All Claims of The Son's Deity

[mikesw]

Contradicted by 1John 1:1-3 which states the Word is a thing that was manifested in or revealed by Jesus. Start interpreting Scripture using Scripture, not interpreting Scripture using assumptions. There is no pre-existent being named the Word anywhere in the Old Testament saying or doing anything nor is God said to have became a man. Actually, Numbers 23:19 and Hosea 11:9 explicitly state God isn't a man. Anything else?

You never learn from your flimsy arguments.
1 John 1 is different from John 1. They are different topics but use some similar words. I do not know who is feeding you this junk, but you have to read it for yourself. Better yet, get a good commentary.

Then Number 23 and Hosea 11 have to do with the nature of men to lie or continue in anger instead of wisdom. In this case, if Jesus is a mere man, then his nature is to lie or change his mind. So you lose either way in your argument.

 

[mikesw]

Don't forget that God became the Savior for Israel and was afflicted
Isaiah 63:8–9 (ESV)
8For he said, “Surely they are my people, children who will not deal falsely.” And he became their Savior.
9In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old.

The Septuagint is clearer
Isa 63:9LXX Not an elder or a messenger but he himself has saved them,

The unitarian has to reject too many passages in order to deny the deity of Jesus.

 

[Runningman]

You never learn from your flimsy arguments.
1 John 1 is different from John 1. They are different topics but use some similar words. I do not know who is feeding you this junk, but you have to read it for yourself. Better yet, get a good commentary.

So the dozens of Bible scholars who capitalized Word in 1 John 1:1-3 are wrong and you a random dude on a forum is the correct one standing against the community of credentialled Bible experts? You seem to have a very grandiose view of your own home-cooked Bible interpretation and reject the consensus of the Trinitarian community.

Then Number 23 and Hosea 11 have to do with the nature of men to lie or continue in anger instead of wisdom. In this case, if Jesus is a mere man, then his nature is to lie or change his mind. So you lose either way in your argument.

They don't mention anything about God ever changing which is what an incarnation would be. God doesn't change, but Jesus changed a lot, even on a spiritual level. Remember, all of that learning the difference between good and evil he had to do, the stature and rapport he built with God, the process of being perfected, the learning of obedience he had to go through? Those aren't jokes Mike. Those are descriptions of a man who didn't inherently have anything God has on the spiritual level. Give it up already.

 

[Runningman]

Don't forget that God became the Savior for Israel and was afflicted
Isaiah 63:8–9 (ESV)
8For he said, “Surely they are my people, children who will not deal falsely.” And he became their Savior.
9In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old.

The Septuagint is clearer
Isa 63:9LXX Not an elder or a messenger but he himself has saved them,

The unitarian has to reject too many passages in order to deny the deity of Jesus.

Don't forget that Jesus is the savior who God made ἐποίησεν (epoiēsen) (make, manufacture, construct) which means Jesus was built into something he previously was not by Someone who is not himself along with the many other saviors God made. Means Jesus isn't God.

Acts 2
36Therefore let all Israel know with certainty that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ!”

 

[mikesw]

So the dozens of Bible scholars who capitalized Word in 1 John 1:1-3 are wrong and you a random dude on a forum is the correct one standing against the community of credentialled Bible experts? You seem to have a very grandiose view of your own home-cooked Bible interpretation and reject the consensus of the Trinitarian community.

They could capitalize every word in 1 John 1:1-3 and it does not change the meaning of John 1 to speak of Jesus' as the One who was with God and was God before becoming flesh and known as Jesus.

They don't mention anything about God ever changing which is what an incarnation would be. God doesn't change, but Jesus changed a lot, even on a spiritual level.

Nothing says that God changed with the incarnation. We do not know all the metaphysics behind God doing this. Anyhow I am suspicious of what sources people used to say that God does not change -- as if he lacks emotions and is not participating in the change of people and thus being changed himself.

Remember, all of that learning the difference between good and evil he had to do, the stature and rapport he built with God, the process of being perfected, the learning of obedience he had to go through?

I can agree that Jesus went through growth. The scriptures show him brilliant at age 12 but we do not know when that happened. He certainly grew taller as he got older. But he hardly has to build up rapport with God since Jesus is also divine.

Those aren't jokes Mike.

Wow. So you think some people do not think Jesus grew from a child to a man?

Those are descriptions of a man who didn't inherently have anything God has on the spiritual level. Give it up already.

You have not shown anything to support your conclusions. If you have some argument against the testimony of scripture about the deity of Christ, you still have a chance to start making some arguments. You have to show that John 1 was incorrect.

 

[mikesw]

Don't forget that Jesus is the savior who God made ἐποίησεν (epoiēsen) (make, manufacture, construct) which means Jesus was built into something he previously was not by Someone who is not himself along with the many other saviors God made. Means Jesus isn't God.

Acts 2
36Therefore let all Israel know with certainty that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ!”

Nothing suggests that this act of installation took place at or after the resurrection. We have seen that it was because he was the Messiah
I. Howard Marshall, Acts: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 5, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1980), 85.

This installing of Jesus as Lord and Christ makes perfect sense when speaking to people who do not know the deity of Christ. That was not the essential gospel message. It just is a fact of fulfillment of scripture. You just are not able to put the pieces together yet.

 

[Runningman]

They could capitalize every word in 1 John 1:1-3 and it does not change the meaning of John 1 to speak of Jesus' as the One who was with God and was God before becoming flesh and known as Jesus.

Then according to your standards, we can remove the capitalizing from the Word in John 1:1 as well and we can interpret it around 1 John 1:1-3 instead and re-translate John 1:1 to have the Word be qualitative instead of personal. There is no Greek grammatical rule in which the Word is a personal being in John 1:1.

Nothing says that God changed with the incarnation. We do not know all the metaphysics behind God doing this. Anyhow I am suspicious of what sources people used to say that God does not change -- as if he lacks emotions and is not participating in the change of people and thus being changed himself.

God is 100% God, but you all say Jesus is 100% God and 100% man after the incarnation. That's a change. The hypostatic union brings the two natures together and doesn't allow them to be separated without risk of having two Jesus': the god Jesus and the man Jesus. Before the alleged incarnation God is 100% God and 0% man. It's really wild how you all have changed God so much that the one you portray is not even god at all, just a random creation from the 4th century in the same category of Zeus and Hermes.

I can agree that Jesus went through growth. The scriptures show him brilliant at age 12 but we do not know when that happened. He certainly grew taller as he got older. But he hardly has to build up rapport with God since Jesus is also divine.

Now we are getting somewhere. So you understand that Jesus changed spiritual. Why do you suppose Jesus had to grow spiritually if he is the Spirit?

Wow. So you think some people do not think Jesus grew from a child to a man?

You have not shown anything to support your conclusions. If you have some argument against the testimony of scripture about the deity of Christ, you still have a chance to start making some arguments. You have to show that John 1 was incorrect.

Jesus needed time to know enough to reject evil and choose good:

Isaiah 7
14Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. 15By the time He knows enough to reject evil and choose good, He will be eating curds and honey.

God and the heavenly host already know the different between good and evil:

Genesis 1
22Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil. And now, lest he reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever...”

Begin with Scripture and good luck.

 

[Runningman]

Nothing suggests that this act of installation took place at or after the resurrection. We have seen that it was because he was the Messiah
I. Howard Marshall, Acts: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 5, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1980), 85.

This installing of Jesus as Lord and Christ makes perfect sense when speaking to people who do not know the deity of Christ. That was not the essential gospel message. It just is a fact of fulfillment of scripture. You just are not able to put the pieces together yet.

Now that we have proven that Jesus' saviorhood was created by God (Acts 2:36) then what is your work around for Jesus not being the same savior as God?

 

[mikesw]

Then according to your standards, we can remove the capitalizing from the Word in John 1:1 as well and we can interpret it around 1 John 1:1-3 instead and re-translate John 1:1 to have the Word be qualitative instead of personal. There is no Greek grammatical rule in which the Word is a personal being in John 1:1.

Duh. We are not talking about grammatical rules. You just do not comprehend things. I pointed out that your hyperliteralist interpretations keep you from recognizing metaphor and allegory. You have not proven against the use of metalepsis here. So you are fighting without a weapon.

God is 100% God, but you all say Jesus is 100% God and 100% man after the incarnation. That's a change. The hypostatic union brings the two natures together and doesn't allow them to be separated without risk of having two Jesus': the god Jesus and the man Jesus. Before the alleged incarnation God is 100% God and 0% man. It's really wild how you all have changed God so much that the one you portray is not even god at all, just a random creation from the 4th century in the same category of Zeus and Hermes.

You are ignorant of history and fail to remember that the council of Nicea was not creating new doctrine. It was affirming and clarifying that the triune recognition. Only maybe 10 out of 300 still argued for the unitarian view of Jesus having divinity only in his birth.

Now we are getting somewhere. So you understand that Jesus changed spiritual. Why do you suppose Jesus had to grow spiritually if he is the Spirit?

Jesus needed time to know enough to reject evil and choose good:

Isaiah 7
14Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. 15By the time He knows enough to reject evil and choose good, He will be eating curds and honey.

This does not deny his divinity that is proven in John 1.

God and the heavenly host already know the different between good and evil:

Genesis 1
22Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil. And now, lest he reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever...”

Begin with Scripture and good luck.

Genesis 1:22 does not talk about Jesus. I see how lost you get.

 

[mikesw]

Now that we have proven that Jesus' saviorhood was created by God (Acts 2:36) then what is your work around for Jesus not being the same savior as God?

Stupid to assume the word is "make" as in "create" but rather it is installing Jesus as Lord and Christ. You fail to even read the simplest material. It is not a problem showing the interaction of the Father and his Son.

 

[civic]

Now that we have proven that Jesus' saviorhood was created by God (Acts 2:36) then what is your work around for Jesus not being the same savior as God?

lol creating a savior is the same as creating god, it didn't happen.

He was the Lord/ Savior before the Incarnation who was the One responsible for creating all things and who existed before all things that were created.

next fallacy

 

[mikesw]

Don't forget that God became the Savior for Israel and was afflicted
Isaiah 63:8–9 (ESV)
8For he said, “Surely they are my people, children who will not deal falsely.” And he became their Savior.
9In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old.

The Septuagint is clearer
Isa 63:9LXX Not an elder or a messenger but he himself has saved them,

The unitarian has to reject too many passages in order to deny the deity of Jesus.

I will retract this (at least for the most part) since it appears to focus on a reflection on history going back to Moses and the wilderness.

 

[Victoria]

Thanks.

Sure thing

. . . . But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that day what has been entrusted to me. [2 Timothy 1:12]

Yes, we all one in Christ.
remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. [Eph. 2:12-16] Yep, There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. . . . . One body, one church of which Christ is the head.

Amen

I believe that particular rendering is questionable. There was no need for God to be justified (1. to render righteous or such he ought to be; 2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered; 3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be) - God was seen of angels in the beginning at creation, it was Jesus who was preached to the Gentiles; it was Jesus who was received up into glory.

If you strip Jesus of his deity, then it would be rather difficult to come to a right understanding of what's meant here in this verse. Jesus stepped down from His throne in heaven, put on human flesh, became a humble servant, & demonstrated to humanity how to know, & be obedient to, God. Only God alone can fulfill the law perfectly, & set humanity free. Upon that accomplishment, He then can be justified in the Spirit so that all will know that Jesus Christ is the Saviour.

AI: The oldest versions of 1 Timothy 3:16 read as "He who was manifested in the flesh" or simply "who was manifested in the flesh". The reading "God" appeared later, likely due to a scribal error where the abbreviation for "God" (ΘΣ) was accidentally substituted for the abbreviation for "who" or "he" (ΟΣ) in manuscripts like the Codex Alexandrinus and Sinaiticus.

God with us because God was in Christ - thanks.

I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one.” [John 10:28-30] I and my Father are one in caring and keeping the sheep----one in purpose and mission.

The above passage is also a disputed passage because it is missing from the earliest and most reliable Greek manuscripts before the fifteenth or sixteenth century.

The Gnostics in Alexandria taught that Jesus wasn't God. Westcott & Hort didn't believe Jesus was God.
It's why you'll read verses such as: all things were created "through Him" instead of "by Him."

Unitarianism - Unitarian Monotheism has it roots in the beginning throughout the OT - The God of our fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob ----- a single ONE.
The first century church was built upon the OT scriptures therefore they were also Unitarians.
The fourth and fifth centuries brought about the idea of a Triune God and developed from there . . .
I am a Biblical Unitarian - a monotheist.

Unitarians just stand in a different camp.

 

[Victoria]

You mentioned other versions that you use. If you use other versions yourself, then what is this nonsense about only needing the KJV?

It's required when doing a fair study comparison of both sets of manuscripts, if I wasn't specific enough.

I used the word "cult" and placed myself as one of them before. I used the word because that is a exactly description for what you current are a part of yourself. I understand you well, having been there myself.

Can you provide me w/ scripture comparisons to demonstrate what's so horribly wrong w/ the AV, & makes it a cult?

The English snobs of this world have always wanted to rule mankind. There is no need to see it any other way. Jesus never spoke a word of English when He walked the face of this earth, that should be enough to abandon your snobbery and embrace the language of the Greatest among humanity. Jesus Christ. It is arrogant and condescending to say what your say about the KJV. Your king James accomplished what he desired from you.

Again, projection.

We can have very detailed debate if you like. Start a thread in the versions forum and tag me. I've already given you homework on mansion and ruler. Did you even look yourself?

Zero scripture, projections, & ad hominems. I think you already lost the debate here.

 

[Runningman]

lol creating a savior is the same as creating god, it didn't happen.

He was the Lord/ Savior before the Incarnation who was the One responsible for creating all things and who existed before all things that were created.

next fallacy

Aside from Jesus, here's another example of a created savior.

Judges 3
9And when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised up a saviour to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.

 

[civic]

Aside from Jesus, here's another example of a created savior.

Judges 3
9And when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised up a saviour to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.

Nice try that savior could not save anyone from their sins

Another uni failure

 

[Runningman]

Nice try that savior could not save anyone from their sins

Another uni failure

Animal sacrifices were a foreshadowing of what Jesus did. Forgiveness of sins came from those too. Leviticus 4:20, 26, 31, 35

It's sad to hear you think God died for your sins when God cannot die at all. So do you believe that only a human body was your sin sacrifice?

 

[amazing grace]

Sure thing

Amen

If you strip Jesus of his deity, then it would be rather difficult to come to a right understanding of what's meant here in this verse. Jesus stepped down from His throne in heaven, put on human flesh, became a humble servant, & demonstrated to humanity how to know, & be obedient to, God. Only God alone can fulfill the law perfectly, & set humanity free. Upon that accomplishment, He then can be justified in the Spirit so that all will know that Jesus Christ is the Saviour.

If my view of Jesus, the Messiah as he is - a human being, then I understand what is meant by being justified in the spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations and believed on and taken up in glory - the ascended, exalted Christ.
Jesus didn't have a throne in heaven . . . Jesus didn't live before he was conceived and born as any other human being was conceived and born.

BUT Jesus is God - so who was he obedient to? BUT Jesus NEVER quit being God - why would he have to be justified? -
Either 'tradition' is lying or God is lying . . . . God said he was not a man - you say he became a man . . .
God said he GAVE/SENT his Son to be the savior of the world - you say God clothed himself in human flesh, became a man . . .
God says of himself that he can not be tempted with evil - you say he was tempted . . . God says he is immortal - you say he paid the price for the sin of humanity . . . God says there was a point in time when Jesus was conceived and born - you say that he has always existed . . . . there's something wrong with this picture. What accomplishment - he is God - you said yourself nothing is impossible for him! But for a human being, a human Son, the only begotten of the Father, to accomplish what Jesus Christ did - GREAT ACHIEVEMENT AND SUCCESS!

The Gnostics in Alexandria taught that Jesus wasn't God. Westcott & Hort didn't believe Jesus was God.
It's why you'll read verses such as: all things were created "through Him" instead of "by Him."

Unitarians just stand in a different camp.

I can tell your previous apology meant NOTHING . . . I am not a Gnostic - I am a Biblical Unitarian.

Happy Thanksgiving.

 

[praise_yeshua]

It's required when doing a fair study comparison of both sets of manuscripts, if I wasn't specific enough.

Can you provide me w/ scripture comparisons to demonstrate what's so horribly wrong w/ the AV, & makes it a cult?

Again, projection.

Zero scripture, projections, & ad hominems. I think you already lost the debate here.

I gave you comparisons. Do you remember me mentioning "mansion" and "ruler". If the KJV is perfect, you wouldn't need to compare anything to get "more information".

The English snob word "rule" in various forms is found in Hebrews 13 several times. Don't pretend I didn't mention this. This is your deception to ignore what I said. Take those other editions you mentioned and find "more information."

I also mention "mansion". You know that huge elaborate and "stately manor" so many people have expected from God since the the KJV translators, your Archbishop and king decided to change the Bishops Bible? John 14:2. Now you have more information that you pretended you didn't already have. Deception isn't good. Pretending isn't good. It is evil. Change.

 

[dwight92070]

If my view of Jesus, the Messiah as he is - a human being, then I understand what is meant by being justified in the spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations and believed on and taken up in glory - the ascended, exalted Christ.
Jesus didn't have a throne in heaven . . . Jesus didn't live before he was conceived and born as any other human being was conceived and born.

BUT Jesus is God - so who was he obedient to? BUT Jesus NEVER quit being God - why would he have to be justified? -
Either 'tradition' is lying or God is lying . . . . God said he was not a man - you say he became a man . . .
God said he GAVE/SENT his Son to be the savior of the world - you say God clothed himself in human flesh, became a man . . .
God says of himself that he can not be tempted with evil - you say he was tempted . . . God says he is immortal - you say he paid the price for the sin of humanity . . . God says there was a point in time when Jesus was conceived and born - you say that he has always existed . . . . there's something wrong with this picture. What accomplishment - he is God - you said yourself nothing is impossible for him! But for a human being, a human Son, the only begotten of the Father, to accomplish what Jesus Christ did - GREAT ACHIEVEMENT AND SUCCESS!

I can tell your previous apology meant NOTHING . . . I am not a Gnostic - I am a Biblical Unitarian.

Happy Thanksgiving.

There's no such thing as a Biblical Unitarian. The Bible contradicts Unitarianism and vice-versa.