I have a great tip for you to improve your debate skills. Try doing an internet search to address your memory problems. Forgetfulness is quite the drawback for you. I may have to do an internet search on how to avoid skimming too quickly on unitarian posts in case they same something relevant.
All Claims of The Son's Deity
- Thread starter Johann
- Start date
Peterlag
Active Member
People often say I'm wrong when I post the following because they say I looked it up in an Interlinear or Concordance and it shows the word is a "him" and not an "it." Those reference books show how the Bible translates words and not what the Greek actually means. The pronoun is an "it" when it refers to an inanimate noun like "word" because Greek has grammatical "gender" and the "Word" in John 1 is a thing so the Greek says it's an "it."
John 1:3 “Everything came to be through it.” The logos is an “it” not a “him.”
Translators have deliberately chosen to use “him” because they wanted to emphasize that the Word was the male person we know as Jesus. This was a theological choice, not a linguistic one.
"Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you” (Proverbs 4:6).
Is the Wisdom in Proverbs 4:6 a distinct divine person?
The "Word" is not literally a person for the same reason that "Wisdom" is not literally a person. Both are to be taken metaphorically.
Jesus is the personification of the Word because He speaks the words of God. To listen to Jesus equals listening to the Word of God.
John 1:3 “Everything came to be through it.” The logos is an “it” not a “him.”
Translators have deliberately chosen to use “him” because they wanted to emphasize that the Word was the male person we know as Jesus. This was a theological choice, not a linguistic one.
"Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you” (Proverbs 4:6).
Is the Wisdom in Proverbs 4:6 a distinct divine person?
The "Word" is not literally a person for the same reason that "Wisdom" is not literally a person. Both are to be taken metaphorically.
Jesus is the personification of the Word because He speaks the words of God. To listen to Jesus equals listening to the Word of God.
Runningman
Active Member
That was a no talent, low effort, response, as are most of your replies. Just a bunch of jabs, but nothing important or relevant. All claims and talking about your doctrines, no Scripture to back it up.
you cannot even recognize your failure to understand scriptures that go against your view. This is feedback, not jabs.
You did not answer the question, Why Jesus was called the "Son of man"?
Hope you will answer it honestly and logically.
Do that mean, that God is same as man?
While I would agree that that is why God refers to Himself as the Word, but you are evading a direct question by @synergy which is: is that Word God?
@Peterlag
Your said: "Jesus did not physically exist before his birth"
He existed as God, period ~ without any qualifications whatsoever. If you connect John 1:1 with verse fourteen which we should do.
You said: "God’s Word “Logos” in John 1:1 refers to God’s plan, wisdom, and intention."
You are adding your personal thoughts to John 1:1 in order to lay the ground work for your false teachings.
You said: "NOT a “second person” of the doctrine of men’s Trinity."
Jesus Christ is God "period", he's not the second person of the Trinity! We reject the eternal generation of Son of God, as heresy.
You said: "That “Word” became flesh when Jesus was born and that was in John 1:14. because God’s plan and purpose for salvation was with Him from the start. But not as a literal person yet."
By the very blessed truth that Jesus was God's only begotten Son in the manner in which he was begotten made him equal to God. Even his enemies understood this truth. (John 10:30-38) The Word that was in the beginning with God joined Himself to the tabernacle of Jesus of Narareth ~ thereby God was made flesh in the person of Jesus Christ.
Bring this to the thread that is going to start today, I would love to comment on this, because my understanding concerning the Trinity is a little different than the average understanding of most in the churches of our day, much different than yours for sure, since we labor to protect Jesus' deity as the God of Genesis 1:1.
Your said: "Jesus did not physically exist before his birth"
He existed as God, period ~ without any qualifications whatsoever. If you connect John 1:1 with verse fourteen which we should do.
You said: "God’s Word “Logos” in John 1:1 refers to God’s plan, wisdom, and intention."
You are adding your personal thoughts to John 1:1 in order to lay the ground work for your false teachings.
You said: "NOT a “second person” of the doctrine of men’s Trinity."
Jesus Christ is God "period", he's not the second person of the Trinity! We reject the eternal generation of Son of God, as heresy.
You said: "That “Word” became flesh when Jesus was born and that was in John 1:14. because God’s plan and purpose for salvation was with Him from the start. But not as a literal person yet."
By the very blessed truth that Jesus was God's only begotten Son in the manner in which he was begotten made him equal to God. Even his enemies understood this truth. (John 10:30-38) The Word that was in the beginning with God joined Himself to the tabernacle of Jesus of Narareth ~ thereby God was made flesh in the person of Jesus Christ.
Peterlag
Active Member
What verse do you want to talk about out of the 11 that you listed above?
Peterlag
Active Member
I don't get the question.
The phrase occurs in different ways “son of man” and “sons of man” and “sons of men” but the meaning is basically the same. It means a human or humans.
I should have noted that I do often look at the scriptures shared, in case there is a point in the favor of the unitarian view. Sometimes there is a narrow idea in their favor but it does not overcome the ambiguity that reflects Jesus' divinity (in the Godhead) within other passages. That is where the unitarian has to make a convincing argument.
Oops! I shouldn't give to tips them. Nevermind. They still will not likely make convincing arguments on those passages.
Wow. Still evading the question when introduced by Red Baker. That is clever deflection.
Peterlag
Active Member
I rest my case.
Peterlag did not answer the issue of Red Baker posed earlier by synergy. I do not know how Peterlag's case is rested.
Peterlag
Active Member
It's rested by you folks not playing nice.
The big problem here is that you are using this forum as a propaganda tool instead of deeper debate.
Runningman
Active Member
Well, God is not a man (Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) and a man is not God. Yet there are many people who are sons of God and sons of men and none of them are God.
The question is simple and centers to Jesus, to your understanding why was Jesus was called as the "Son of man?"
Yes, sons of God refers to those who have faith in Him.
But I would like to know your understanding why Jesus was called as the "Son of man?"
