All Claims of The Son's Deity

[101G]

There are only about eight verses in the entire New Testament that can be understood to say that Jesus is God, and every one of them can either be translated in a way that supports the Biblical Unitarian position, or disputed textually, or can be explained from the use of the word “God” in the culture. In contrast, the clear verses where Jesus is said to be a “man” such as when Peter or Paul taught their audiences that Jesus was a man appointed by God are not disputed and in the context there does not seem to be any good reason those men would not have said Jesus was a God-man if in fact that is what he is.

the Lord Jesus was ... "LIKE" ... a man with... "BLOOD". and upon his resurrection, "WITHOUT" blood, he, Jesus, God shared in flesh, is the NEW MAN, that is in his OWN IMAGE from Genesis 1:26 that was to come.

101G.

 

[Peterlag]

the Lord Jesus was ... "LIKE" ... a man with... "BLOOD". and upon his resurrection, "WITHOUT" blood, he, Jesus, God shared in flesh, is the NEW MAN, that is in his OWN IMAGE from Genesis 1:26 that was to come.

101G.

It should be a huge red flag to all of you if you just stop and think that you believe the same doctrine that the Catholics believe.

 

[Runningman]

I will quote verses from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to the original languages. Just three verses before the text in question the "Mighty One" in Psalms 45:3, as the Son in Isaiah 9:6 "Mighty God." Do that referred to any human?

I will also quote from a literal Bible translation, in this case the Smith's Literal Translation, where the same word for "Mighty One" in Psalm 45:3 and Isaiah 9:6 appears in Ezekiel.

Notice closely how they didn't translate it as "Mighty Gods" in the below verse or Psalm 45:3. Therefore the best Biblical consistency is that Jesus is not the Mighty God. Know why? He was never called any such thing in the Bible. Applying Isaiah 9:6 is a common mistake by trinitarians since Isaiah 9:6 is never once applied to Jesus by God, the prophets, Jesus, or the disciples anywhere in the Bible.

Ezekiel 32
21The strong of the mighty shall say to him from the midst of hades with his helpers: they went down; they lay uncircumcised, wounded of the sword.

Do you believe Jesus' words when He said neither had heard the voice of the Father anytime?(John 5:37)
Then whose voice was that that commanded Moses?(Jos 22:9)
Whom was described as the "Mighty One, God?" in Joshua 22:22?
Again, do that refer to human to you?

Yes these all refer to humans. Did you know that "strong and mighty" in Ezekiel 32:21 uses the same Hebrew words as the words you're attempting to deify Jesus with?

Psa 45:3 Gird Your sword on Your thigh, O Mighty One, In Your splendor and Your majesty!
Joh 5:37 "And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form.
Jos 22:9 The sons of Reuben and the sons of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh returned home and departed from the sons of Israel at Shiloh which is in the land of Canaan, to go to the land of Gilead, to the land of their possession which they had possessed, according to the command of the LORD through Moses.
Jos 22:22 "The Mighty One, God, the LORD, the Mighty One, God, the LORD! He knows, and may Israel itself know. If it was in rebellion, or if in an unfaithful act against the LORD do not save us this day!


You can apply those Bible verses above to answer this interpretation.

Psalm 45 is still about king Solomon. They are calling Solomon a mighty just like they did the other humans in Ezekiel 32:21. You have not provided any convincing argument that would suggest you have soundly divided the Bible. I would also add, word games and semantics of the Bible will never help you as a trinitarian. There are to many words and concepts that trinitarians rely on that are not stated or described in the Bible.

 

[Peterlag]

I will also quote from a literal Bible translation, in this case the Smith's Literal Translation, where the same word for "Mighty One" in Psalm 45:3 and Isaiah 9:6 appears in Ezekiel.

Notice closely how they didn't translate it as "Mighty Gods" in the below verse or Psalm 45:3. Therefore the best Biblical consistency is that Jesus is not the Mighty God. Know why? He was never called any such thing in the Bible. Applying Isaiah 9:6 is a common mistake by trinitarians since Isaiah 9:6 is never once applied to Jesus by God, the prophets, Jesus, or the disciples anywhere in the Bible.

Ezekiel 32
21The strong of the mighty shall say to him from the midst of hades with his helpers: they went down; they lay uncircumcised, wounded of the sword.

Yes these all refer to humans. Did you know that "strong and mighty" in Ezekiel 32:21 uses the same Hebrew words as the words you're attempting to deify Jesus with?

Psalm 45 is still about king Solomon. They are calling Solomon a mighty just like they did the other humans in Ezekiel 32:21. You have not provided any convincing argument that would suggest you have soundly divided the Bible. I would also add, word games and semantics of the Bible will never help you as a trinitarian. There are to many words and concepts that trinitarians rely on that are not stated or described in the Bible.

You do write well when you say there are to many words and concepts that trinitarians rely on that are not stated or described in the Bible. What they use that you know so well is bits and pieces of words and half verses along with their own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as they pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there.

 

[Runningman]

You do write well when you say there are to many words and concepts that trinitarians rely on that are not stated or described in the Bible. What they use that you know so well is bits and pieces of words and half verses along with their own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as they pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there.

Trinitarianism is a bunch of misleading half-truths built on cherry picking verses and saying it means something that usually is contradicted by the context.

 

[mikesw]

Trinitarianism is a bunch of misleading half-truths built on cherry picking verses and saying it means something that usually is contradicted by the context.

so now the unitarians find the scripture full of irresolvable contradictions instead of pointing to Christ as Lord.

 

[Peterlag]

so now the unitarians find the scripture full of irresolvable contradictions instead of pointing to Christ as Lord.

You're spinning and twisting again which is what you do most of the time. We did not say the Scripture is full of contradictions. We said the way that you use Scripture is contradicing to the context.

 

[mikesw]

You're spinning and twisting again which is what you do most of the time. We did not say the Scripture is full of contradictions. We said the way that you use Scripture is contradicing to the context.

That is your spinning and twisting. Lovely attempt to turn that against the testimony of scripture. I'm not the one disregarding John 1 and the pre-existence of Christ and even the parable in Luke 20:9ff. It seems a difficult existence for you to pretend those do not exist.

 

[Peterlag]

That is your spinning and twisting. Lovely attempt to turn that against the testimony of scripture. I'm not the one disregarding John 1 and the pre-existence of Christ and even the parable in Luke 20:9ff. It seems a difficult existence for you to pretend those do not exist.

Trinitarians are impossible to have an intelligent debate with...

because they completely corrupted the language from both ends. Words have meaning everywhere, but not when it comes to the Bible. For example: The word "man" can mean man and sometimes the word "man" cannot mean man. Sometimes the word "man" can mean both man and not man at the same time such as something being 100 percent of two different things at the same time. They leave the English language utterly useless as a tool for communication.

 

[mikesw]

Trinitarians are impossible to have an intelligent debate with...

because they completely corrupted the language from both ends. Words have meaning everywhere, but not when it comes to the Bible. For example: The word "man" can mean man and sometimes the word "man" cannot mean man. Sometimes the word "man" can mean both man and not man at the same time such as something being 100 percent of two different things at the same time. They leave the English language utterly useless as a tool for communication.

the problem is not the Trinitarian orthodox believers. It is the unitarian inability to recognize metaphor and abstract language in scripture. So they take the biased interpretation that disregards analogies and metaphors. They deny the pre-existence of Jesus and they deny the ability of God to become incarnate among humans. It is a powerless limited god that the unitarians believe in.

 

[Peterlag]

the problem is not the Trinitarian orthodox believers. It is the unitarian inability to recognize metaphor and abstract language in scripture. So they take the biased interpretation that disregards analogies and metaphors. They deny the pre-existence of Jesus and they deny the ability of God to become incarnate among humans. It is a powerless limited god that the unitarians believe in.

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100%man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

 

[mikesw]

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100%man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

You just have to neglect John 1 to make your point. That is not good bible study there mr. peterlag.
You will have to explain your sources for the metaphysical restrictions that you are placing on God's ability, as if you were pre-existent to know God's wisdom and ability. You simply whitewash things so you do not have to explain your weak concept of God's ability.
The thing you obviously miss is that to be made like his brothers, he would have to be different otherwise. So you neglect half of the verse so you can deny who Jesus is. It is your constant denial of the obvious elements that makes your theory so far off track.

 

[101G]

It should be a huge red flag to all of you if you just stop and think that you believe the same doctrine that the Catholics believe.

so we can take this as you cannot refute what 101G said? thought so. and by the way, 101G is not Catholic.

101G.