The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus

no wonder you reject the scriptures. You interpret the recognition of the divinity of Christ as if a second god. If your misunderstood concept were actually representing a belief, it would be proper to reject that doctrine. However, as it stands, you are a horse in a race who cannot even get out of the starting gate.
No idea what you're talking about. Who here believes Jesus is a second god?
 
As Christians, we recognize the divinity of Lord Jesus in the Godhead. It remains a mystery precisely how he is the Son of God and thus divine while not being some sort of distinct and different god. We acknowledge what God has revealed in scripture. The Unitarians simply deny the possibility that the mystery exists. The Unitarian does not consider that the details of the mystery existed in the OT and was highlighted in the NT but was not part of the focus to resolve to better understanding until the subsequent centuries.
That's not Christianity, that would be the heresy of the trinity. We Christians don't believe what you do.
 
Exactly is right. So you can stop your gaslighting strawmen arguments as if that is what anyone believes here.
You keep saying there is no other god. That is a true statement but no one that I know says Jesus is another god. It is your argument that wrongly pushes the idea of people holding that Jesus is a different god. Maybe if you recognize that underlying concept of your arguments then you will be able to fix your arguments -- at least to defend what you mean to convey. If you keep arguing wrong, you will not be effective.
 
You keep saying there is no other god. That is a true statement but no one that I know says Jesus is another god. It is your argument that wrongly pushes the idea of people holding that Jesus is a different god. Maybe if you recognize that underlying concept of your arguments then you will be able to fix your arguments -- at least to defend what you mean to convey. If you keep arguing wrong, you will not be effective.
No idea what you're talking about still. The Father is the only true God as I have already proved. If you want to say that Jesus as a son of God is elohim then I will accept that, but if you do you must also accept that there are more elohim than Jesus. Means Jesus isn't God Almighty. (Revelation 1:4-8, Revelation 21:22)

Psalm 82
6I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;

John 10
34Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken— 36do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?
 
If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it? I know enough about how the Bible is written in the New Testament and in the Gospels to know if there was a trinity it would have been taught. The Gospels would have clearly said...

Verily, verily I say unto you that I am Jesus and I'm also God.

The Epistles would have writings like...

Yay, I Paul do testify that Jesus who is God came down from heaven to be a man for us. And we do know and testify that this same Jesus who you crucified is God. And so let us bow our knee to the one and only true God-Man Jesus Christ.

And yet there's nothing like that anywhere. Not in the Old or New Testament. Not even one complete verse like that.
 
If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it? I know enough about how the Bible is written in the New Testament and in the Gospels to know if there was a trinity it would have been taught. The Gospels would have clearly said...

Verily, verily I say unto you that I am Jesus and I'm also God.

The Epistles would have writings like...

Yay, I Paul do testify that Jesus who is God came down from heaven to be a man for us. And we do know and testify that this same Jesus who you crucified is God. And so let us bow our knee to the one and only true God-Man Jesus Christ.

And yet there's nothing like that anywhere. Not in the Old or New Testament. Not even one complete verse like that.
funny how you request that be in scripture and we see Jesus conveying his divinity. We could call your symptoms as blindness.
 
The Bible says Jesus is an “heir” of God (Hebrew 1:2), and a “joint-heir” with us (Romans 8:17). But if Christ is a co-eternal “Person” in the “Godhead” then he cannot be an heir “of God” because being God would put him into a position to be a full owner of everything and that would mean there would be nothing he could “inherit” which is why Jesus cannot be God and an heir of God at the same time.
Where to start….?

First of all, heir, cannot be taken literally, for the Father cannot die. Heir is symbolic of being family, and Jesus is the Son of God. We become family with the Father and the Son when we are adopted, not because of we are like in nature of God, but because we were created in his image and are His creation.

Jesus/the Word was in the beginning with the Father/God, which means he is eternal in nature of existence. The only type being that is eternal/uncreated is God. If he is with God in the Beginning, then he is co-eternal with the Father.


Doug
 
Where to start….?
I was thinking the same thing.

First of all, heir, cannot be taken literally, for the Father cannot die. Heir is symbolic of being family, and Jesus is the Son of God. We become family with the Father and the Son when we are adopted, not because of we are like in nature of God, but because we were created in his image and are His creation.
This strange doctrine was never found on the lips of Jesus. He described his brothers as children who could be born from above. Of course, not in the literal sense because Jesus didn't descend from the sky either, but spiritually with God as their Father. (John 3:13, Acts 17:29)

I also find it tragic that you need to spiritualize the word for inheritance for no other reason than the literal definition of the word is a stumbling block for you. As Peter pointed out above, Jesus is an inheritor in Hebrews 1:2, not the source or originator of the creation.
Jesus/the Word was in the beginning with the Father/God, which means he is eternal in nature of existence. The only type being that is eternal/uncreated is God. If he is with God in the Beginning, then he is co-eternal with the Father.


Doug
Your philosophy doesn't really make any sense with the Bible. You just said Jesus is the Word and the Father is God, but John 1:1 from the KJV says:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

So if Jesus is the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, but God is the Father as you said then John 1:1 could read like:

In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with the Father, and Jesus was the Father.

Where to begin as they say. The reason why your trinitarian philosophy is difficult to take serious is because it is not a satisfactory explanation of who God is and doesn't fit into Scripture. All throughout the Bible where God is mentioned, if we plug in your ideas the Bible stops making sense. Go ahead and try it anywhere.
 
Last edited:
According to the Bible, all prayer should be directed to the Holy Trinity, which includes God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit.

Prayer is talking to God. And Jesus is, as the Scriptures present him, the one person who is truly God and truly human—-the second person of the Trinity now incarnate—-then how could praying to this Jesus be wrong?
 
According to the Bible, all prayer should be directed to the Holy Trinity, which includes God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit.

Prayer is talking to God. And Jesus is, as the Scriptures present him, the one person who is truly God and truly human—-the second person of the Trinity now incarnate—-then how could praying to this Jesus be wrong?
Matthew 6:6,9 is the teaching from Jesus about prayer. Do you believe if Jesus only ever opened his mouth about praying to the Father then that is what we should go by or are we free to include others as well?
 
No thanks I'll continue being a Christian. Are you sure you aren't a Muslim? It sounds like you're trying to proselytize me.
You're the one who thinks like a Muslim, denigrating Jesus to just a human. You will find many kindred believers at your local Mosque. Who knows, you might end up becoming an Imam with your hatred of the Christian Trinity.
 
You're the one who thinks like a Muslim, denigrating Jesus to just a human. You will find many kindred believers at your local Mosque. Who knows, you might end up becoming an Imam with your hatred of the Christian Trinity.
Nonsense. I don't want you to be a Muslim, but rather I want you to be a Christian. You want me to be a Muslim and now you're denying that you're the one acting like a Muslim. You're tripping over your own shoe laces.
 
This strange doctrine was never found on the lips of Jesus. He described his brothers as children who could be born from above. Of course, not in the literal sense because Jesus didn't descend from the sky either, but spiritually with God as their Father. (John 3:13, Acts 17:29)
Nothing I’ve said denies that we must be born from above/born again. That is necessary to become children of God, and thus, like Jesus, we are, as children, in line to receive the “inheritance” of the promises made by God to his children.

We are adopted into God’s family, by an act of pure grace, and are made brothers with Christ and made to be included in Christ as heirs to the promises of God.

Doug
 
Back
Top Bottom