How are God and Jesus the same, but different?

[360watt]

Do you have any concerns about it being posted by a trinitarian ministry as an aid for those who are searching for Bible study tools?

I think, like the others..she has just misused a term. I think all it would take is another Trinitarian to proof read it.

 

[civic]

I think, like the others..she has just misused a term. I think all it would take is another Trinitarian to proof read it.

Agreed most likely it was not edited by anyone except herself.

 

[civic]

Yeah I read the article after posting. It's weird because it's mostly straight down the line trinitarian teaching..then she writes about seperate beings and I think... wha?

She still has Jesus as God, co-equal with the Father and Holy Spirit, so it may just be misused terms.

But this has been my issue with the standard line of Jesus not being the Father or the Holy Spirit.. is then it's language that could easily lend itself to Polytheism.

I know it doesnt really amount to Polytheism .. but seems easy to go to that point when you start dividing the trinity parts too strongly.

Ditto

 

[Matthias]

I think, like the others..she has just misused a term. I think all it would take is another Trinitarian to proof read it.

Thanks.

I wrote to them this morning about the article. I’ll let you know if / when I receive a response from them.

 

[101G]

Yes when we say God is One ( something ) that refers to Gods Being, Nature, Substance, Essence etc......... not Person.
God is One Divine Essence, One Divine Nature, One Divine Being, One Divine Substance. All synonymous Terms to describe God is One.

Person/Personhood is not synonymous with nature as they are distinct. There is not a one correlation with person and nature/being.

God is One Being and 3 Persons

Good statement, "ONE NATURE", great. 101G have a question, and any trinitarian may answer. the statement, "Yes when we say God is One ( something ) that refers to Gods Being, Nature, Substance, Essence etc......... not Person". and also stated, "Person/Personhood is not synonymous with nature as they are distinct". Good, this is all 101G needs to know. now, 101G question to these statements.

1. "since your personhood of the second person, came in flesh, how much of the "one" Spirit was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') for the Son?". because remember, your second PERSON, has the SAME "ONE" NATURE, Spirit, God. supportive scripture,
Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

the term " being" here is present tense, and in this present tense, the scriptures states, he, the Lord Jesus, is in the "SAME NATURE" of God, which is Spirit, Per John 4:24a. for "FORM" here means "NATURE". so how much of the "ONE" Spirit" was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō'), according to Philippians 2:7?

was the "ONE" Nature made 1/3 less for the person son? or was all the Spirit made empty? ... your answer please.

101G.

 

[360watt]

Yeah, to have one God, the division between the Holy Spirit, Son and Father is not separation, but distinction. Going to the book of Revelation, we can see that the roles of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are interchangeable/equal. It is Jesus speaking to the churches, Jesus is spoken of in terms you give to the Father, and it is also the Holy Spirit speaking to the churches.

 

[praise_yeshua]

This article - posted on biblestudytools.com - contains several statements about the Trinity which I would like to ask trinitarian members of this forum about.

I’ll start with this one. (I’ll ask about others in follow-up posts in this thread.) As a trinitarian, what is your reaction to this:

”… God and Jesus are also separate beings …”

Is Jesus God?

The Bible tells us that Jesus is God. Let's look at some statements Jesus made as well as the differences between God and Jesus.

www.biblestudytools.com

Does this statement about the Trinity raise a red flag, or is it non-problematical?

Why can't you make the argument yourself? I don't understand why anyone takes such an approach. I'm not going to read your reference only to have you "move the goalpost".

The Father didn't die for sin. The Father was pleased by the Son. In perfect Unity there was only a temporal difference in experience. I use the word "temporal" in a logical sense. I don't believe there was a literal temporal effect.

 

[civic]

Why can't you make the argument yourself? I don't understand why anyone takes such an approach. I'm not going to read your reference only to have you "move the goalpost".

The Father didn't die for sin. The Father was pleased by the Son. In perfect Unity there was only a temporal difference in experience. I use the word "temporal" in a logical sense. I don't believe there was a literal temporal effect.

Ya think lol

 

[Matthias]

Why can't you make the argument yourself? I don't understand why anyone takes such an approach.

I’ve publicly stated, several times, why I use trinitarian scholarship when I speak with a trinitarian audience. I get it that you don’t understand why.

I'm not going to read your reference only to have you "move the goalpost".

Read my reference or don’t; the goalpost isn’t moving.

The Father didn't die for sin. The Father was pleased by the Son. In perfect Unity there was only a temporal difference in experience. I use the word "temporal" in a logical sense. I don't believe there was a literal temporal effect.

God didn’t die.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I’ve publicly stated, several times, why I use trinitarian scholarship when I speak with a trinitarian audience. I get it that you don’t understand why.

I don't understand the desire to use such methods because they are largely meaningless. You are appeal to information that is not your own and not necessarily the position of other other Trinitarians. You keep insisting that it is meaningful and it really not.

I not that I don't understand why. I know exactly why, I have told you. You feel comfortable attacking the meaningless.

Read my reference or don’t; the goalpost isn’t moving.

The goalpost moved when you admitted that you're not a principled Jewish Monotheist.

God didn’t die.

You asked me the difference with my position. I told you. It doesn't matter whether you accept this fact or not. I both answered your question and remained true to my own position.

God tasted death through the Hypostatic Union of the Son with flesh.

 

[Matthias]

I don't understand the desire to use such methods because they are largely meaningless.

They aren’t meaningless. Many people have abandoned trinitarianism because of them.

You are appeal to information that is not your own and not necessarily the position of other other Trinitarians. You keep insisting that it is meaningful and it really not.

Tne average trinitarian doesn’t know, nor does he or she care, about the details of the doctrine of the Trinity. When I’m speaking to such persons I address their ignorance. The response to that varies. Most of them just shrug their shoulders. Some of them accuse me of lying about that orthodoxy teaches - these are the people I’m most likely to succeed with. I direct them to the sources (which they largely ignore) and to their trinitarian clergy. Once they speak with their clergy they discover, from their clergy’s confirmation, that I wasn’t lying to them about what the doctrine teaches. Now they have to make a choice. Most will remain where they are - they rationalize that the details don’t really matter. As long as they believe in a Trinity … everyone is happy.

But then there are the others. Some will not remain where they are - they are disturbed by the fact that what they believe is not what the doctrine teaches - they can’t rationalize that the details don’t really matter. What will they do? Eventually, many of them abandon trinitarianism. I’ve seen them fall into cults, i to Judaism, into Islam, into atheism, etc. Some of them I can reach with the real Messiah.

I not that I don't understand why. I know exactly why, I have told you. You feel comfortable attacking the meaningless.

I don’t attack the meaningless. I attack the idolatry.

The goalpost moved when you admitted that you're not a principled Jewish Monotheist.

Those are your words, not mine. I would never say, nor would I admit, that I’m not a principled Jewish monotheist.

You asked me the difference with my position. I told you. It doesn't matter whether you accept this fact or not. I both answered your question and remained true to my own position.

Good on you.

God tasted death through the Hypostatic Union of the Son with flesh.

The one God of the scriptures is immortal. He hasn’t died and he will never die.

 

[Fred]

Tne average trinitarian doesn’t know, nor does he or she care, about the details of the doctrine of the Trinity. When I’m speaking to such persons I address their ignorance.

How unimpressive.
Yet when you are refuted, you dodge the evidence.

 

[Matthias]

One of the best weapons that I have at my disposal in dealing with the average trinitarian are the details of the doctrine of the Trinity. Step 1. Teach them the details of the doctrine - using trinitarian sources - which their clergy hasn’t but should have.

 

[Fred]

One of the best weapons that I have at my disposal in dealing with the average trinitarian are the details of the doctrine of the Trinity. Step 1. Teach them the details of the doctrine which their clergy hasn’t but should have.

Pathetic.

You can't even adequately defend your false belief about Jesus.

 

[civic]

The one God of the scriptures is immortal. He hasn’t died and he will never die.

Time to refute the unitarian strawman. Jesus is the final authority not you.
Jesus said the Father has never been seen, who is invisible and immortal. He never said it was God who was immortal, its the Father.

John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.


John 6:46
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.


Col 1:15
He is the image of the invisible God,( the Father ) the firstborn over all creation.


1 Tim 1:17
17 Now to the King eternal, immortal,( the Father ) invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

 

[civic]

If one cannot teach monotheism then they cannot teach trinitarianism. The two go hand in hand together.

 

[Fred]

John 6:46
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

Since no one has seen the Father (John 6:46), but God was seen (Exodus 24:10-11), then who does Matthias say was seen?

 

[Matthias]

Time to refute the unitarian strawman. Jesus is the final authority not you.
Jesus said the Father has never been seen, who is invisible and immortal. He never said it was God who was immortal, its the Father.

John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.


John 6:46
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.


Col 1:15
He is the image of the invisible God,( the Father ) the firstborn over all creation.


1 Tim 1:17
17 Now to the King eternal, immortal,( the Father ) invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Every verse you quoted is compatible with and fully supports Jewish monotheism, not trinitarianism.

You haven’t refuted Jewish monotheism. Trinitarianism destroys it, when trinitarianism is believed.

 

[Fred]

Every verse you quoted is compatible with and fully supports Jewish monotheism, not trinitarianism.

Continues to dodge post 97.

 

[civic]

Since no one has seen the Father (John 6:46), but God was seen (Exodus 24:10-11), then who does Matthias say was seen?

that is the uinitarians dilemma - between a rock and a hard place. they have no biblical answer only unbiblical opinions.