The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

[TomL]

The Greek version of the Old Testament (The Septuagint) that Paul quoted so often, was written by monotheistic Jewish Scholars, not by polytheistic Greeks. They did the translation two or three centuries before Christ, and they wrote it for Jew readers who were also monotheists.
So, thinking in God as One Single Person is the basic foundation upon which Paul preached the Gospel.



I agree.
Paul was not arguing against Trinitarism, because Trinitarism did not exist. Not in his mind, not in the mind of the Christians he wrote to.

Lets see

Isaiah 63:9–16 (KJV 1900) — 9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, And the angel of his presence saved them: In his love and in his pity he redeemed them; And he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. 10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: Therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them. 11 Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him? 12 That led them by the right hand of Moses with his glorious arm, Dividing the water before them, to make himself an everlasting name? 13 That led them through the deep, As an horse in the wilderness, that they should not stumble? 14 As a beast goeth down into the valley, The Spirit of the LORD caused him to rest: So didst thou lead thy people, To make thyself a glorious name. 15 Look down from heaven, and behold From the habitation of thy holiness and of thy glory: Where is thy zeal and thy strength, The sounding of thy bowels and of thy mercies toward me? are they restrained? 16 Doubtless thou art our father, Though Abraham be ignorant of us, And Israel acknowledge us not: Thou, O LORD, art our father, our redeemer; Thy name is from everlasting.

We have the messenger (angel) of his presence who is called YHWH and God in Scripture - this is the precarnate Christ - word who was God

We have the Holy Spirit

And we have the Father (YHWH)

 

[synergy]

The Greek version of the Old Testament (The Septuagint) that Paul quoted so often, was written by monotheistic Jewish Scholars, not by polytheistic Greeks. They did the translation two or three centuries before Christ, and they wrote it for Jew readers who were also monotheists.
So, thinking in God as One Single Person is the basic foundation upon which Paul preached the Gospel.

You're acknowledging the authenticity of the Greek OT. You're now light years ahead of the Latin and Anglo world that chose to translate the modified Masoretic text (instead of the Septuagint) into their native tongue.

The Greek OT proved crucial in the conversion of Greek speaking Diaspora Jews into Christians. It was the Bible of the Early Church and only later were the NT books were written let alone canonized.

I agree.
Paul was not arguing against Trinitarism, because Trinitarism did not exist. Not in his mind, not in the mind of the Christians he wrote to.

Verses like 1 Kings 12:22 and 1 Ch 17:3 certainly precluded Unitarianism. They clearly reveal that the Pre-Incarnate Word of God was a Communicative Person who had all the attributes of a Person (Mind, Will, Individuality, etc...)

• 1 Kings 12:22 "But the Word of God came to Shemaiah the man of God, saying,"
• 1 Ch 17:3 "And it happened the same night the Word of God came to Nathan, saying,

This obviously proves that the Word of God (Jesus), who is Uncreated (John 1:3), cannot possibly be just a thing (a word) or even an angel. He is God

 

[Runningman]

False. Ex 3 describes a Divine Appearance. Do you understand that fact?

So, answer me who appeared and spoke the words in Ex 3?

1. John 6:46 precludes the possibility that it's the Father appearing to anyone except Christ but
2. John 14:9 allows the Father to be seen when one sees Jesus, the Preincarnate Jesus in the case of Ex 3.

Conclusion: Jesus is the "I Am" OT God mentioned in Ex 3.

You're beating a dead horse at this point. Acts 3:13 proves that Jesus is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Additionally, no one has actually literally seen God because He's invisible. Jesus is not invisible. Therefore seeing Jesus is not seeing God. Seeing refers to knowing God.

John 1
18No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

 

[Runningman]

So how can you say that it was the Father that appeared to Moses in Ex 3?

Which verse?

 

[Runningman]

Nope that’s your fallacy not mine since both the Father and Son are the true God, Lord, Sovereign, YHWH, Creator, King of Kings, Lord of Lords. Alpha/ Omega, First/ Last, God almighty, Savior, I Am, etc …..

Then Jesus is not the only Lord. Seems we have finally sorted you out by exposing flaws in your logic. So, there are different Lords in different contexts. Jesus is Lord over the church according to Ephesians 1:22, but only the Father is referred to as the Lord of heaven and earth/Creator. Matthew 11:25, Acts 17:24,25. That's straight Scripture.

 

[synergy]

You're beating a dead horse at this point. Acts 3:13 proves that Jesus is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Additionally, no one has actually literally seen God because He's invisible. Jesus is not invisible. Therefore seeing Jesus is not seeing God. Seeing refers to knowing God.

John 1
18No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

Unitarian.theology is indeed a "dead horse" as evidenced by your continuous avoidance of John 6:46 and John 14:9. That we can agree on.

In contrast to you I do acknowledge Acts 3:13 but Ex 3 describes a Divine Appearance. Do you understand that fact?

 

[TomL]

The Greek version of the Old Testament (The Septuagint) that Paul quoted so often, was written by monotheistic Jewish Scholars, not by polytheistic Greeks. They did the translation two or three centuries before Christ, and they wrote it for Jew readers who were also monotheists.
So, thinking in God as One Single Person is the basic foundation upon which Paul preached the Gospel.

YHWH sends YHWH



Zechariah 2:6–13 (LEB) — 6 “Woe! Woe! Flee from the land of the north,” declares Yahweh, “for I have scattered you like the four winds of the heavens,” declares Yahweh. 7 “Woe, Zion! Escape, you inhabitants of the daughter of Babylon!” 8 For thus said Yahweh of hosts, after glory he sent me against the nations plundering you: Truly, the one touching you is touching the apple of his eye. 9 “Yes, look! I am going to wave my hand against them, and they will become plunder for their servants, and you will know that Yahweh of hosts has sent me. 10 Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for look, I am coming and I will dwell in your midst,” declares Yahweh. 11 “Many nations will join themselves to Yahweh on that day, and they will be my people, and I will dwell in your midst. And you will know that Yahweh of hosts has sent me to you. 12 And Yahweh will inherit Judah as his portion in the holy land, and he will again choose Jerusalem. 13 Be silent, all people, before Yahweh, for he is roused from his holy dwelling.”

 

[Runningman]

Unitarian.theology is indeed a "dead horse" as evidenced by your continuous avoidance of John 6:46 and John 14:9. That we can agree on.

In contrast to you I do acknowledge Acts 3:13 but Ex 3 describes a Divine Appearance. Do you understand that fact?

No. Trinitarian theology is nonsense. Jesus being the son/servant of the God of Abraham means he isn't the God of Abraham. None of God's sons/servants are the God of Abraham. There isn't a special nonsense clause for Jesus where one gets to change the rules to defy conventional reason. Scripture says no one has ever seen God then turns right around and says the disciples have seen God. Seeing and being blind are used in scripture in a figurative sense.

 

[TomL]

No. Trinitarian theology is nonsense. Jesus being the son/servant of the God of Abraham means he isn't the God of Abraham. None of God's sons/servants are the God of Abraham. There isn't a special nonsense clause for Jesus where one gets to change the rules to defy conventional reason. Scripture says no one has ever seen God then turns right around and says the disciples have seen God. Seeing and being blind are used in scripture in a figurative sense.

John 6:46 (LEB) — 46 (Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God—this one has seen the Father.)

Um If no one has seen the Father who did they see when they saw God?


John 14:8–9 (KJV 1900) — 8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 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?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

God the Father sent God the Son. Perfectly Trinitarian.

Yes, perfectly Trinitarian… and perfectly alien to the Bible.
Where does The Bible say that God the Father sent “God the Son”? As far as I know, it says that God sent his Son (1 John 4:9)
So, God is the FATHER of Jesus, as well as our Father, as Jesus Himself confirmed in John 20:17
That makes Jesus our brother, not our God!

For both He who sanctifies [ Christ ] and those who are sanctified [men] are all of One. [God]. For this reason He is not ashamed to call them brothers (Hebrews 2:12)

Jesus never claimed to have been sent by a Council or Board of Three Divine Persons.
Jesus never claimed to have sent Himself
Jesus claimed to have been sent by a singular, personal God, a “He”. “For God so much loved the world, that He sent his only begotten Son…” John 3:16

 

[TomL]

Yes, perfectly Trinitarian… and perfectly alien to the Bible.
Where does The Bible say that God the Father sent “God the Son”? As far as I know, it says that God sent his Son (1 John 4:9)
So, God is the FATHER of Jesus, as well as our Father, as Jesus Himself confirmed in John 20:17
That makes Jesus our brother, not our God!

For both He who sanctifies [ Christ ] and those who are sanctified [men] are all of One. [God]. For this reason He is not ashamed to call them brothers (Hebrews 2:12)

Jesus never claimed to have been sent by a Council or Board of Three Divine Persons.
Jesus never claimed to have sent Himself
Jesus claimed to have been sent by a singular, personal God, a “He”. “For God so much loved the world, that He sent his only begotten Son…” John 3:16

How about YHWH sending YHWH

Zechariah 2:6–11 (LEB) — 6 “Woe! Woe! Flee from the land of the north,” declares Yahweh, “for I have scattered you like the four winds of the heavens,” declares Yahweh. 7 “Woe, Zion! Escape, you inhabitants of the daughter of Babylon!” 8 For thus said Yahweh of hosts, after glory he sent me against the nations plundering you: Truly, the one touching you is touching the apple of his eye. 9 “Yes, look! I am going to wave my hand against them, and they will become plunder for their servants, and you will know that Yahweh of hosts has sent me. 10 Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for look, I am coming and I will dwell in your midst,” declares Yahweh. 11 “Many nations will join themselves to Yahweh on that day, and they will be my people, and I will dwell in your midst. And you will know that Yahweh of hosts has sent me to you.

 

[Runningman]

Jesus prayed to His Father that his followers could be One... as "one" as He was with His Father. Big words, aren't they?

Now, if we think about it...

Was Jesus's prayer just "wishful thinking"... an utopia that could never and would never be realized? Was Jesus so naïve?

Now, assuming Jesus was not naïve and He knew that the unity of his followers was possible... did His Father listen to his prayer? will His Father ever listen to that prayer?

My point is that, under God's grace, we can build the necessary unity among Christians little by little, because that's Jesus will.
Of course, I am not talking about doctrinal uniformity, but about true love. And true love, certainly, cannot flourish when someone thinks that his neighbor deserves to be tortured in hell forever because of theological discrepancies.

Jesus' prayer probably applied specifically to those people and, by extension, those who belong to him. I agree with his prayer and I hope God answered it in the affirmative, at least for the disciples, but if you will look at some of the things the Trinitarians say, they actually say this oneness with God is something that makes Jesus God. So they don't believe in having the same oneness with God that Jesus prayed the disciples would have. I haven't met any Trinitarians who agree with this prayer. Have you?

For the record, yes I absolutely do love all people and that includes Trinitarians. My neighbor is a good man and happens to be a Trinitarian. He's the "love thy neighbor" type and has gone out of his way to just do nice things for me for years. We were talking one day because he loves talking about the Bible and he said something about John 1:1 and how that's Jesus, but I only merely pointed out the obvious, which was "the Word was God" it doesn't say "the Word was Jesus." He got quiet and had that 1000 yard stare in his eyes as he looked into the distance at something only he could see, seeming to be deep in thought. The next day he said "The Word was God" and I said yes absolutely. He smiled big and I don't know what his conclusion really was because he didn't explain, but it seemed like he understood something. This kind of reaction is foreign on message boards.

I don't know if you have any Trinitarian friends or neighbors in real life, but most of them are not debate-hardened and truth-resistant. Most people are not spending most of their time doing what we are doing here and still have a purity and innocence about them with Scripture. People on forums, however, have been doing this for years and, as you can see, regardless of what the Bible says, most people have chosen their side and will not budge from it.

I don't think so, and would be needed badly.

Yes let's open one. I am curious to get a head count of how many of our "brothers and sisters" will say we're going to hell to burn without offering any remedy. That's what they often do isn't it. They'll say you aren't saved and then not tell you how to be saved. That isn't love.

 

[civic]

Then Jesus is not the only Lord. Seems we have finally sorted you out by exposing flaws in your logic. So, there are different Lords in different contexts. Jesus is Lord over the church according to Ephesians 1:22, but only the Father is referred to as the Lord of heaven and earth/Creator. Matthew 11:25, Acts 17:24,25. That's straight Scripture.

And the Father is not the only true God.

Seems we exposed your flaws , double standard , eisegesis , bias, etc…

 

[Runningman]

And the Father is not the only true God.

Seems we exposed your flaws , double standard , eisegesis , bias, etc…

You're taking it too far if it results in denying Scripture. I am aware of the issue we are talking about. It's because there is a context to which is applies.

Try this... you walk into a bakery and ask to speak to the manager. Technically you didn't say which manager from which establishment. They most likely wouldn't run down the street and bring back the manager from the library would they? So there is a context and they will likely bring you the bakery manager and even the manager probably has a manager above him/her. It's the same with God and Jesus.

When they were writing their letters and books in the Bible, they weren't always abreast of what the others were writing, but when you understand that when we are in the church we have only one Lord named Jesus it makes sense. On the other hand, the Father is also Lord according to Matthew 11:25. Some have come to the wrong conclusion and decided Jesus is the Father or vice versa, but that isn't the case. There is simply a hierarchy in heaven and Jesus is near the top, second in command even, but is not over God.

1 Cor. 3​

23and you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God.​

​

1 Cor. 11​

3But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.​

​

1 Cor. 15​

27For “God has put everything under His feet.”b Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him.​

 

[civic]

You're taking it too far if it results in denying Scripture. I am aware of the issue we are talking about. It's because there is a context to which is applies.

Try this... you walk into a bakery and ask to speak to the manager. Technically you didn't say which manager from which establishment. They most likely wouldn't run down the street and bring back the manager from the library would they? So there is a context and they will likely bring you the bakery manager and even the manager probably has a manager above him/her. It's the same with God and Jesus.

When they were writing their letters and books in the Bible, they weren't always abreast of what the others were writing, but when you understand that when we are in the church we have only one Lord named Jesus it makes sense. On the other hand, the Father is also Lord according to Matthew 11:25. Some have come to the wrong conclusion and decided Jesus is the Father or vice versa, but that isn't the case. There is simply a hierarchy in heaven and Jesus is near the top, second in command even, but is not over God.

1 Cor. 3​

23and you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God.​

​

1 Cor. 11​

3But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.​

​

1 Cor. 15​

27For “God has put everything under His feet.”b Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him.​

Great scripture.

Let me ask you 2 simple questions that will expose your fallacious argument.

Are you the head of your wife ? yes or no

Is your wife any less human than you are ? yes or no

end of discussion.

next fallacy

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

You're acknowledging the authenticity of the Greek OT. You're now light years ahead of the Latin and Anglo world that chose to translate the modified Masoretic text (instead of the Septuagint) into their native tongue.

An off-topic question, my friend, now that you mention the Septuagint. Do you accept the so called deuterocanonical books/texts as inspired by God? If there is a thread about that, I would like to know it.

The Greek OT proved crucial in the conversion of Greek speaking Diaspora Jews into Christians. It was the Bible of the Early Church and only later were the NT books were written let alone canonized.

I agree. We must recognize and respect the great work of the Jewish scholars that produced the Septuagint.
Certainly, they were not perfect as no translator is perfect. God's Word is powerful despite the imperfections of translators.
Just to come back to the point we started mentioning this translation, it is essential to keep in mind the Greek side of the New Testament... but not in order to understand the basic tenets of Theology. We need it to understand how such theology was explained so that it could be more easily understood by the target audience.

So, Theos may have been a word that Greeks used to describe the shared divine nature of Zeus, Hermes, Hades and Aphrodite. It was the word at hand, and the word used by the authors of the NT. Not necessarily the ideal word that Jewish-minded Paul would have wanted.
This is why it is important, again, to notice that for Paul, although there are many gods, for Christians there is only one Theos. And that Theos is a Person, called The Father.

As I said before, if Paul had preached and written letters to ancient Chinese, he would have had to use the word Tien, Heaven, for God. And then, we would be debating how to interpret "heaven" in a given verse.

That's why I emphasize so much to go back to the Jewish mindset of Christ and his disciples.

Verses like 1 Kings 12:22 and 1 Ch 17:3 certainly precluded Unitarianism. They clearly reveal that the Pre-Incarnate Word of God was a Communicative Person who had all the attributes of a Person (Mind, Will, Individuality, etc...)

• 1 Kings 12:22 "But the Word of God came to Shemaiah the man of God, saying,"
• 1 Ch 17:3 "And it happened the same night the Word of God came to Nathan, saying,

This obviously proves that the Word of God (Jesus), who is Uncreated (John 1:3), cannot possibly be just a thing (a word) or even an angel. He is God

Let me comment on this in another post.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Great scripture.

Let me ask you 2 simple questions that will expose your fallacious argument.

Are you the head of your wife ? yes or no

Is your wife any less human than you are ? yes or no

end of discussion.

next fallacy

The text says that Christ is the head of man.
Is Christ your head?
If the answer is "yes". Do you share the same nature as Christ?

As you can see, Paul is using this analogy to talk about authority, not about nature. Please read the whole passage.

For Paul, the woman has less authority than man. Man has less authority than Christ. Christ has less authority than God.

The fact that Christ has less authority than God indicates two things:

1. For Paul, God is not Christ. Otherwise, he wouldn't have needed to mention God separate from Christ. Do you agree with this? For Paul, man is not woman, and that's why he separates them. Man is not Christ, and that's why he separates them. Christ is not God, and that's why he separates them.
2. For Paul, Christ is not God, because nobody could have authority over God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

And the Father is not the only true God.

If Jesus said explicitly that the Father is the Only True God, why do you say the opposite?
Who could know more about the Father than Jesus?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Unitarian.theology is indeed a "dead horse" as evidenced by your continuous avoidance of John 6:46 and John 14:9. That we can agree on.

In contrast to you I do acknowledge Acts 3:13 but Ex 3 describes a Divine Appearance. Do you understand that fact?

What's the issue about John 6:46?
Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God. He has seen the Father.

Jesus always said He was from God. Jesus always talked about God as a Person who had sent him.
So, what's the problem?

And what's the issue about John 14:9?
Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you such a long time, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father. So how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’

Is there any one in the Forum, Trinitarian or Unitarian, who thinks that Jesus and His Father are the same person?
I think no one thinks that... well, I now remember we have a modalist brother. So my apologies.
But for those participating in this thread, I guess we all interpret the passage figuratively.
The Father manifests in Jesus his love, wisdom, Word, etc. so that knowing the One Sent by the Only True God is equivalent to knowing the Only and True God. This is what eternal life is all about, isn't it?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

How about YHWH sending YHWH

Zechariah 2:6–11 (LEB) — 6 “Woe! Woe! Flee from the land of the north,” declares Yahweh, “for I have scattered you like the four winds of the heavens,” declares Yahweh. 7 “Woe, Zion! Escape, you inhabitants of the daughter of Babylon!” 8 For thus said Yahweh of hosts, after glory he sent me against the nations plundering you: Truly, the one touching you is touching the apple of his eye. 9 “Yes, look! I am going to wave my hand against them, and they will become plunder for their servants, and you will know that Yahweh of hosts has sent me. 10 Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for look, I am coming and I will dwell in your midst,” declares Yahweh. 11 “Many nations will join themselves to Yahweh on that day, and they will be my people, and I will dwell in your midst. And you will know that Yahweh of hosts has sent me to you.

I don't understand your post, my brother.
The verses you are quoting are about Zechariah, the prophet, speaking in first person.
YHWH is sending Zechariah.