Runningman
Active Member
God isn't in Psalm 45:6,7; hat's king Solomon. Does that establish the divinity of king Solomon?
Jesus denied being God
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
I see you find King Solomon as the righteous gold standard to the extent of denying the divinity of Christ. You seem to find Solomon "fairer than the sons of men" (v2). You find him the example of righteousness(v6) and a victorious king (v4). But none of these are scripturally found in Israel history concerning Solomon. The constant effort of unitarians is to exalt man while diminishing who Christ is.
Runningman
Active Member
Why did you reply only to expose you are evading the question? I'll answer for you since your answers are always about as clear as mud.
Yes, Psalm 45:6,7 is traditionally believed to be about king Solomon who, according to trinitarians, David said "Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever, and justice is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you above your companions with the oil of joy"
So is king Solomon deity or not? Short answer, no. So when the same exact words are applied to the Jesus, it doesn't mean Jesus is deity. Next fallacy.
charismaticlady
Active Member
Sorry, my friend but 1 John 4:1-3 is about the Gnostics who believed that Jesus came only in Spirit, therefore, any sins of the flesh, didn't count, only sins of their spirit. They even taught grace was to be proved by raping each other's wives every day. That was the sin of the Nicolaitans. This also explains 1 John 1:6, 8 and 10. They didn't believe their sins of darkness in the flesh were not sins at all. But they were in the church spreading false doctrine. Another reason for John to use "we." John didn't mean that applied to everyone in the church as is another false doctrine, but not one you hold to nor I, but Calvinists do, and most with western literal thinking. They are known for taking verses out of context, and standing on one verse instead of the whole Word of God.
But you know this already. Those are not Trinitarians and you know it. Nice try, though hysterical. Thanks for the good laugh.
Last edited:
Peterlag
Active Member
You missed the point. I'm using 1 John as an example.Sorry, my friend but 1 John 4:1-3 is about the Gnostics who believed that Jesus came only in Spirit, therefore, any sins of the flesh, didn't count, only sins of their spirit. They even taught grace was to be proved by raping each other's wives every day. That was the sin of the Nicolaitans. This also explains 1 John 1:6, 8 and 10. They didn't believe their sins of darkness in the flesh were not sins at all. But they were in the church spreading false doctrine. Another reason for John to use "we." John didn't mean that applied to everyone in the church as is another false doctrine, but not one you hold to nor I, but Calvinists do, and most with western literal thinking. They are known for taking verses out of context, and standing on one verse instead of the whole Word of God.
But you know this already. Those are not Trinitarians and you know it. Nice try, though hysterical. Thanks for the good laugh.
charismaticlady
Active Member
I know, but no Trinitarian believes as 1 John 4:2 says. So you have no point. Understand? Trintarian Christians are not Gnostic Nicolaitans! They do not think as the Gnostics thought. I just thought any verse used from 1 John 4:1-3 was hysterical. You're smarter than that. You may fool a new Christian, but not anyone who knows the Word of God. I didn't even have to look up your verse to see what it says in context. I know the Word of God, especially 1 John. I just love John's books.
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
But in Trinitarian philosophy, you don't believe Jesus Christ came in the flesh. You believe God came in the flesh, and that Jesus Christ is a human, but God is not a human, correct? You essentially believe Jesus Christ is God incarnate and God's name isn't Jesus, but rather is YHWH. So trinitarian beliefs are anti-Christ from a Biblical perspective. I am sure you feel differently, but just wanted to point out the obvious.
i guess you are happy enough in misunderstandings. You did not even explore the problems with your view or what you call the "traditional view"
You are proven wrong since conversely speaking that lack of applicability to Solomon means the text refers to the deity of Jesus. Maybe I'll be ready for the next fallacy of your beliefs.
Runningman
Active Member
So I am wrong about king Solomon? King Solomon is Lord God Almighty to you?
If you think he was totally righteous and divine, that would be your opinion. I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion though. I suppose you also would think of a donkey as a purebred race horse
Runningman
Active Member
David wrote of king Solomon "Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever, and justice is the scepter of Your kingdom..." but Solomon isn't God right? I hope you don't think he is. So why do you hold a different interpretation for the Son in Hebrews 1:8? Care to explain?
Is it with total ignorance of prophecy and scripture that you pose that question or are you just trying to trick people into false doctrines? You further diminish who God is by nullifying prophecy --saying God is not able to give prophecy in the way he wishes.
You have not answered how you find Solomon to be the all-righteous king and victorious with no background of battles. Once you get past that then you might have a clue about what you really should ask. It would also be totally useless to apply that Psalm in Hebrews 1 if it were about Solomon.
You really have to clean up your interpretation methods if you want to provide decent arguments.
Last edited:
Peterlag
Active Member
Here's another one for those of you who did not like 1 John.
John 8:24
...ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he,
Since Jesus is God. Then the above verse reads like the following to the Trinitarian.
...ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am God,
Runningman
Active Member
So your argument is essentially deny that Psalm 45:6,7 is about king Solomon? The whole chapter is about the royal wedding of Solomon. It's difficult to take you credibly if you have to resort to just flat out denying the Bible.
Read what comes after verse 8 in Hebrews 1.
9You have loved righteousness
and hated wickedness;
therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
above Your companions with the oil of joy.”
See the difference above? One gives the anointing and exaltation above his companions, the other is anointed and exalted. One of them is God and the other isn't God. If Jesus were already the Most High God in the same sense as the One who anointed/exalted him, then he wouldn't need to be anointed an exalted above anyone since he would already be in the highest position. Someone less than or equal to another cannot exalt someone else higher than them.
So in the context your interpretation of Hebrews 1:8 is not a sound or rightly divided interpretation.
You remain totally confused about what the verse says. That is odd that you, as a hyperliteralist, now seek to ascribe this verse to be about Solomon. There is no evidence of that nor does Solomon seem relevant in Hebrews. You end up making up ideas to deny God's ability to prophesy through people.
You have to deny how this speaks to God in what you clearly missed in highlighting stuff. It essentially says of the Son "YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER," This is explicit for identifying the deity of Christ. You miss the obvious. Of course Christ as deity is above his companions, if you realize this is not a pantheon of companion gods -- of such polytheism that you often assume in arguments against Christians.
You always prefer to demote Jesus and exalt humans. That is obvious in your interpretation here.
Maybe you heard that the deity of Christ makes sense of this but that being incarnate he carries a distinction from the Father. Actually I do not think you understand any of the passages you are quoting. Worse yet, you are arguing against a modalist view rather than a Christian understanding of the deity of Christ. You would desire that the Father not regard the Son higher than humans; that is pure denigration of both the Father and the Son.
More accurately we can note you just do not understand the passages you are trying to use to deny who Christ is.
Common unitarian error of failing to recognize words like "ἐγώ εἰμι" only refer to his deity. Context matters, except to the unitarians in their effort to blur texts through hyperliteralist readings.
charismaticlady
Active Member
Maybe that is your understanding, or misunderstanding. But Trinitarians believe Jesus is 100% God AND 100% human. I've heard it preached saying, "how anything can be 200% I don't know, but Jesus is."
and 1 John 4:1-3 is still wrong...
cc: @Peterlag
charismaticlady
Active Member
cc: @Runningman
Jesus embodies the full Godhead, Father, Word, Spirit. "For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" They are One God - "He." Just as humans are one person. 1 Thes. 5:23 (spirit, soul and body) but three distinct parts. We are made in Their likeness. Elohim is a plural word. I cannot live without my mind. I cannot live without my breath. I cannot live without my body. "His name shall be called Emmanuel, "God with us." My body is still part of my person, just as Jesus is part of One God. He was called the Word in heaven.
John 8:23 And He said to them, “You are from beneath; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”
25 Then they said to Him, “Who are You?”
And Jesus said to them, “Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I heard from Him.”
27 They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father.
28 Then Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things. 29 And He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things that please Him.”
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
The point is that Hebrews 1:8 has no reference to deity for Jesus. Going back to Psalm 45:6,7 where king Solomon is referred to as elohim, it doesn't mean someone is Lord God Almighty, especially when a human is called this in the Bible. It also shouldn't be capitalized because king Solomon isn't God, but rather is a god among men. Elohim can also be translated as a judge or magistrate in the kingly sense, bother which describe Solomon and Jesus precisely, but to say Solomon and Jesus are both Lord God Almighty is way out of line and cannot be accurate.
So, no, you have not provided anything conclusive or convincing with your Hebrews 1:8 interpretation, especially since your premise is undone by Hebrews 1:9 where the "God" being referenced in Hebrews 1:8 has a God and isn't already anointed and exalted above his companions. This runs entirely contrary to trinitarian theology and can't be band-aided. The only sensible conclusion that works well with Scripture is that Jesus isn't actually God. You're misunderstanding Scripture and context.
Similar threads
