The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning

[Wholeheart]

Sometimes, as we get new information, things that once seemed mysterious to us are unraveled. But for me I have always been a believer in the Trinity from the first time it was presented to me. Nothing will ever change my understanding of the Trinity.

My view is that there is one God that exists in three distinct persons: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ), and God the Holy Spirit. Each person is fully God, sharing the same divine essence, yet they are distinct from one another in their relationships and roles.

 

[civic]

Funny. you have selective memory. Genesis 1 speaks in plurality. The Angel of the Lord appears as Yahweh such that they are distinct but the same. The Word of the Lord comes to certain people and is distinct from God but is the same as God. Jesus is God in John 1:18 and really in John 1:1-18. But to you that is never plural. Nor do you give any logical alternative meaning to Christ in pre-existence passages. Sure you can have scripture mean whatever you want when you are neglecting half of what scripture says.

Consider that there are reasons that Arianism had not taken hold in the 300s. It was a heretical teaching held by a minority of people. No one has established that this had any related pagan background. In reality, all the pagan similarities have actually been debunked. Plus, neither Paul nor John had pagan backgrounds so as to be fooled into pagan ideas. But the unitarian must make Paul and John susceptible to pagan influence in order to sustain their Arian heresy.

Yes YHWH identifies as both Plural and Singular.

The Uni's deny the Bible. Its just that simple. They deny Gods testimony concerning Christ and His Deity, Christis testimony of His Deity and the Apostles testimony of His Deity along with those He healed that worshiped Him as God.

Here is what they have left which cannot save them. A Messiah who is only human , a man and not Divine/ God.

Psalm 49:7
No one can redeem the life of another or give to God a ransom for them

Its impossible for them to e redeemed from their sins and death.

 

[amazing grace]

I'm not sure how to help you here. This claim to divinity is made obvious in Matt 26:64-65. It also is apparent that Jesus is not just a human in Dan 7:13-14. I'm not sure where that gets lost on you. His divinity is moderated by saying he appears as a son of man. Then in Jesus' ministry he presents himself specifically as that Son of Man figure.

I just want to make sure of your terminology - by 'claim to divinity' you mean 'claim to be deity, i.e. God'? Right?

hmmm - In my Bible, in 26:63 Jesus was asked if he was the Christ, the Son of God and in 26:64 - He replied - You have said so (Yes, I am). Being the Messiah is not a claim to divinity or God. In Daniel, the 'son of man' was presented before the Ancient of Days - there are two figures there - God and the 'son of man' not one figure. Nothing is being lost on me - Yes, the Son of Man is Jesus' title indicating him being part of humanity, a human being.

It does not say God sent another human to earth. It does not say the Father sent the Father. It shows the Father sent the Son. Maybe we can find a logic class for you.

There is no need to nick pick John 3:16 - a basic Sunday School verse.
Correct, it does not SAY God sent another human to earth - It says "For God so loved the world that he GAVE his Son. . . ." Right, it's not that hard - God says he gave his Son then he gave His Son which would be someone different from himself.

Deuteronomy 18 God told Moses that he would raise up a prophet like Moses out from among Moses' brethren, i.e. the Israelites and he would put his words in his mouth and he shall speak all that I command him. . . . sounds like a human to me.
2 Samuel 7 God tells David - I will raise up your offspring after you who shall come from your body, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever . . . sounds like a human to me.
Isaiah 53 speaks of someone who grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; . . . sounds like a human to me.

God showed his compassion by giving his Son sent from heaven to experience as a human. As Hebrews shows, this was not for the Father's sake but for the outreach to humans. Basic points here.

God GAVE (sent, came from heaven, came from God, came from above, etc) his Son in this manner:
The Holy Spirit will come up on you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore (for this reason) the child to be born will be called holy----the Son of God. (parenthesis added) Yes, Jesus Christ was sent to reconcile people back to God.
Who was God's Son while waiting in heaven for his time to be born?

Seeing God as idolatrous in what he has done through Christ is pretty bad thinking on the unitarian's arguments.
Also if Jesus is not divine, it is the unitarian who can claim to be like Jesus in the flesh.

Worshiping anyone or anything that is NOT Almighty God AS Almighty God . . . that is idolatry.
What is wrong with being a human? that is what is meant by 'in the flesh'. Wasn't Jesus made like into his brothers in every respect? Are we not to emulate Jesus in humility, patience, love, forgiveness, i.e. his qualities? Are we perfect like Jesus? NO, in no way but Jesus isn't ashamed to call us brothers.

You have to reject the testimony of the ancient scripture that shows Jesus as God here. I'm not sure why you think you can avoid that.

That's okay with me . . . I am confident in my choice, out of the two possibilities, it fits within the full scope of scripture.

I point out the issues and unitarians just gloss over them

I have read, and tried to understand each issue that you have pointed out - I have NOT glossed over them - but have addressed them from my point of view just as you present the issues you have from your point of view.
I also think Trinitarians just gloss over the issues that Unitarians point out - we each feel this frustration.

That is the hyperliteralism where unitarians who take John 17:3 as the ultimate point and reject the passages that show the divinity of Christ. What can be worse than that? I can understand if some people temporarily get distracted by unitarian beliefs but hope they can come to know the true Christ.

Dr. David Cooper, founder of The Biblical Research Society, is known for his "Golden Rule of Interpretation,

"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. Therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise. ​

This rule should be generally followed, but it is not flawless. Scripture uses many literary devices that are not always announced in the immediate context. Devices such as metaphor, allegory, types, hyperbole, idioms, parable, etc.

John 17:3 should be taken literally. The point is I haven't rejected ANY scripture, as I said above I have tried to address each point you bring up. I actually believe that Jesus came in the flesh, i.e. a human being NOT 'God in the flesh'. I do not believe he literally preexisted his birth - I believe he preexisted his birth ONLY in the foreknowledge of God's mind and plans. (I am only speaking on my behalf as a Biblical Unitarian)

I know the true Christ, the Lord's Messiah and my fellowship is with the Father, the one true God and his Son, Jesus Christ.

 

[civic]

Worshiping anyone or anything that is NOT Almighty God AS Almighty God . . . that is idolatry.
What is wrong with being a human? that is what is meant by 'in the flesh'. Wasn't Jesus made like into his brothers in every respect? Are we not to emulate Jesus in humility, patience, love, forgiveness, i.e. his qualities? Are we perfect like Jesus? NO, in no way but Jesus isn't ashamed to call us brothers.

No Jew would ever worship anyone or anything except God. You shall have no other gods- worship God alone.

And we know the disciples worshiped Jesus and He allowed their worship. And many others in the gospel accounts worshiped Jesus.

This First Commandment sets the tone for the first four commandments, which can be summarized as, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:5). Jesus Christ called this summation the great commandment (Matthew 22:37-38).

And we know Jesus commanded His disciples love Him by forsaking everything to follow Him, total allegiance to Him and that they would be persecuted and die for Him. Only God can make such demands of anyone. Otherwise it’s idolatry.

And Jesus accepts all the same worship, glory, praise, honor, prayer that the Father receives from the Apostles.

And His Apostles called Him God and worshipped Him as God.

I will throw this one in for free at no charge.

Thomas never called the Father his God- But he called Jesus his Lord and his God.

And Jesus accepted being called his God( THEOS, YHWH) and allowed Thomas to worship Him. thus breaking the first commandment for any Jew.

But wait Thomas didn't break the 1st commandment because Jesus was His God !!!!!!!!

And all these below are worshipers of God the Son

1-We see in Matthew 2:11 the Magi worships Jesus
2-We see in Matthew 8:2 that a leper worships Jesus
3-We see in Matthew 9:18 Jairus worships Jesus
4-We see in Matthew 15:25 that a woman worships Jesus
5-We see in Matthew 14:33 the disciples worship Jesus
6-We see in John 9:38 that a blind man worships Jesus
7-We see in Matthew 28:9 the women worship Jesus
8-We see in Matthew 28:17 all the disciples worship Jesus
9-We see in Revelation 4 all creation worships Jesus.
10-We see in Revelation 5 all creation worships Jesus

Was the Son worshiped? Or was He simply given obeisance as so many unitarians contend?

Matt 2:11 And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.

The verb used in the above text is προσεκύνησαν (prosekunesan) from προσκυνέω (proskuneo), rendered worshiped.

There are 65 verses that contain the word. I would encourage you to go here and examine each use. Lets take a look at few occurrences to see if in fact the NT authors really meant for the religious worship of the Son of God.

John 4:20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship

Mat 14:33 And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

Mat 28:9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.

Matt 28:17 And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted.

Acts 7:43 You took up the tent of Moloch, and the star of your god Rephan, the images that you made to worship; and I will send you into exile beyond Babylon

Rev 5:14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped.

Rev 7:11 And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God,

Rev 11:16 And the twenty-four elders who sit on their thrones before God fell on their faces and worshiped God,

Rev 13:4 And they worshiped the dragon, for he had given his authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?”

Rev 19:4 And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who was seated on the throne, saying, “Amen. Hallelujah!”

Rev 20:4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

Is there any question that προσεκύνησαν means actual worship; the same kind of which belongs only to YHWH:

Mat 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’”

conclusion: the unitairians have been thoroughly defeated above. Since they refuse to worship the Son in the same way as the Father they have no Savior for their sins. Since they say Jesus is only a man then they cannot be redeemed from their sins and death.

Psalm 49:7- No one can redeem the life of another or give to God a ransom for them

The man Jesus cannot redeem them. Its as simple as that. Until they confess Jesus is YHWH/ God/ I Am they will remain in their sins without a Savior/Redeemer as per John 8:24, John 8:58.

hope this helps !!!

 

[amazing grace]

Right Jesus Christ is the promisee in Gal 3:16. I guess you missed that the second or third times I pointed that out. Jesus also manifested on earth as the recipient and fulfillment of that promise. So you are right., Jesus is the promised offspring but no mediator is possible in the promise since it is from the Father to the Son. Maybe you missed verse 19 that says "a mediator is not of one." That excludes the ability to have a mediator in the promise. If Jesus were solely human, a mediator could be in the promise between God and a man but Paul excludes that by saying "but God is one." That refers to Jesus as divinity with the Father. They are one per the shema.

#1 - God made a promise to Abraham because of his obedience: 'In you shall all the nations be blessed.'
#2 - Abraham is the promisee (not Jesus Christ) - a person to whom a promise is made.
#3 - Jesus fulfilled that promise in that he was the offspring.
#4 - There was NO mediator because "By myself I have sworn declared Yahweh" (God swore by HIMSELF, i.e. one - Gen. 22:16)
#5 - An offspring of Abraham would be a human being.
#6 - No 'Jesus as divinity with the Father' - whatever that means.
#7 - The shema - Hear O Israel: The LORD your God, the LORD is one. THEY are not one per the shema.

That is the typical unitarian error of making Jesus less than his divinity by making him mere man, despite unitarians for some reason denying that concept. They sort of give some unscriptural intermediate level of who he is thought to be. The unitarian denies the meaning of "Son of God" such that it does not mean having divinity from his Father.

You made an accusation toward me so you need to show me what I said concerning Jesus is unscriptural.

"a GREAT human being, one who managed to live his life in total submission and obedience to God, his Father to the point of death, even death on the cross - whom God raised and exalted to his own right hand - That cannot be said of any other human being before nor since."​

No, I do not deny the meaning of the Son of God - He is called the Son of God because God is his Father (Luke 1:35) - it doesn't mean one is deity.

Again it is far too weak to be valid to say this is a prophecy about Jesus rather than his actual existence. It is stuff like that which makes the unitarian view utterly nonsensical.

You want to believe that Jesus preexisted as some deity, spirit being, or as God ..... that's on you. I would think twice about saying a Unitarian view is utterly nonsensical . . . what's that saying - pot calling the kettle black?

I do not know how you can call Jesus relying on Greek philosophy instead of his actual existence as God. That is another reason why unitarian arguments seem untenable.

OMGosh . . . I said that the idea of preexistence was derived from Greek philosophy . . . Paul and Barnabas encountered such people in Acts 14. . . . nothing about Jesus relying on Greek philosophy. Jesus did not exist as God.

You can complain to God about this. You do not have to make sense of it if scripture is too confusing for you.

Again attacking the person instead of the doctrinal issues.

I say both exist and are fine. We have the triune God found in Matt 28:19-20 and should not be discarded just because unitarians do not like it.

Nope haven't discarded nor denied any scripture.

Jesus is either of the same God as the Father or is a separate one. You have to make him a separate god to even build your argument.
Then accept the divinity of Christ as part of the same God.

If Jesus is the same God as the Father then he is the Father - that is a no no!
I do not have to make him a separate god or any kind of god since I don't believe he is God.

As I said I will stick with the only true God who is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Thanks.

 

[Runningman]

Funny. you have selective memory. Genesis 1 speaks in plurality. The Angel of the Lord appears as Yahweh such that they are distinct but the same. The Word of the Lord comes to certain people and is distinct from God but is the same as God. Jesus is God in John 1:18 and really in John 1:1-18. But to you that is never plural. Nor do you give any logical alternative meaning to Christ in pre-existence passages. Sure you can have scripture mean whatever you want when you are neglecting half of what scripture says.

Consider that there are reasons that Arianism had not taken hold in the 300s. It was a heretical teaching held by a minority of people. No one has established that this had any related pagan background. In reality, all the pagan similarities have actually been debunked. Plus, neither Paul nor John had pagan backgrounds so as to be fooled into pagan ideas. But the unitarian must make Paul and John susceptible to pagan influence in order to sustain their Arian heresy.

I'm also quoting Genesis 1. Right off the bat, Moses is calling God a singular person. Do you need a grammar lesson about how many persons "His" and "He" refers to?

Genesis 1
27So God created man in His own image;
in the image of God He created him;
male and female He created them.

 

[amazing grace]

No Jew would ever worship anyone or anything except God. You shall have no other gods- worship God alone.

And we know the disciples worshiped Jesus and He allowed their worship. And many others in the gospel accounts worshiped Jesus.

Correct, no Jew would ever worship anyone or anything except God . . . so they did not worship Jesus AS God. Please note the word AS . . . meaning "used in comparisons to refer to the extent or degree of something; used to indicate by comparison the way that something happens or is done." but we are to "honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. Do a word study on the word worship.

This First Commandment sets the tone for the first four commandments, which can be summarized as, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:5). Jesus Christ called this summation the great commandment (Matthew 22:37-38).

Why did you exclude Deut. 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. and I will use the parallel verse quoted by Jesus in Mark 12:29 "Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
AND YES, you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’. . . . and your point.?

And we know Jesus commanded His disciples love Him by forsaking everything to follow Him, total allegiance to Him and that they would be persecuted and die for Him. Only God can make such demands of anyone. Otherwise it’s idolatry.

Jesus asked his disciples to follow him and that obedience to him would mean that they would be hated by the world and suffer persecution - it was up to the individual to commit themselves and walk accordingly.

Idolatry is to worship or value an idol or anything other than the supreme deity or more than that deity. IOW - to worship an idol or anything AS the supreme deity, i.e. God, aka Yahweh. Again, you might want to do a word study on the word worship.

And Jesus accepts all the same worship, glory, praise, honor, prayer that the Father receives from the Apostles.

And His Apostles called Him God and worshipped Him as God.

I will throw this one in for free at no charge.

Thomas never called the Father his God- But he called Jesus his Lord and his God.

And Jesus accepted being called his God( THEOS, YHWH) and allowed Thomas to worship Him. thus breaking the first commandment for any Jew.

But wait Thomas didn't break the 1st commandment because Jesus was His God !!!!!!!!

Thomas did acknowledge 'My Lord and My God' (theos), when he saw the resurrected Christ . . . You can believe he meant Yahweh but I don't and therefore do not see him as breaking the 1st and great commandment.

Here's three trinitarian scholars on the use of theos:

Christopher Kaiser (The Doctrine of God, 1982, pg 29) "Belief in the deity of Christ has traditionally been the keystone of the doctrine of the Trinity, yet explicit references to Jesus as 'God' in the NT are very few and even those few are generally plagued with uncertainties of either text or interpretation.​

Murray J. Harris (Jesus as God, 1992, pg 9-11) No one . . . can help being impressed by the remarkable reserve of NT writers in applying the term 'theos' to Jesus . . . If the writers of the NT were persuaded of the deity of Christ, what accounts for their reticence to ascribe to him the title that, of all divine names, would seem most explicitly to affirm that deity? Have the Father's and the creeds of the church out stripped the NT evidence in speaking so plainly and so often of Jesus Christ as 'God'? . . . It is a curious fact that each of the texts to be examined contain and interpretive problem of some description; actually, most contain two or three.​

Brian J. Wright (Jesus as theos: A Textual Examination, 2011, p. 229-231) No author of a Synoptic Gospel explicitly ascribes the title 'theos' to Jesus. Jesus never used the term 'theos' for himself. No sermon in the book of Acts attributes the title 'theos' to Jesus . . . And possibly the biggest problem for NT Christology regarding this topic is that textual variants exist in every potential passage where Jesus is explicitly referred to as 'theo'. ​

No one in the NT worshiped Jesus AS, AS, AS Almighty God, aka Yahweh.

And all these below are worshipers of God the Son

1-We see in Matthew 2:11 the Magi worships Jesus
2-We see in Matthew 8:2 that a leper worships Jesus
3-We see in Matthew 9:18 Jairus worships Jesus
4-We see in Matthew 15:25 that a woman worships Jesus
5-We see in Matthew 14:33 the disciples worship Jesus
6-We see in John 9:38 that a blind man worships Jesus
7-We see in Matthew 28:9 the women worship Jesus
8-We see in Matthew 28:17 all the disciples worship Jesus
9-We see in Revelation 4 all creation worships Jesus.
10-We see in Revelation 5 all creation worships Jesus

There is no term or phrase 'God the Son'.
This is the Greek word and what it means used in each of your references------

proskyneō - 1. to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence; 2. among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence; 3. in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication; A. used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank, a. to the Jewish high priests; b. to God; c. to Christ; d. to heavenly beings; e. to demons (Strong's Concordance #4352)​

Was the Son worshiped? Or was He simply given obeisance as so many unitarians contend?

The scripture show that the Son was worshiped but not AS Almighty God, aka Yahweh.

Matt 2:11 And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.

They worshiped the child as the Messiah NOT AS Almighty God, aka Yahweh.

The verb used in the above text is προσεκύνησαν (prosekunesan) from προσκυνέω (proskuneo), rendered worshiped.

There are 65 verses that contain the word. I would encourage you to go here and examine each use. Lets take a look at few occurrences to see if in fact the NT authors really meant for the religious worship of the Son of God.

definition and Greek word for worship in previous post

John 4:20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship

'Woman believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father'. . . aka Almighty God, aka Yahweh

Mat 14:33 And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

Worshiped him appropriately as the Son of God NOT AS Almighty God, aka Yahweh.

Mat 28:9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.

Matt 28:17 And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted.

Acts 7:43 You took up the tent of Moloch, and the star of your god Rephan, the images that you made to worship; and I will send you into exile beyond Babylon

Rev 5:14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped.

Rev 7:11 And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God,

Rev 11:16 And the twenty-four elders who sit on their thrones before God fell on their faces and worshiped God,

Rev 13:4 And they worshiped the dragon, for he had given his authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?”

Rev 19:4 And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who was seated on the throne, saying, “Amen. Hallelujah!”

Rev 20:4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

Is there any question that προσεκύνησαν means actual worship; the same kind of which belongs only to YHWH:

Mat 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’”

conclusion: the unitairians have been thoroughly defeated above. Since they refuse to worship the Son in the same way as the Father they have no Savior for their sins. Since they say Jesus is only a man then they cannot be redeemed from their sins and death.

I am not going through each verse - this type of worship proskyneō is not reserved just for God.

Psalm 49:7- No one can redeem the life of another or give to God a ransom for them

The man Jesus cannot redeem them. Its as simple as that. Until they confess Jesus is YHWH/ God/ I Am they will remain in their sins without a Savior/Redeemer as per John 8:24, John 8:58.

hope this helps !!!

"Why should I fear in times of trouble, when the iniquity of those who cheat me surrounds me, those who trust in their wealth and boast of the abundance of their riches? Truly, no man can ransom another or give to God the price of his life, for the ransom of their life is costly and can never suffice, that he should live on forever and never see the pit." Psalm 49:5-9
Correct, no amount of wealth or riches can ransom or give God the price of his life . . . the ransom of life is costly and no amount of wealth or riches can suffice.

What did God say His purpose was in GIVING HIS Son ---- that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. So if God believed his Son was sufficient to redeem mankind then His Son was sufficient.

And the jailer called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” [Acts 16:29-31] So your last statement is false.

 

[amazing grace]

Then who or what was John talking about in vs 14, And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.?

The WORD was made flesh and dwelt among us . . . the only begotten of the Father, aka Jesus Christ.

Ah, so we look like angels. God looks like an angel. That's cool. Farfetched but cool.

God is carrying on a conversation with his heavenly host --- it is God that does the creating.
We were made a little lower than the angels.
Not as far fetched as a Triune God speaking to the others within himself.

 

[Grace ambassador]

Correct, no amount of wealth or riches can ransom or give God the price of his life . . . the ransom of life is costly and no amount of wealth or riches can suffice.

Thank you for being Correct; What Saith The Scripture About our Ransom / The PRICE Paid?:

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which The Holy Ghost Hath Made​

you overseers, to feed the church of God, Which He Hath Purchased With His Own BLOOD."​

(Acts 20:28 AV)​

Little wonder then, why we "worship Him", eh?

Much More Scriptural Confirmation Is Here!:

Why The Triune GodHead Is Correct! ​

Amen.

 

[FreeInChrist]

The WORD was made flesh and dwelt among us . . . the only begotten of the Father, aka Jesus Christ.

God is carrying on a conversation with his heavenly host --- it is God that does the creating.
We were made a little lower than the angels.
Not as far fetched as a Triune God speaking to the others within himself.

Um, the Trinity is 3 separate within the Godhead.

The same as when Jesus was baptised and the Holy Spirit decended to Him and The Father spoke from heaven.

Not from within.... separate.

And your answer for why Jesus would have changed things when sending them out to preach and teach and said
baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.....when up to that point everyone had been baptised in Jesus name only.

Why the change? What purpose did it serve? And why in the "name" of rather then "names" of....

 

[amazing grace]

Thank you for being Correct; What Saith The Scripture About our Ransom / The PRICE Paid?:

"Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which The Holy Ghost Hath Made​

you overseers, to feed the church of God, Which He Hath Purchased With His Own BLOOD."​

(Acts 20:28 AV)​

Little wonder then, why we "worship Him", eh?

Much More Scriptural Confirmation Is Here!:

Why The Triune GodHead Is Correct! ​

Amen.

Yep, the ransom was paid by the blood of his own [Son] NOT by money which is exactly what Psalm 49 was talking about.
(a. Acts 20:28 Some manuscripts of the Lord b. Acts 20:28 Or with the blood of his Own.) I believe God is immortal and therefore cannot die. And I don't believe spirits have blood to shed - God is Spirit.

For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life for the ransom of many. [Mark 10:45]

For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. [1 Timothy 2:5,6]

. . . knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a Lamb without blemish or spot. [1 Peter 1:18,19]

And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every nation and language and people and nation [Revelation 5:9]

BUT God's Son did give his life and shed his blood!! Praise God!

 

[Runningman]

I just want to make sure of your terminology - by 'claim to divinity' you mean 'claim to be deity, i.e. God'? Right?

hmmm - In my Bible, in 26:63 Jesus was asked if he was the Christ, the Son of God and in 26:64 - He replied - You have said so (Yes, I am). Being the Messiah is not a claim to divinity or God. In Daniel, the 'son of man' was presented before the Ancient of Days - there are two figures there - God and the 'son of man' not one figure. Nothing is being lost on me - Yes, the Son of Man is Jesus' title indicating him being part of humanity, a human being.

There is no need to nick pick John 3:16 - a basic Sunday School verse.
Correct, it does not SAY God sent another human to earth - It says "For God so loved the world that he GAVE his Son. . . ." Right, it's not that hard - God says he gave his Son then he gave His Son which would be someone different from himself.

Deuteronomy 18 God told Moses that he would raise up a prophet like Moses out from among Moses' brethren, i.e. the Israelites and he would put his words in his mouth and he shall speak all that I command him. . . . sounds like a human to me.
2 Samuel 7 God tells David - I will raise up your offspring after you who shall come from your body, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever . . . sounds like a human to me.
Isaiah 53 speaks of someone who grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; . . . sounds like a human to me.

God GAVE (sent, came from heaven, came from God, came from above, etc) his Son in this manner:
The Holy Spirit will come up on you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore (for this reason) the child to be born will be called holy----the Son of God. (parenthesis added) Yes, Jesus Christ was sent to reconcile people back to God.
Who was God's Son while waiting in heaven for his time to be born?

Worshiping anyone or anything that is NOT Almighty God AS Almighty God . . . that is idolatry.
What is wrong with being a human? that is what is meant by 'in the flesh'. Wasn't Jesus made like into his brothers in every respect? Are we not to emulate Jesus in humility, patience, love, forgiveness, i.e. his qualities? Are we perfect like Jesus? NO, in no way but Jesus isn't ashamed to call us brothers.

That's okay with me . . . I am confident in my choice, out of the two possibilities, it fits within the full scope of scripture.

I have read, and tried to understand each issue that you have pointed out - I have NOT glossed over them - but have addressed them from my point of view just as you present the issues you have from your point of view.
I also think Trinitarians just gloss over the issues that Unitarians point out - we each feel this frustration.

Dr. David Cooper, founder of The Biblical Research Society, is known for his "Golden Rule of Interpretation,

"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. Therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise. ​

This rule should be generally followed, but it is not flawless. Scripture uses many literary devices that are not always announced in the immediate context. Devices such as metaphor, allegory, types, hyperbole, idioms, parable, etc.

John 17:3 should be taken literally. The point is I haven't rejected ANY scripture, as I said above I have tried to address each point you bring up. I actually believe that Jesus came in the flesh, i.e. a human being NOT 'God in the flesh'. I do not believe he literally preexisted his birth - I believe he preexisted his birth ONLY in the foreknowledge of God's mind and plans. (I am only speaking on my behalf as a Biblical Unitarian)

I know the true Christ, the Lord's Messiah and my fellowship is with the Father, the one true God and his Son, Jesus Christ.

Well said and I agree with Dr. David Cooper on that point. The plain text of Scripture, what is plainly published and printed in the text, is superior to philosophy, interpretation, and speculation. We must understand that the Bible is the revelation already given in the format we need to understand unless explained better by the whole scope of Scripture. We must also respect the guardrails Scripture puts up to guide us in our reading. The Father being the ONLY true God is a cornerstone that will correctly guide our understanding of the whole Bible. You do a pretty good job of that.

 

[mikesw]

Well said and I agree with Dr. David Cooper on that point. The plain text of Scripture, what is plainly published and printed in the text, is superior to philosophy, interpretation, and speculation. We must understand that the Bible is the revelation already given in the format we need to understand unless explained better by the whole scope of Scripture. We must also respect the guardrails Scripture puts up to guide us in our reading. The Father being the ONLY true God is a cornerstone that will correctly guide our understanding of the whole Bible. You do a pretty good job of that.

I can see how you would endorse the misinterpretation. Dan 7:13-14 does not narrow the idea to "the son of man" but rather "one like a son of man." That is why only Jesus incarnated is different. He comes as the Son of God and Son of Man thus having divinity and humanity. The High Priest recognized Jesus's claim to divinity and that is why the High Priest interpreted this as blasphemy. These concepts are beyond the grasp of the hyperliteralist unitarian way of thinking.

 

[amazing grace]

Um, the Trinity is 3 separate within the Godhead.

The same as when Jesus was baptised and the Holy Spirit decended to Him and The Father spoke from heaven.

Not from within.... separate.

3 separate whats? 3 separate whos?

Jesus was baptized and as a sign for John the Baptist to know who he was - God, who is the Father, visibly sent his Spirit to rest upon Jesus.
Matthew - And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him. . . . This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased. Mark - And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove . . . You are my beloved Son, with you I am well pleased. Luke - and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.” John - And John bore witness: “I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’

Let's see - There is John baptizing Jesus, of course, Jesus himself and God, aka the Father speaking from heaven and sending forth His spirit in the physical manifestation of a dove . . . so the question remains 3 separate whats? 3 separate whos?

And your answer for why Jesus would have changed things when sending them out to preach and teach and said
baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.....when up to that point everyone had been baptised in Jesus name only.

Why the change? What purpose did it serve? And why in the "name" of rather then "names" of....

I don't believe Jesus changed anything. Matthew was written before the book of Acts where it seems baptisms, among healings, etc. were carried out in the name of Jesus or in the name of Jesus Christ.
The only thing questionable is whether Matthew 28 is meant to substantiate the possibility of a Triune God.

 

[FreeInChrist]

3 separate whats? 3 separate whos?

The three you got baptized under. Do you need a reminder?

 

[amazing grace]

The three you got baptized under. Do you need a reminder?

Great way to ignore the actual question!
I got baptized in the name of Jesus if I remember correctly - it was a long time ago.

Um, the Trinity is 3 separate within the Godhead.

3 separate whats? 3 separate whos?

 

[FreeInChrist]

Great way to ignore the actual question!
I got baptized in the name of Jesus if I remember correctly - it was a long time ago.

Interesting. Thought after Jesus told them to baptize in all 3 names that was the go to.
Although I do know of a place in the vicinity that will baptize anyone for any reason but how I have no idea... I dont want to.

Well, to answer you question The Father. The Son, The Holy Spirit.

These names are one in the Godhead. Each has a specific job(s) to do so they work together as one.

Much the same as a man and woman who are married are considered by God as ......
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Each has their own job(s) buit they also work together and are one.

 

[amazing grace]

Interesting. Thought after Jesus told them to baptize in all 3 names that was the go to.
Although I do know of a place in the vicinity that will baptize anyone for any reason but how I have no idea... I dont want to.

Well, to answer you question The Father. The Son, The Holy Spirit.

These names are one in the Godhead. Each has a specific job(s) to do so they work together as one.

Much the same as a man and woman who are married are considered by God as ......
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Each has their own job(s) buit they also work together and are one.

I guess you have never read the book of Acts . . .

And all three are God? (1) We have the Father who is God. (2) We have the Son who is God. (3) We have the Holy Spirit who is God. SEPARATE and DISTINCT? Right?

Yep, but I ain't my husband and my husband ain't me so we are not one entity, aka one being, aka one person, aka not one person in the marriage.

He is my head - his head is Christ - Christ head is God - Which 'who' or 'what' is this 'God' who is the head of Christ?

 

[FreeInChrist]

I guess you have never read the book of Acts . . .

And all three are God? (1) We have the Father who is God. (2) We have the Son who is God. (3) We have the Holy Spirit who is God. SEPARATE and DISTINCT? Right?

Yep, but I ain't my husband and my husband ain't me so we are not one entity, aka one being, aka one person, aka not one person in the marriage.

He is my head - his head is Christ - Christ head is God - Which 'who' or 'what' is this 'God' who is the head of Christ?

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Matt 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Mark 10:8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

Take it up with God.

And while you are at it go study about echad.

"echad" is used in Genesis 2:24 to describe the unity of a husband and wife, indicating that they become "one flesh," which reflects a composite or unified oneness rather than a singular numeric one. This usage emphasizes the idea of partnership and unity in marriage.

Similar to the Godhead.

There is a lot written on this for study. A lot.

 

[amazing grace]

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Matt 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Mark 10:8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

Take it up with God.
And while you are at it go study about echad.
"echad" is used in Genesis 2:24 to describe the unity of a husband and wife, indicating that they become "one flesh," which reflects a composite or unified oneness rather than a singular numeric one. This usage emphasizes the idea of partnership and unity in marriage.

Similar to the Godhead.

There is a lot written on this for study. A lot.

Yes, I know the verses very well but it still doesn't make my husband and I ONE human being! Yes, one in purpose and united in marriage but still two individual human beings, a male and a female.

He is my head - his head is Christ - Christ head is God - Which 'who' or 'what' is this 'God' who is the head of Christ? I didn't see this answered.

Similar to the Godhead? If I am one in purpose with my husband yet we are still two individual human beings then wouldn't that also be applicable to the Godhead? We would have God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit one in purpose yet three individual, separate and distinct, beings which seems to me to equal 3 gods.

Yeah, ehad (pronounced ekh-awd) means 1) the ONE (number); 2) each, every; 3) a certain; 4) an (indefinite article); 5) only, once, once for all; 6) one . . another, the one....the other, one after another, one by one; 7) first; 8) eleven (in combination, eleventh (ordinal) Although this is not mentioned in the cefinition for ehad I knew it would need to be addressed ------ It can mean one COLLECTIVELY as in one herd, one cluster of grapes, one body [heis - numeral one; one body(of Christ with many members).