The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

[TibiasDad]

According to you, the divine nature makes someone God. According to Scripture, Christians have the divine nature. What you seem to believe is not orthodox Trinitarianism. Do you belong to the Latter-Day Saints?

2 Peter 1
4Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

“Partakers of” does not make one divine as a matter of being. The nature of our being, our state of existence is human; the quality of that being/state of existence, is either holy or unholy, of divine quality or inferior quality.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

According to you, the divine nature makes someone God. According to Scripture, Christians have the divine nature. What you seem to believe is not orthodox Trinitarianism. Do you belong to the Latter-Day Saints?

2 Peter 1
4Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Another thought, is that we partake of the divine nature of God; we are able to glean from the divine nature of God what we need to become like him in our quality of living.

We can never be, in this existence, fully divine in being; that is, impeccably perfect!
We will never be absolutely divine, because part of being absolutely divine is being uncreated.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

When God and Jesus are spoke of in the same sentence, it's intuitive they are not the same person.

Good, because we do not believe they are one person. They are one God!

Doug

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Good, because we do not believe they are one person. They are one God!

Doug

If God and Jesus are treated as having separate minds and wills, how can Jesus be God?
TibiasDad is not Pancho Frijoles because each of us has a separate mind…a separate will.
If I said that you are me or I am you, that would be absurd.

 

[Runningman]

It may be plausible on a superficial reading while neglecting critical passages. Too bad you took that path. The Bible is something that requires a deeper and careful study, not a superficial one.

That is pure ignorance expressed. Sure scripture can benefit people who read it at a simple level, but the prophets, for example, have written complex material that requires careful analysis. If you showed ability at the deeper level, you first would find your errors but you also could possibly be convincing.

Who ever gave you the authority to create an entirely new branch of reason and logic though? No one in the world follows the trinitarian idea of sons not being sons and humans being god. That was a paganistic idea, but it certainly never existed in Judeo-Christian culture, historically speaking. The earliest examples of Unitarians are the Jews. They explained clearly that God is one person named YHWH.

 

[Runningman]

“Partakers of” does not make one divine as a matter of being. The nature of our being, our state of existence is human; the quality of that being/state of existence, is either holy or unholy, of divine quality or inferior quality.

Doug

I had a feeling you would try to lawyer your way out of this, but the word for "partake" in 2 Peter 1:4 means partner, sharer, companion, or participant which implies there is more than one party involved, i.e., God and Christians.

So if you insist that partaking of the divine nature does not make one divine in their being, even though 2 Peter 1:4 is about "sharing" the divine nature, then you must also adopt the position that God is not divine. See my point?

 

[Runningman]

Another thought, is that we partake of the divine nature of God; we are able to glean from the divine nature of God what we need to become like him in our quality of living.

We can never be, in this existence, fully divine in being; that is, impeccably perfect!
We will never be absolutely divine, because part of being absolutely divine is being uncreated.

Doug

What you suggest is a superficial charade and lip service where, outwardly, one is merely living out an act of having the divine nature without actually being divine. This is pretty much antithetical to the message in the Bible. The divine nature that people can have is real, not just about moving through the motions and putting on a show. I believe this will be clearer from the previous point I made about it in comment #2266.

 

[Runningman]

Good, because we do not believe they are one person. They are one God!

Doug

God is a person, not a status, substance, or essence shared among three persons.

 

[mikesw]

Who ever gave you the authority to create an entirely new branch of reason and logic though? No one in the world follows the trinitarian idea of sons not being sons and humans being god. That was a paganistic idea, but it certainly never existed in Judeo-Christian culture, historically speaking. The earliest examples of Unitarians are the Jews. They explained clearly that God is one person named YHWH.

You might notice that God is greater than creation and only conveys details about his existence in an analogical sense to humanity. The Israel people had also had wondered about passages where heavenly encounters in scripture reflected interaction of two figures who both appeared as God. Also, historically, Jews often worshiped other gods and thus were not monotheistic in practice. Nor is there a pagan background similar to what we see in the Trinity.
You are wrong on each point you are trying to push here except that of the Shema that speaks of God's oneness. So your argument here fails on all points except recognizing the oneness of God, which is not in dispute.

 

[MTMattie]

Well, that doesn't really work either because the nature of God doesn't make someone God. The divine nature is something you can have also. It should be the standard for all Christians according to 2 Peter 1:4. There is a lot to say about having the same righteousness as God, though it's unpopular. The bible does say to be holy as God is holy and to be perfect as He is perfect. So the argument about Jesus and God having a singular name and thus they having a singular nature doesn't really help make the point when Christians have that same nature as well. So by that logic, a prayer to God would become a prayer to me for example. Ideas can be taken to an extreme and sorta stop making sense. It's the red flag to turn back.

Also, Jesus doesn't have the authority of God in the Bible. For example, Jesus doesn't know when he return according to Matthew 24:36 and Acts 1:7. He also doesn't have authority over God according to 1 Corinthians 15:27 and other verses that speak of Jesus belonging to God and God being the head of Jesus. Actually there are numerous verses about people being given authority to do the same things Jesus does. For example, there is Revelation 3:21 where people will sit with Jesus on his throne. There is a verse about saints judging the world. There is evidence in Matthew 9:6-8 that says God gave authority to the men to forgive sins.

So I believe if we focus too much on how Jesus is different we may miss that we can be "heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ" as Paul said in Romains 8:17. So I will leave you with a question... what does it mean to be an Heir of God and a Co-Heir with Christ?

WHO WAS/IS THE WORD??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/

 

[MTMattie]

God is a person, not a status, substance, or essence shared among three persons.

PROVE IT................................................................ PROVE GOD IS A PERSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Peterlag]

Your argument is not very convincing, even after all this practice you have gotten.

Think of it this way. You're standing holding nothing in your hand. Then you ask me to prove there's nothing there.

 

[Peterlag]

A Good Read...