The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

[Pancho Frijoles]

The unitarian's Demise is that the doctrine is not even described or explained in the Bible lol. No one even took a moment to say "Now on the matter of the God being 1 person etc etc etc etc" None at all or anything close to that.

hope this helps !!!

Well, if you wrote a book about Mozart, calling him about 550 times "He" "him" "his", using singular tenses in verbs, and treating him as a person, narrating what he felt, what he wanted, what he hated, where he went, what he did to whom, why would anyone think that you considered "Mozart" to be class or collection of individuals?

Furthermore, if there were impostors out there claiming to be Mozart, and you explicitly wrote "There is only one and true Mozart", or " Mozart is one", why would anyone think that you considered "Mozart" to be a class, category or collection of musicians?

Would you need to write explicitly: "Beethoven was not Mozart", so that people who read your book could be sure that Beethoven was not Mozart?
If in your book you depict Beethoven referring to Mozart as "he", as another person... who could possibly believe that Beethoven was Mozart? What if your book narrated the encounter of Beethoven and Mozart in Vienna? What if your book told the story of a conversation in which Beethoven says to Mozart: "You are the only and true Mozart, and I am your musical heir"?

 

[synergy]

Just a clarification: Baha'is do not think we can directly see the Father. That's precisely one of the beauties and blessings of believing in the Manifestations of God. We "see" the Father's attributes (love, justice, wisdom, etc) through them.

Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure.

Regarding "Judaizers" I don't know which people you are specifically talking about, because as I mentioned before, the term was given to Christian converts who demanded the observance of the Law of Moses to be considered Christian. But if you meant Jews or Messianic Jews, none of them think they can see the Father directly.

Moses saw the back side of God.

Mormons do think that Joseph Smith saw the Father directly, and that he realized He has a physical body.

Ok.

Christian Unitarians, as far as I know, don't think they see the Father directly.

Again, Moses saw the back side of God. Is God the Father in their view?

 

[synergy]

Well, if you wrote a book about Mozart, calling him about 550 times "He" "him" "his", using singular tenses in verbs, and treating him as a person, narrating what he felt, what he wanted, what he hated, where he went, what he did to whom, why would anyone think that you considered "Mozart" to be class or collection of individuals?

With that type of thinking, then the phrase "the Word was God" would make you a modalist.

Furthermore, if there were impostors out there claiming to be Mozart, and you explicitly wrote "There is only one and true Mozart", or " Mozart is one", why would anyone think that you considered "Mozart" to be a class, category or collection of individuals?

Classes dictate what's truly common within a group. In your example, it would not be a class of "Mozart", it would be a class of "Imposter", aside from the true Mozart,

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

With that type of thinking, then the phrase "the Word was God" would make you a modalist.

Classes dictate what's common within a group. In your example, it would not be a class of "Mozart", it would be a class of "Imposter".

Certainly, there may be hundreds of imposters, but only one Mozart.
Same thing with polytheism vs monotheism.
There may be hundreds of false gods, but only One God.

God is not a plurality.
Only One and True Mozart.
Only One and True God.

 

[synergy]

Certainly, there may be hundreds of imposters, but only one Mozart.
Same thing with polytheism vs monotheism.
There may be hundreds of false gods, but only One God.

It still makes you a modalist with phrases like "the Word was God".

God is not a plurality.
Only One and True Mozart.
Only One and True God.

You still have modalism to contend with.

You have an even bigger problem with the phrase "the Word was with God" which signifies 2 entities.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Moses saw the back side of God.

Again, Moses saw the back side of God. Is God the Father in their view?

Does anyone in this Forum, who is not a Mormon, think God has a "back side"? What about "arm", "hands" and "face"? All of those features are written in the Scriptures. Could God "smell" the smoke from the roasted meat of holocausts or the inciense?

In ancient cultures, people thought that gods (and angels) could take human (or animal) form to interact with humans.
The ancient Hebrews (I mean, pre-exile) were under that influence. Let's look, for example, at the story of the annunciation of the birth of Samson.

To me, synergy, what the narrative of the face-to-face interaction between Moses and God is trying to convey is the very intimate relationship between Moses and God. For Baha'is, such intimate relationship is not a surprise as we take Moses as Manifestation of God, such as Jesus Christ.
That's why Moses is also referred as displaying a radiant face... so radiant that it had to be hidden from people.
But that's another story, which does not pertain to this discussion.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

You still have modalism to contend with.

One thing at a time, my friend. One thing at a time.
First is to recognize that in the Bible, God is treated 99.5% of the times as a singular person, not as a class... and not only that, but that he is treated as a singular person by Jesus Christ Himself.

If you are interested in my position towards modalism, I will gladly share it with you... but first things first.

 

[TomL]

None of this suggests Jesus pre-existed in the way you suggest.

TSK TSK

you are clearly refuted concerning Christ's pre-existence

John 17:5 (NASB 2020) — 5 And now You, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world existed.

Philippians 2:5–7 (NASB 2020) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself by taking the form of a bond-servant and being born in the likeness of men.

 

[synergy]

One thing at a time, my friend. One thing at a time.
First is to recognize that in the Bible, God is treated 99.5% of the times as a singular person, not as a class... and not only that, but that he is treated as a singular person by Jesus Christ Himself.

If you are interested in my position towards modalism, I will gladly share it with you... but first things first.

That's why a true belief must be true 100% of the time. It must also be true with the phrase "the Word was with God" which signifies 2 entities.

 

[synergy]

Does anyone in this Forum, who is not a Mormon, think God has a "back side"? What about "arm", "hands" and "face"? All of those features are written in the Scriptures. Could God "smell" the smoke from the roasted meat of holocausts or the inciense?

In ancient cultures, people thought that gods (and angels) could take human (or animal) form to interact with humans.
The ancient Hebrews (I mean, pre-exile) were under that influence. Let's look, for example, at the story of the annunciation of the birth of Samson.

To me, synergy, what the narrative of the face-to-face interaction between Moses and God is trying to convey is the very intimate relationship between Moses and God. For Baha'is, such intimate relationship is not a surprise as we take Moses as Manifestation of God, such as Jesus Christ.
That's why Moses is also referred as displaying a radiant face... so radiant that it had to be hidden from people.
But that's another story, which does not pertain to this discussion.

The "back side" term was obviously a personification. My interest here is in knowing if you believe that Moses saw God or not?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

TSK TSK

you are clearly refuted concerning Christ's pre-existence

John 17:5 (NASB 2020) — 5 And now You, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world existed.

Philippians 2:5–7 (NASB 2020) — 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself by taking the form of a bond-servant and being born in the likeness of men.

Some reflections on on Philippians 2:5-7

1. In Philippians chapter 2, Paul is requesting the brethren to be humble. That's the main topic and not the deity of Christ. Please read the first 4 verses.
2. Scholars believe Paul is quoting a hymn, a poem to be chanted, that was probably popular or known among early Christians... he's quoting it to emphasize Christ humbleness.
3. They hymn presumes the distinction between God and Christ.
4. The hymn does not say that Christ was God but "in the form of God". Other Scriptures talk about Christ as the "image of God". Adam was also created in the "image of God".
5. The hymn says that God, a Person, exalted Christ, another Person. That God, a Person, gave Christ (another Person) a name which is above all names.
6. The hymn states that kneeling before Christ and confessing Christ as Lord has one purpose: to glorify God.
7. The hymn gives one name and only one name to this God: The Father.
8. Surprising? Not at all. It is common throughout the New Testament than, when The Father and Jesus are mentioned together, only one of the two personal beings is given the title "God". You know whom.

​

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

The "back side" term was obviously a personification.

My apologies for having misinterpreted your statement.

My interest here is in knowing if you believe that Moses saw God or not?

Do you mean physically?
No, I don't.

By the way, I would bet that no modern Jew thinks that YHWH has a physical body and that such body was seen by Moses. I can lose the bet, but I would be greatly surprised.

 

[synergy]

My apologies for having misinterpreted your statement.

Do you mean physically?
No, I don't.

Then in what way? A dream? How would you explain the physical effect on his face?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Then in what way? A dream? How would you explain the physical effect on his face?

To me, he most likely thing is that it is a metaphor that means "God Himself told Moses what to speak and do" or something like "God spoke to Moses as if two people were talking face to face".

Perhaps the radiance of Moses (in Mount Sinai), Jesus (in the Transfiguration), Zoroaster (in the river Daiti) or Buddha (upon his awakening under the tree of Bodhi) is a metaphor to illustrate the Light of God (another symbol of his Word... remember John 1?)

This is just my personal reflection upon this.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

That's why a true belief must be true 100% of the time. It must also be true with the phrase "the Word was with God" which signifies 2 entities.

Well, the belief that God is a class or category where several persons can fit would be true 0.5% of the time. Much more distant from 100% than 99.5%, don't you think?

There are explanations that we can seek to rule out that 0.5%
In contrast, seeking explanations to rule out 99.5% would mean inventing another religion from anew and discarding the Bible as source of knowledge about God.

Let me give you an example:
In the narrative of creation, God is called "Elohim", a plural form of God. Those verses are in that 0.5% I mention.
Some explanations are

• Hebrews collected the mythical narration from polytheistic sources, as many of Hebrews themselves were polytheistic, not in the sense that they worshipped several gods (although many did worship several gods) but in the sense that they believed their national God (El, for Israel, YHWH, for Judah) were supreme over the other gods, the multiple gods of the surrounding nations.
• Hebrews sometimes used the "majestic plural".

Both hypotheses are debatable, controversial.
I personally prefer to remain in the expectation of further discoveries from linguists, archeologists, etc to explain those verses, than to try to rule out the 99.5% of the verses that present God as a Singular Person.

That is from the intellectual side.
From my spiritual side, I find much more relevant, beautiful and powerful to submit my will to a Single Mind that to a plurality of minds.

 

[synergy]

To me, he most likely thing is that it is a metaphor that means "God Himself told Moses what to speak and do" or something like "God spoke to Moses as if two people were talking face to face".

Perhaps the radiance of Moses (in Mount Sinai), Jesus (in the Transfiguration), Zoroaster (in the river Daiti) or Buddha (upon his awakening under the tree of Bodhi) is a metaphor to illustrate the Light of God (another symbol of his Word... remember John 1?)

This is just my personal reflection upon this.

I personally don't think it's a metaphor because metaphors do not cause physical effects. I think it has to do with God's energies that is mentioned in the Greek NT and is clumsy translated as operations or work on English Bibles.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I personally don't think it's a metaphor because metaphors do not cause physical effects. I think it has to do with God's energies that is mentioned in the Greek NT and is clumsy translated as operations or work on English Bibles.

I appreciate and respect your way of thinking.
It is a matter of what we want to believe, what we feel more useful to bring us closer to the love of God.
My purpose here in the Forum is to encourage you and all our readers to understand the other position, the people at the other side of the table, so that nobody feels superior or saved because they adhere to a more "orthodox" view.

Regarding the radiant face or garments, I was trying to say that the effects are part of the metaphor.
Look:

Suppose you start a conversation with a Buddhist who has never heard of the radiant face of Moses and you have never heard of Buddah's radiant face upon his awakening.

What could the Buddhist think of the biblical account, and what could you think of the Buddhist account?
I am not sure, but I would dare to say that your opinions would more or less lean into one of these 3:

1. It was something experienced literally by the eyewitness and defies the laws of nature.
2. It is just a fable invented deliberately by evil people/ a demon to deceive others
3. It is a beautiful metaphor that conveys a profound, important spiritual meaning

 

[synergy]

Well, the belief that God is a class or category where several persons can fit would be true 0.5% of the time. Much more distant from 100% than 99.5%, don't you think?

Trinitarians believe that "God" denotes either Person or Nature (Class) based on context. So Trinitarianism is correct 100% of the time.

There are explanations that we can seek to rule out that 0.5%
In contrast, seeking explanations to rule out 99.5% would mean inventing another religion from anew and discarding the Bible as source of knowledge about God.

The phrase "the Word was with God" makes it impossible to rule out the 0.5%.

Let me give you an example:
In the narrative of creation, God is called "Elohim", a plural form of God. Those verses are in that 0.5% I mention.
Some explanations are

• Hebrews collected the mythical narration from polytheistic sources, as many of Hebrews themselves were polytheistic, not in the sense that they worshipped several gods (although many did worship several gods) but in the sense that they believed their national God (El, for Israel, YHWH, for Judah) were supreme over the other gods, the multiple gods of the surrounding nations.
• Hebrews sometimes used the "majestic plural".

Both hypotheses are debatable, controversial.
I personally prefer to remain in the expectation of further discoveries from linguists, archeologists, etc to explain those verses, than to try to rule out the 99.5% of the verses that present God as a Singular Person.

That is from the intellectual side.
From my spiritual side, I find much more relevant, beautiful and powerful to submit my will to a Single Mind that to a plurality of minds.

All 3 Persons of the Trinity possess their own minds but they are so united that it can be said that they are single minded.

 

[Runningman]

I did answer your question. Here's the proof:

Now what's your next false excuse to avoid answering my question?

Then by your own standard you are a heretic every time you have refused to answer my question and then later came around and answered it. Now I'll come around and answer your underhanded throw of a question.

Your questions were:

You don't believe God (Preincarnate Jesus) appeared to Moses?????

Is everything that Moses wrote, a lie????

Jesus didn't appear to anyone in the Old Testament and no Moses didn't lie about anything. Man up now. Quote the Old Testament verse with Jesus in it.

 

[Runningman]

They are a much bigger fish to fry. The Deity of Christ is the biggest issue of the 21st century. Who knows, we might build an alliance with Calvinists on that theme. Strange how life can takes twists and turns.

The deity of Jesus got debunked. Your "church" is bleeding numbers by the buckets. In 50 years I predict you all will be a shadow. Here's a good case study. Go around and ask people if they believe a man is God and they will probably laugh in your face. Go around and ask people if God worked through a man and the vast majority of them will agree.