:
Ok. So that is a start since you accept the divinity of Christ in the Godhead. I had posted a thread a year ago looking for those who accepted the divinity of Christ but not the Trinity. No one confessed to that view in that discussion.
Click to expand...
I don't accept the divinity or deity of Christ in the godhead. That isn't my point. I am a Unitarian who believes the Father is the only true God.

But on the matter of John 1:1, if we use the same argument that you do, then it still doesn't help the Trinity. I would actually somewhat understand you if you said you're a Binitarian, but Trinitarianism is very far off the mark.
 
Runningman said:
I don't accept the divinity or deity of Christ in the godhead. That isn't my point. I am a Unitarian who believes the Father is the only true God.

But on the matter of John 1:1, if we use the same argument that you do, then it still doesn't help the Trinity. I would actually somewhat understand you if you said you're a Binitarian, but Trinitarianism is very far off the mark.
Click to expand...
Recognizing the divinity of Christ is critical. Sorry you got confused and do not recognize the meaning of John 1. It still remains a decent step to recognize John 1 as showing the divinity of Christ. It helps reduce misconceptions of other passages too.
 
mikesw said:
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.
Click to expand...
They can’t find a verse either saying God is a Unitarian, God is one person. Their own criteria backfires on them
 
mikesw said:
Recognizing the divinity of Christ is critical. Sorry you got confused and do not recognize the meaning of John 1. It still remains a decent step to recognize John 1 as showing the divinity of Christ. It helps reduce misconceptions of other passages too.
Click to expand...
Recognizing Jesus as God is a fast way to land yourself in sin. The only true God is the Father, any others are an idol. You've been informed, shown the Scripture, now it's up to you to repent.
 
civic said:
Nope you are reading your bias into those passages. They actually make the Son equal with the Father
Click to expand...
They explicitly state that YHWH is the Father, the only God, there are no others, the one and only true God. That is not an interpretation, a redefining of words, or making any assumptions. You're better off sticking in the murkey waters of theology and philosophy rather than coming after the Bible head on. Check mate.
 
Runningman said:
Why do you think Christians don't need Jesus?
Click to expand...
well. You are not exactly keeping true to my words.

I observed the difference between Christians who know their sin and need for the divine Christ Jesus against the unitarian who you seemed to reflect had no sin by not needing the divine Christ Jesus. You have been abusing the use of "Christian" by applying it to unitarians. It is the same problem as Mormons, who do the same thing.
 
Pancho Frijoles said:
Why do you say that, Johann?
God The Father is not a Trinitarian designation.
I say "God The Father". Does that make me Trinitarian?

If The Father is the Only and True God, then The Father is the Only and True God. Period!:)

Christ didn't need to say "I am not God" for the same reason Moses, or Isaiah, or Paul, or Barnabas, didn't need to say "I am not God".
Once you know who is the Only and True God, you don't need disclaimers from anyone!
Even more if the person who is telling you who is the Only and True God is Jesus Himself ! (John 17:1-3 and John 20:17)

"God The Son", in contrast, is a Trinitarian designation. A designation that is absent in the Bible.
Click to expand...
Four months ago you made this post.

Have you reconsidered this post of yours, in the Light of the Scriptures presented to you???
 
mikesw said:
well. You are not exactly keeping true to my words.

I observed the difference between Christians who know their sin and need for the divine Christ Jesus against the unitarian who you seemed to reflect had no sin by not needing the divine Christ Jesus. You have been abusing the use of "Christian" by applying it to unitarians. It is the same problem as Mormons, who do the same thing.
Click to expand...
No idea what you're talking about. We Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God and Messiah. It seems you're trying to tell us we don't believe that. I normally would laugh and move on at what is obviously a joke, but in you're case I think you're serious.

May I ask you what the gospel is?
 
Peterlag said:

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.
Click to expand...
the same thing in Isaiah. Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." .............. one person or two? same one. Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." SAME ONE PERSON ONLY, "DIVERSIFIED" OF HIMSELF. or in Layman's terms, God is the "EQUAL SHARE" of himself in flesh and blood that .... "WAS" .... to come. Oh so simple by the scriptures.

101G.
 
Runningman said:
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.
Click to expand...
I ran one two and I'm sure I did here too. My question was why would God come to the earth as a man? What profit would it accomplish. Nobody could answer and it went on for months. Many pages. They all said only God can redeem, but there's no verse saying that.
 
Runningman said:
Recognizing Jesus as God is a fast way to land yourself in sin. The only true God is the Father, any others are an idol. You've been informed, shown the Scripture, now it's up to you to repent.
Click to expand...
Looks like John never received the unitarian memo when he wrote "the Word was God" in John 1:1.
 

Similar threads

Johann
Christ The God-Man
2
Replies
26
Views
453
101G
101G
Johann
The Character of Genuine Saving Faith
Replies
2
Views
58
Ahar
Ahar
Neil Spargo
Exposing the secretive world of the Jehovah’s Witnesses
2
Replies
31
Views
355
101G
101G
Runningman
Is there a sin sacrifice in Trinitarianism?
2
Replies
28
Views
128
101G
101G
civic
Faith that saves
Replies
6
Views
66
Studyman
S
Back
Top Bottom