Jesus denied being God

[praise_yeshua]

John 1:1 is not a teaching. A teaching is a whole couple of paragraphs or a chapter. Not half verses or a word here and another word someplace else. Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression... His reason, purpose and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God's self-expression or communication of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation and especially the heavens. It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture. Most notably it has come into being through His Son. The logos is the expression of God and is His communication of Himself just as a "word" is an outward expression of a person's thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son and thus it's perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the "Word." Jesus is an outward expression of God's reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason we call revelation "a word from God" and the Bible "the Word of God."

If we understand that the logos is God's expression... His plan, purpose, reason and wisdom. Then it is clear they were with Him "in the beginning." Scripture says God's wisdom was "from the beginning" and it was common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. The fact that the logos "became" flesh shows it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative "existence" as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the "word" in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a "spirit-book" somehow in eternity past, but came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down.

I asked if you want to deal with this in a different topic relative to this single verse. Details are important. You're just repeating what someone said. That is all it is to you. Just words that confirm your bias. That is what is to most people.

For example, it took about 2 seconds to find your reference above. They came from

John 1:1 – But what about John 1:1? - BiblicalUnitarian.com

Does John 1:1 support the Doctrine of the Trinity? Does it prove that Jesus is God? John W. Schoenheit breaks down this popular verse - The meaning of John 1:1

www.biblicalunitarian.com

Is this your website or are you just posting content without permission?

There are many "Google" theologians in this world. I've never meet one that actually knew what they claimed to know.

Use your own words. Make your own arguments. I'm not going to debate this with someone copying and pasting the theology of another. I've spent decades doing this. You don't know the times I've gotten into a debate to only have someone else abandon the topic because they were only "copy and paste" theologians.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I can "bow the knee" in my heart and reference Jesus Christ without a single outer confirmation of such.

That's what I thought, and I think that's great.
Now, if you allow me to go further, it might be useful to explain ourselves (even if we can't explain it to our readers) what we mean by "bowing the knee in my heart"

Jesus told his disciples to pray in their closet. Have you forgotten this?

Honestly I had forgotten... but I am happy I do just that. I pray alone in my bedroom, door closed. Well, I must confess I often take my dog inside with me. I call him, as a joke, a "baha'i dog" since he likes to sit next to me as I prostrate. "Let's pray to our Creator", I tell him.

 

[praise_yeshua]

You walk in your flesh and I in the spirit. So you cannot understand what I write. I am not a sinner as you suggest. I am made in the righteousness of God in him. In him is in the spirit.

2 Corinthians 5: 17, 21
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Wow. What a stellar argument. "I'm a Christian and you're not"........

Did you learn that argument in kindergarten?

The fact is, your still a sinner. In this flesh dwells "no good thing". Your flesh and Spirit is contrary to one another. You're not perfectly keeping anything. Just another in a long line of pretenders.

 

[praise_yeshua]

That's what I thought, and I think that's great.
Now, if you allow me to go further, it might be useful to explain ourselves (even if we can't explain it to our readers) what we mean by "bowing the knee in my heart"



Honestly I had forgotten... but I am happy I do just that. I pray alone in my bedroom, door closed. Well, I must confess I often take my dog inside with me. I call it, joking a "baha'i dog" since it likes to sit next to me as I prostrate. "Let's pray to your Creator", I tell him.

Pray everywhere and at every time. You seem to be the more reasonable person of the current Unitarians in the conversation.

I give you my honest assessment of where we are at this moment. I see you're trying to be reasonable in areas that you have no real "absolutes". While I tend to do the same at times, this is one area that I find vitally necessary to understand relative to our experience with God.

If I were to sum up my theology, I would call it "The God Experience". I would detail it in writing but I have been doing just that in conversation throughout the internet for many many years. Every time I go to try to put pen to an exhaustive narrative of that theology, I just can't. It is not that I can't define it. I've come to realize it must be lived. It must shared through a living sacrifice or it is nothing more than empty words to someone else. I hope to pass it on to my own children. I hope to pass it on to others of the faith through conversation and experience.

Everyone wants a "book" to read to know God. There is already one out there. However, God is not limited by paper and pen. He reaches out to all people of all generations. He is not "far from us all". The Gospel must be lived.

 

[Peterlag]

Wow. What a stellar argument. "I'm a Christian and you're not"........

Did you learn that argument in kindergarten?

The fact is, your still a sinner. In this flesh dwells "no good thing". Your flesh and Spirit is contrary to one another. You're not perfectly keeping anything. Just another in a long line of pretenders.

That is true that there's no good thing in the flesh. But I am not in the flesh. I'm in the spirit.

Romans 8:6-9
For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

 

[Peterlag]

I asked if you want to deal with this in a different topic relative to this single verse. Details are important. You're just repeating what someone said. That is all it is to you. Just words that confirm your bias. That is what is to most people.

For example, it took about 2 seconds to find your reference above. They came from

John 1:1 – But what about John 1:1? - BiblicalUnitarian.com

Does John 1:1 support the Doctrine of the Trinity? Does it prove that Jesus is God? John W. Schoenheit breaks down this popular verse - The meaning of John 1:1

www.biblicalunitarian.com

Is this your website or are you just posting content without permission?

There are many "Google" theologians in this world. I've never meet one that actually knew what they claimed to know.

Use your own words. Make your own arguments. I'm not going to debate this with someone copying and pasting the theology of another. I've spent decades doing this. You don't know the times I've gotten into a debate to only have someone else abandon the topic because they were only "copy and paste" theologians.

John and I went to the same Bible college. I'm not repeating. We were taught the same data.

 

[Peterlag]

What about John 1:1...

John 1:1 – But what about John 1:1? - BiblicalUnitarian.com

Does John 1:1 support the Doctrine of the Trinity? Does it prove that Jesus is God? John W. Schoenheit breaks down this popular verse - The meaning of John 1:1

www.biblicalunitarian.com

 

[mikesw]

John and I went to the same Bible college. I'm not repeating. We were taught the same data.

What college was that? I would advise people not to go to that one.

One problem or concern I see with that explanation (in the text) is that Jews were a minority of the believers such that the gospel would not likely be addressed to their mindset. That is just a quick impression. I might read more of it. But we did see someone earlier (runningman maybe?) who shared from Meyer's commentary to say Logos did not speak of Jesus. However, Meyer's expresses it does. So that argument flopped badly when not addressing Meyer's full view.

 

[Runningman]

Hi @Runningman and @praise_yeshua
Hi everyone

In these debates, two things tend to happen

• Unitarians suppose that Trinitarians are rejecting God or teaching idolatry, so they often get outraged
• Trinitarians suppose that Unitarians are rejecting or degrading Jesus, so they often get outraged

Both suppositions, if true, would mean hell. Not just hell, but a hell "well deserved". This means that the parties in question would not consider unfair that God punishes the other party with fire. They would consider it unquestioned divine justice.

So, we should better be extremely prudent in making these judgements.
If we are making the worst possible judgement on our fellow (what can be worse than damnation!) we are going to be judged by the same measurement.

Trinitarians could not possible reject the Father, since the Father is pleased to see that a Trinitarian loves his Son and follows his teachings.
As I am trying to prove, a statement "I worship Jesus" has no other meaning, in practice (not in theory) that following Jesus as Lord over any other competing Lord.

In this Forum, however, we all are fond of theory. We are passionate about doctrines.

I'm gonna use a strong metaphor here. My apologies in advance:
To get aroused by the sight of a beautiful woman is something healthy for a man, a reaction that is a gift of God.
To get addicted to pornography perverts that gift and lead us astray from the things that really matter.

Well, theology is a wonderful gift to the mind, but addiction to theology can be like addition to pornography. It may lead us to despise the grace of God and make of our interpretation of the Scriptures a golden calf around which we dance.

I don't know. To be perfectly honest, I am not outraged about that. I probably was at the beginning, years ago, when I discovered that Christians don't normally believe the Bible; I was naive then.

I will admit it is frustrating not being able to communicate effectively with one another since our views on the same subject seem so opposed. I do think there can be some judgment coming. I would like someone to tell me personally if they thought I was sinning. When I have been charged with sin, I typically ask what I did because it was never my intention to sin. That way, I can at least get a chance to pray and ask the Father about what I should or shouldn’t be doing. God wants to answer those kinds of prayers regarding sin and judgment, so I would know the answer soon. It'll also help me gauge who is hypersensitive or so weak that the truth is a stumbling block to them.

I also don't want anyone to go to hell or be put in fire. It makes me sad to think there are people who believe God does that when, apparently, He never even considered it.

As for theology becoming an idol, that is 100% possible. Really, anything can become an idol; even Jesus can become an idol because he isn't God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Pray everywhere and at every time. You seem to be the more reasonable person of the current Unitarians in the conversation.

We all fluctuate into being more reasonable and less reasonable. We are all emotional beings as well.
It will be interesting in the future to witness a debate about the Trinity between AI bots.
They would be programmed to keep objective and logical until the end.
My guess is that, regardless of who won such debate between AI programs, human beings witnessing the debate would leave it with a sense of emptiness and dissatisfaction.

We cannot "deduce" God by reasoning, and a logical "deduction" would not bring us the happiness of his presence.
So I find your comment on "The God Experience" really interesting and inspiring.

 

[mikesw]

We all fluctuate into being more reasonable and less reasonable. We are all emotional beings as well.
It will be interesting in the future to witness a debate about the Trinity between AI bots.
They would be programmed to keep objective and logical until the end.
My guess is that, regardless of who won such debate between AI programs, human beings witnessing the debate would leave it with a sense of emptiness and dissatisfaction.

We cannot "deduce" God by reasoning, and a logical "deduction" would not bring us the happiness of his presence.
So I find your comment on "The God Experience" really interesting and inspiring.

AI just reassembles information that it has gathered. It also runs on guidelines about the value of sources and what might be more conventional than another idea. We hardly need AI as an arbiter here since the unitarians do not appear to interpret the divinity passages decently.

 

[praise_yeshua]

We all fluctuate into being more reasonable and less reasonable. We are all emotional beings as well.
It will be interesting in the future to witness a debate about the Trinity between AI bots.
They would be programmed to keep objective and logical until the end.
My guess is that, regardless of who won such debate between AI programs, human beings witnessing the debate would leave it with a sense of emptiness and dissatisfaction.

We cannot "deduce" God by reasoning, and a logical "deduction" would not bring us the happiness of his presence.
So I find your comment on "The God Experience" really interesting and inspiring.

My ultimate goal to force every man to be "fully persuaded in their own minds". Most people don't even have enough information to have an educated opinion about much of anything.

Emotions are where we sense God through our own "faculties". There are good emotions and there are bad emotions. I agree there is no escaping knowing God without emotions. Emotions are where we find meaning.....

However, we can be entirely wrong and emotionally invested in things that are very wrong.

 

[praise_yeshua]

AI just reassembles information that it has gathered. It also runs on guidelines about the value of sources and what might be more conventional than another idea. We hardly need AI as an arbiter here since the unitarians do not appear to interpret the divinity passages decently.

AI reflects its creator. They is why they are all different to one degree or another. They do what they're told.

 

[praise_yeshua]

That is true that there's no good thing in the flesh. But I am not in the flesh. I'm in the spirit.

Romans 8:6-9
For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Are you still going to die? You know you are. Which proves that you're still in the flesh. You don't understand Paul's argument. Nothing new.

Your flesh hasn't changed at all. Wait till your old and weaker than you are now. Who knows what you'll do. You just might cuss God due to your physical illnesses.

Your flesh isn't redeemed.

 

[praise_yeshua]

John and I went to the same Bible college. I'm not repeating. We were taught the same data.

You're saying the same things identically. Which means you're repeating. That Bible college sure has you trained to repeat them.

 

[TomL]

You can't argue with me because I'm clearly exposing your lies. No need to tell yourself otherwise.



I know, you're the exception to this. Surprise for you......God tolerates us all. Even you. You're substantially different than @Pancho Frijoles

He should recognize this about you.



I believe Jesus is God. God has a perfect relationship with the Son. When you see the Son, you perfectly see the Father.

Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?




You're not worshipping the Father while rejecting Jesus Christ.

That is correct

John 5:23 (KJV 1900) — 23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I don't know. To be perfectly honest, I am not outraged about that. I probably was at the beginning, years ago, when I discovered that Christians don't normally believe the Bible; I was naive then.

I will admit it is frustrating not being able to communicate effectively with one another since our views on the same subject seem so opposed. I do think there can be some judgment coming. I would like someone to tell me personally if they thought I was sinning. When I have been charged with sin, I typically ask what I did because it was never my intention to sin. That way, I can at least get a chance to pray and ask the Father about what I should or shouldn’t be doing. God wants to answer those kinds of prayers regarding sin and judgment, so I would know the answer soon. It'll also help me gauge who is hypersensitive or so weak that the truth is a stumbling block to them.

I also don't want anyone to go to hell or be put in fire. It makes me sad to think there are people who believe God does that when, apparently, He never even considered it.

As for theology becoming an idol, that is 100% possible. Really, anything can become an idol; even Jesus can become an idol because he isn't God.

So the Bible says that Jesus is an idol? I'd like to know where that verse exists.

 

[praise_yeshua]

What about John 1:1...

John 1:1 – But what about John 1:1? - BiblicalUnitarian.com

Does John 1:1 support the Doctrine of the Trinity? Does it prove that Jesus is God? John W. Schoenheit breaks down this popular verse - The meaning of John 1:1

www.biblicalunitarian.com

Yeah. I posted that before you decided to come clean on what you were sharing.

Tell you what. Get the "new guy" in the youtube page they have to agree to a public unedited debate. I'll gladly correct him.

 

[TomL]

I don't know. To be perfectly honest, I am not outraged about that. I probably was at the beginning, years ago, when I discovered that Christians don't normally believe the Bible; I was naive then.

I will admit it is frustrating not being able to communicate effectively with one another since our views on the same subject seem so opposed. I do think there can be some judgment coming. I would like someone to tell me personally if they thought I was sinning. When I have been charged with sin, I typically ask what I did because it was never my intention to sin. That way, I can at least get a chance to pray and ask the Father about what I should or shouldn’t be doing. God wants to answer those kinds of prayers regarding sin and judgment, so I would know the answer soon. It'll also help me gauge who is hypersensitive or so weak that the truth is a stumbling block to them.

I also don't want anyone to go to hell or be put in fire. It makes me sad to think there are people who believe God does that when, apparently, He never even considered it.

As for theology becoming an idol, that is 100% possible. Really, anything can become an idol; even Jesus can become an idol because he isn't God.

John 1:1 (KJV 1900) — 1 IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 20:28 (KJV 1900) — 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Titus 2:13 (KJV 1900) — 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

2 Peter 1:1 (KJV 1900) — 1 SIMON Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

Isaiah 9:6 (KJV 1900) — 6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: And the government shall be upon his shoulder: And his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The bible does not agree with you

 

[TomL]

I asked if you want to deal with this in a different topic relative to this single verse. Details are important. You're just repeating what someone said. That is all it is to you. Just words that confirm your bias. That is what is to most people.

For example, it took about 2 seconds to find your reference above. They came from

John 1:1 – But what about John 1:1? - BiblicalUnitarian.com

Does John 1:1 support the Doctrine of the Trinity? Does it prove that Jesus is God? John W. Schoenheit breaks down this popular verse - The meaning of John 1:1

www.biblicalunitarian.com

Is this your website or are you just posting content without permission?

There are many "Google" theologians in this world. I've never meet one that actually knew what they claimed to know.

Use your own words. Make your own arguments. I'm not going to debate this with someone copying and pasting the theology of another. I've spent decades doing this. You don't know the times I've gotten into a debate to only have someone else abandon the topic because they were only "copy and paste" theologians.

It totally breaks down at

Philippians 2:5–8 (KJV 1900) — 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

does an impersonal thing have a mind?

does it think?

Can it act in humility?

Make itself of no reputation?