praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Never said it said specifically said "Trinity". I can see you're upset with the mistake you made.
Is Jesus the Christ a human Person?
- Thread starter Matthias
- Start date
Never said it said specifically said "Trinity". I can see you're upset with the mistake you made.
Wrangler
Well-known member
He said he would, not that he did. See the difference?
It is amazing how trinitarian's eisegesis takes everything as "support" Romans 10:9 does not say that Jesus raised himself from the dead as a requirement for salvation. You want to take this to be taken in a way language is not used.
If Romans 10:9 meant that Jesus raised himself from the dead it would be written that way. It doesn't. "God" in his unitarian nature is the subject of the sentence, doing the action of raising - not Jesus.
Still, you don't get this basic point. Even if Jesus were God, a trinity it would not make.
Wrangler
Well-known member
Now, you are just playing word games.
Romans 10:9 does not include something like The nature of God is a trinity - consisting of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit who are co-equal, co-substantial and co-eternal - and if you do not believe this, you cannot be saved but are damned to hell forever. Sorry but it's just not there, which shows your claim is bunk.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
So Jesus lied in John 2:19?.... There goes the Atonement.... Not that I believe you can actually establish the Atonement with an simple human person dying. You can't. However, that is what you certainly believe.
I'm glad you admit that Romans 10:9 can actually teach that Jesus is God. We are making progress.
Last edited:
civic
Well-known member
if He said He would do it and did not then He lied.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Me playing games with words? Geesh.......
Okay... I'll restate......
Romans 10:9 establishes Jesus as God.
When you want to discuss the council of the Spirit?
Complete
Well-known member
Hello @Matthias,
How can we who are finite, understand what is infinite. We can only use the words and imagery that we have been given in Scripture in order to understand as best we can.
The Father, The Son, and, The Holy Spirit, are seen working as ONE in the Bible, ( in saying that I have probably strayed inadvertently into another category), and instead of rejoicing in it, these precious truths are being pulled apart. Such words as unitarian and trinitarian are an anathema, and should be avoided: they, like all labelling are divisive, and are tools of the Adversary: Prideful words of man's devising, which create division. 'I am of Paul', 'I am of Cephas' - carnal reasoning. Not of Christ. Not honouring in any way, shape or form.
Shameful!!
In Christ Jesus
Chris
Last edited:
Matthias
Well-known member
“The anhypostasia, impersonality, or, to speak more accurately, the enhypostasia, of the human nature of Christ. This is a difficult point, but a necessary link in the orthodox doctrine of the God-Man; for otherwise we must have two persons in Christ, and, after the incarnation, a fourth person, and that a human, in the divine Trinity.“
(Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church Chapter IX, §142. The Orthodox Christology - Analysis and Criticism)
HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH*
www.ccel.org
Matthias
Well-known member
The post-biblical formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity went beyond what is written in scripture.
civic
Well-known member
Which is why I always say first and foremost I'm a biblical trin.
I don't necessarily disagree with the Creeds but they are not the inspired word of God. So they are secondary sources and do not have the same level of authority as Scripture although many put them on the same playing field with anathema claims.
Matthias
Well-known member
Which is why I always say first and foremost I'm a biblical trin.
As one trinitarian on another forum pointed out, I’m an “elemental trinitarian”.
Matthias
Well-known member
This is what trinitarians should be explaining to “trinitarians” who believe Jesus is a human person.
Johann
Well-known member
Act_14:11 And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.
Rom_6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom_8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Php_2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
Was made in the likeness of men (ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος)
Lit., becoming in, etc. Notice the choice of the verb, not was, but became: entered into a new state. Likeness. The word does not imply the reality of our Lord's humanity, μορφή form implied the reality of His deity. That fact is stated in the form of a servant. Neither is εἰκών image employed, which, for our purposes, implies substantially the same as μορφή. See on Col_1:15. As form of a servant exhibits the inmost reality of Christ's condition as a servant - that He became really and essentially the servant of men (Luk_22:27) - so likeness of men expresses the fact that His mode of manifestation resembled what men are.
This leaves room for the assumption of another side of His nature - the divine - in the likeness of which He did not appear. As He appealed to men, He was like themselves, with a real likeness; but this likeness to men did not express His whole self. The totality of His being could not appear to men, for that involved the form of God. Hence the apostle views Him solely as He could appear to men. All that was possible was a real and complete likeness to humanity. What He was essentially and eternally could not enter into His human mode of existence. Humanly He was like men, but regarded with reference to His whole self, He was not identical with man, because there was an element of His personality which did not dwell in them - equality with God. Hence the statement of His human manifestation is necessarily limited by this fact, and is confined to likeness and does not extend to identity. “To affirm likeness is at once to assert similarity and to deny sameness” (Dickson). See on Rom_8:3.
VWS.
ὁμοιώματι
Transliteration: homoiōmati
Morphology: N-DNS
Noun - Dative Neuter Singular
Strong's no.: G3667 (ὁμοίωμα)
Meaning: (originally: a thing made like something else), a likeness, or rather: form; a similitude.
J.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Which is why they often ignore this fact to attack secondary sources. It is easier for them than dealing with the Scriptures themselves.
civic
Well-known member
Bingo
Matthias
Well-known member
Do you believe Jesus is a human person?
Matthias
Well-known member
The secondary sources have only the authority of the Church which produced them; the opinions of men who went beyond what is written in scripture. Throw them away.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
A detailed response yet you choose to overlook such to imply you can not determine the answer from the response?
I can tell what the answer is. Why can't you?
Johann
Well-known member
Is that all there is to Yeshua HaMashiach?
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Nonsense. I believe in the Individual Priesthood of the Believer. I have direct access to God. I can speak for myself. I can appeal to the words of the Apostles and God Himself. I don't need you to try to put someone between me and God. Which is why I have studied Theology throughout my adult like. I care to make the Truth my own.
Which in my opinion is one of the reasons God has crafted this life the way He has.
I have long believed that beliefs are meaningless until you actually make them your own. That is what true belief means.
Similar threads
