Runningman
Well-known member
So there are a lot of sons of God who are not God in the Bible. Jesus is also a Son of God, therefore being a Son of God doesn't mean someone is God.
Salvation and Unitarians
- Thread starter praise_yeshua
- Start date
Runningman
Well-known member
Revelation has so much imagery in it. Not a book for non-understanding literalists to distort. You should be more respectful to the Scriptures.
Runningman
Well-known member
I directly answered you when you wrote your comment to me yesterday. After that you said I am dodging. Reads like you're scared to actually engage with me. The "dodge" accusation has become your go-to intellectually lazy cop out to excuse yourself from a debate.
If that's your excuse for an answer then I pity the people that you may happen to teach.
Runningman
Well-known member
And here you are still talking about me rather than the real issues in Scripture.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
I'm not a "literalist". You have no idea......
However, everything has to be discerned by realty. You're living in your own imaginations. You imaginations are not real at all.
Have you ever stopped to consider that we are most "like God" in our imaginations? We can do ANYTHING in our imaginations.
Now in "realty"........ not so much.
"Imagination" is were speech comes from. Imagination is where false speech comes from. Evil imaginations such as you have about Jesus Christ is on "full display" in your words/imaginations.
You're "imagining a vain thing".
That is why Paul referenced "casting down imaginations".
You speak from the heart. Your heart is evil.
Runningman
Well-known member
I'm just speaking concerning Scripture. I have no preference about the alleged deity of Jesus nor am I hostile to the idea. If Jesus is God then the Bible would just need to say so in no uncertain terms. Since it doesn't say Jesus is God, but also aggressively denies it, I am forced to take the position that Jesus is not God. This is not even my favorite topic. Would love to come here and just chat about the Excellence of God all day, but in trying to do that we cannot even agree who God is and I am not going to participate in idolatry. With that being said, if Jesus was God then I would believe it with a smile and a happy heart, but he isn't. I didn't write the Bible. So as far as my heart goes, clearly you have no idea where I am coming from.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
In fact, Unitarianism should not be an effort to deny who is not God, but to affirm who is.
Are Unitarians interested in denying that Caesar was God?
There is no single verse in the Bible that explicitly says that Ceasar was not God... is there a need for it?
The Bible points out to who is the True and Only God, and by default no other person is God, Caesar included.
Having said that, we as Unitarians should exert self-criticism and ask ourselves whether we are giving the impression that we are obsessed in denying Jesus' deity, instead of upholding the deity of He who Jesus called "My God".
That's what Thomas referred to Jesus as in John 20:28.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
This is a good opportunity to put in practice what I wrote in post 548.
I won't spend time in denying, but in affirming.
1. I will affirm that The Father was the God of Thomas and all his companions, according to Jesus' own explicit statement (John 20:17)
2. I will affirm that every time the apostles had the names "Father" and "Jesus" on the same sentence and wanted to use the titles "God" and "Lord", they always gave the title "God" to the Father and the title "Lord" to Jesus. (30 verses already quoted)
3. I will affirm that, in view of points 1 and 2, Thomas was addressing Jesus when he exclaimed "My Lord!", and Thomas was addressing The Father, who had raised Jesus from dead, when he exclaimed "My God!".
No proof for that, especially when both "Lord" and "God" are said to Jesus.
"Jesus" is not used in John 20:28 so your proof in number 2 does not apply.
Which doesn't cancel out that Jesus is the God of Thomas in John 20:28.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
That's correct. John 20:28 is not included in the 30 verses I am referring to.
That's why, since neither "Jesus" nor "Father" are mentioned in that verse, it is helpful to resort to all verses in which "Father" and "Jesus" are mentioned in the same sentence. That way we can check
- who receives the title of "God" and who receives the title "Lord"
- whether those titles are swapped
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
You're right, under the assumption that "God" is a category or class in which several individuals can fit.
You are not right, under the assumption that God is a Person. If God is a Person, has a single mind, a single will.
My arguments are based on the assumption that God is a Person ( a "He") because
- This is the way that the Bible speaks about God
- This is the way that Jesus, in particular, speaks about God
- This is the way that we speak about God
I'm aware of that. His essence is and will always be infinitely out of the scope of our limited mind.
Still, I choose to think in God in that way.
No, it isn't because it's not the same.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Certainly it is not a proof. It is an inference from points 1 and 2.
Points 1 and 2, however, are facts, not inferences.
Certainly point 3 could be wrong. I just think it very unlikely to be wrong in view of the unequivocal veracity of points 1 and 2.
Other alternative explanations, which we could explore, are:
1. Jesus didn't know Thomas' true beliefs. Thomas had been hiding them from Jesus.
2. The God of Thomas was the Father at the time Jesus resurrected, but then Thomas changed his mind. Two suboptions from this are
2.1 Thomas changed his mind within the period of 8 days.
2.2 Thomas changed his mind when he realized Jesus was alive
3. In John 20:17 Jesus was saying who their God should be, regardless of their current beliefs. Then we have other 3 suboptions
3.1 The woman did not communicate this to the apostles
3.2 The woman did it, but since Thomas was away, Thomas didn't get the message.
3.3 The woman did it, and Thomas got the message, but he didn't believe in the woman nor in the message.
4. Jesus and his disciples did not share with the rest of Israel the idea of God. There are 2 suboptions here4.1 They thought that "God" meant "divine", an attribute or class. Therefore, YHWH was a title that could be given to several persons. What the Shema Israel of the Torah really meant was: "Listen, Israel, YHWH our God, is a Council of Divine persons who act as One"
4.2. They thought that The Father and the Son were in reality the same Person. Therefore, when Jesus said "I am ascending to My Father", he meant "I am ascending to another aspect of Me".
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
That's true. Not always.
Just more than 95% of the cases... and if we consider the subgroup of "words spoken by Jesus Himself", 100% of the cases.
For example, John 3:16
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life."
Since Jesus fully knows the hearts of all people the above is impossible.
Similar threads
