Easily Dispelling The Trinity

All they see is what they think is an inferior quality of existence/essence associated with the Son.
No rational person should get past the term "Son of God" to know with absolute certainty that we are not talking about YHWH, the only true God, who we relate to as Father. Jesus' God is the only true God. The Son said this himself.
 
No rational person should get past the term "Son of God" to know with absolute certainty that we are not talking about YHWH, the only true God, who we relate to as Father. Jesus' God is the only true God. The Son said this himself.
I think that Jesus was rational enough when He declared Himself as the "I Am" of the OT to the Pharisees (John 8:58).
 
Don't you find this the most absurd statement ever written? Jesus Christ has the greatest reputation of any man who ever lived, the most famous man who ever lived.
The way I see it is that Paul is emphasizing the fact that Jesus temporarily set His Divine powers and perogatives aside (not His Divinity) and took up human nature as an ordinary unremarkable run-of-the-mill human being. That's what Paul is talking about. He is not talking about what transpired afterwards at the Cross and His Resurrection.
 
Thank you so much for all that information. In your estimation, would you say that Shekinah/Shekhinah is a name for the Holy Spirit? Might there be other OT or Rabbinical names for the Holy Spirit?
Some information from the Sages and rabbins re the Shekinah brother.
The Concept of Shekinah in Rabbinic Literature and in Matthew’s Gospel
The Etymology and Origin of Shekinah

The etymology of shekinah is straightforward. The noun is derived from the Hebrew verb škn (pronounced “shakan”) which means “to dwell, abide, settle, rest.”

Shekinah and the related Aramaic noun shekinta share the same verbal root. The Hebrew word for “tabernacle” (mishkan) is also derived from škn.

Shekinah/ shekinta does not occur in the Hebrew Bible and there is no evidence of the word in pre-rabbinic literature or in the Qumran texts (the Dead Sea Scrolls), but it is common in rabbinic literature and the Aramaic Targums.[3]

Martin McNamara notes that shekinah/ shekinta “is a central term and concept in rabbinic literature expressing God’s presence in the Temple and with his people.”[4]

Rabbis used the word in verses that refer to God’s presence in the Israelite’s camp, the tabernacle, or temple (e.g., Exod. 19:16–18; 40:34-38; 1 Kings 6:13; 2 Chron. 7:1), and on mountains (e.g., Exod. 19:18; Psa. 68.16–18; Joel 3:17 cf. the Transfiguration).

In the Bible, God’s shekinah appeared as a cloud (Exod. 24:16–18; 33:9; 34:5; 40:34–38; Num. 9:15; 11:25; 14:14; 16:42; 1 Kings 8:10–13), as a pillar of smoke and a pillar of fire (Exod. 13:21–22), as a burning bush (Exod. 3:2), and as a wall of fire (Zech. 2:5).

Avoiding Anthropomorphism

In rabbinic texts, shekinah/ shekinta is sometimes synonymous with the Holy Spirit. However, the word is employed in the Targums as an indirect way to refer to God.

It is used instead of the Hebrew word Elohim (“God”) and God’s name YHWH, and also instead of “face” and “presence” when used of the divine. This is especially the case in Bible verses where God is depicted as going somewhere or as doing something that humans might do. The rabbis who wrote the Targums wanted to avoid attributing human characteristics directly to God.[5]

The New Testament authors did not have the same concern about anthropomorphism. They tell us the astonishing story that God came in human form and did human things. Moreover, the God-man Jesus even took on the form of a slave and allowed himself to be executed in a humiliating and barbaric way on a cross (Phil. 2:6–8 cf. 1 Cor. 1:18). It is no wonder the cross was a stumbling block to some Jewish people (1 Cor. 1:23–24).

The Divine Presence in Gatherings
Shekinah occurs twice in the Mishnah, the most ancient part of the Talmud. These two occurrences are in statements made by two second-century CE rabbis and they resonate with Jesus’s words recorded in Matthew 18:20.

“If two sit together and words between them are of the Torah, then the Shekinah is in their midst” (Mishnah Avot 3:3).

“If ten men sit together and occupy themselves with the Law, the Shekinah rests among them” (Mishnah Avot 3:6).[6]

“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am there among them” (Matt. 18:20).


McNamara suggests that the author of Matthew’s Gospel molded current rabbinic theology and terminology on the shekinah in keeping with New Testament Christology.[7]

The shekinah as the “glory of the Lord” had dwelt in the tabernacle and then the temple (e.g., Exod 40:35; 2 Chron. 7:1). Christians believe that since Pentecost, --the Holy Spirit dwells among God’s people wherever they are, wherever they gather, and that God’s people together constitute a new temple (1 Cor. 3:16 NIV; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:19–22 cf. 1 Pet. 2:5).


Interesting study-if you have time brother.
Shalom
Johann.
 
No rational person should get past the term "Son of God" to know with absolute certainty that we are not talking about YHWH, the only true God, who we relate to as Father. Jesus' God is the only true God. The Son said this himself.

Are you Oneness? Is that what perspective you're coming from here?
 
JWs are Arians who do not believe that Jesus is the uncreated Son of God. What is the Unitarians' position on that?

To be clear, there is a group UUA, that I am not associated with anymore. My unitarian position is that the word "son" by definition is a created being. the Bible calls Jesus a created being, using the term begotten.


What does SIL stand for?
Son In Law.
 
The way I see it is that Paul is emphasizing the fact that Jesus temporarily set His Divine powers and perogatives aside (not His Divinity) and took up human nature as an ordinary unremarkable run-of-the-mill human being.

I don't personally believe this to be so. He appeared as such but appearances are deceiving. His Eternal power was displayed in the miracles He wrought. In fact, He insisted that they believe because of the miracles.

I believe there is an embellishing that takes place when we talk about how Christ humbled Himself. He had the ability and power to do anything. He chose not to. Which is the character of Divinity on full displace. A quality Innate to Divinity. All of God shares in this. Jesus Christ expressed it in Person.
 
I think that Jesus was rational enough when He declared Himself as the "I Am" of the OT to the Pharisees (John 8:58).
This is pure invention of trinitarians. Many people say I am. It is not a claim of deity. God's name is YHWH not Jesus.
 
The way I see it is that Paul is emphasizing the fact that Jesus temporarily set His Divine powers and perogatives aside (not His Divinity)
Jesus must have put his divinity aside since the Divine Holy Spirit came to him upon his baptism.
 
To be clear, there is a group UUA, that I am not associated with anymore. My unitarian position is that the word "son" by definition is a created being. the Bible calls Jesus a created being, using the term begotten.



Son In Law.

Still a Universalist? I'm trying to understand your perspective. I have to honestly say... I don't see consistency in the things you say. You make statements contrary and self defeating to your position.
 
took up human nature as an ordinary unremarkable run-of-the-mill human being. That's what Paul is talking about. He is not talking about what transpired afterwards at the Cross and His Resurrection.
You mean Paul was talking about how birth being to a poor family rather than from a great legacy?
 
This is pure invention of trinitarians. Many people say I am. It is not a claim of deity. God's name is YHWH not Jesus.

No one says it like Jesus did. Have you even read the verse? Does everyone say "Before Abraham.... I AM

Joh_8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

To me, it is rather obvious that you don't believe in the veracity of the NT. Do you believe in the inspiration of the NT?
 
Still a Universalist? I'm trying to understand your perspective. I have to honestly say... I don't see consistency in the things you say. You make statements contrary and self defeating to your position.
No. I am not a universalist. UUA ≠ Biblical Unitarian.

If you see inconsistency in what I say, please point it out. YHWH is the only God and his Anointed, adopted son is Jesus. What is inconsistent?
 
No. I am not a universalist. UUA ≠ Biblical Unitarian.

If you see inconsistency in what I say, please point it out. YHWH is the only God and his Anointed, adopted son is Jesus. What is inconsistent?

I have been. I will continue to. You miss the obvious. Like your statement concerning "I AM"... I mean seriously.... Everyone says what Jesus said in John 8? You know they don't. Yet you claim that is true.
 
No one says it like Jesus did. Have you even read the verse?

Joh_8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

To me, it is rather obvious that you don't believe in the veracity of the NT
No. I just reject the trinitarian exegesis of the NT, looking for any rationalization to violate the 1C.

"Before Abraham was, I am" ≠ Claim of Deity. Just a claim he existed before Abraham. Come on. Keep it real here.

Have you ever read, John 8:54 ‘If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing.’ Yet, trinitarians contradict Jesus, asserting he is claiming all glory by reading into his words to mean he is God. And then overlook a stronger explicit anti-trinitarian verse than is hard to imagine. For us, there is one God, the Father. 1 Corinthians 8:6.
 
No. I just reject the trinitarian exegesis of the NT, looking for any rationalization to violate the 1C.

"Before Abraham was, I am" ≠ Claim of Deity. Just a claim he existed before Abraham. Come on. Keep it real here.

Have you ever read, John 8:54 ‘If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing.’ Yet, trinitarians contradict Jesus, asserting he is claiming all glory by reading into his words to mean he is God. And then overlook a stronger explicit anti-trinitarian verse than is hard to imagine. For us, there is one God, the Father. 1 Corinthians 8:6.

You're distancing yourself from what you actually said. You said everyone says "I AM". Which is silly defense given the evidence.

So who else can say what Jesus said? Yet, you made that claim.
 
Do you believe in the inspiration of the NT?
Yes.
  1. Do you recognize the fact that the entire Bible, with the possible exception of Luke, was written by monotheist Jews who reject the trinity to this day?
  2. Do you recognize the fact that Jesus was born a Jew under the law, required to believe in the monotheism of Judaism and there is no evidence he ever stopped being Jewish?
  3. Do you recognize the fact that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, meaning he is the Messiah of a monotheist religion?
 
Don't you find this the most absurd statement ever written? Jesus Christ has the greatest reputation of any man who ever lived, the most famous man who ever lived.

Yep. You don't believe the veracity of the NT. Can you clearly state what your canon is? I think it will help us accuracy deal with your position. This is very important to share.
 
You're distancing yourself from what you actually said. You said everyone says "I AM". Which is silly defense given the evidence.

Using capital letters changes nothing. I am not distancing myself from this one little bit. The simple fact of the matter is that everyone says "I am" and it is not a claim of deity. What is silly are all these trinitarian inventions.

So who else can say what Jesus said? Yet, you made that claim.
Presumably millions lived before Abraham. The claim I made was that everyone says I am, not that everyone claims to have existed before Abraham.
 
Back
Top Bottom