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

[Runningman]

Everyone else has to be wrong so running man can be right.

Isn't that what you are doing though? 1 John 1:1-3 calls the Word a that, which, this, that, and an it but you can't accept that refers to a thing. Suddenly eternal life isn't immortality, but a person, and the grammar of John 1:1 can't mean anything else other than the translation provided in published Bibles. If I may ask, what is your horse in the race here? Are you a trinitarian because that's what you want to believe or are you a trinitarian because that's what the Bible says of God?

 

[Runningman]

@mikesw I am thinking of opening a new thread. It's going to be called something to the effect of "There are no post-resurrection examples of Jesus forgiving sins in the Bible." Just thought I would see what you said first.

 

[synergy]

Then you have just confessed that that Word is not God.

You sound confused. You're the one who keeps contradicting John 1:1c by saying that, not me. Only unitarians go around contradicting scripture.

This isn't one of those situations where you can have your cake and eat it too. At least @mikesw was smart and wouldn't commit to an answer, but you did.

So can you tell us what an anarthrous predicate nominative predicate nominative means in context of John 1:1?

I already told you in my previous post. If you can't bother to read what I wrote then just say so.

That phrase does indeed use the word "God" as an anarthrous predicate nominative placed before the verb, a construction that in Greek emphasizes nature or essence, meaning the Word possesses the very essence and characteristics of God. Since only God can possess the characteristics of omnipresence and omniscience then the Word is obviously God.

Send us more Trinitarian verses. Don't stop now You're doing a super job of supporting Trinitarianism.

 

[civic]

@mikesw I am thinking of opening a new thread. It's going to be called something to the effect of "There are no post-resurrection examples of Jesus forgiving sins in the Bible." Just thought I would see what you said first.

none with the Father either.

next fallacy

 

[civic]

@mikesw I am thinking of opening a new thread. It's going to be called something to the effect of "There are no post-resurrection examples of Jesus forgiving sins in the Bible." Just thought I would see what you said first.

and why would their be since He made atonement for sin before His Resurrection. His death provided forgiveness for sins.

your logic and reasoning is flawed to discredit Jesus and devalue Him and take away His glory, honor, worship, power and praise.

 

[synergy]

Isn't that what you are doing though? 1 John 1:1-3 calls the Word a that, which, this, that, and an it but you can't accept that refers to a thing. Suddenly eternal life isn't immortality, but a person, and the grammar of John 1:1 can't mean anything else other than the translation provided in published Bibles. If I may ask, what is your horse in the race here? Are you a trinitarian because that's what you want to believe or are you a trinitarian because that's what the Bible says of God?

You continue to display your willful ignorance of Greek. John makes use of Greek-styled neuter pronouns in 1 John 1 to refer to an abstracted or collective reality, as he did in John 3:6: “That which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” We can all agree that a thing is not born of Spirit, people are. Right?

 

[synergy]

@mikesw I am thinking of opening a new thread. It's going to be called something to the effect of "There are no post-resurrection examples of Jesus forgiving sins in the Bible." Just thought I would see what you said first.

Beware of what you promote because it might very well become true in your case.

 

[Runningman]

and why would their be since He made atonement for sin before His Resurrection. His death provided forgiveness for sins.

your logic and reasoning is flawed to discredit Jesus and devalue Him and take away His glory, honor, worship, power and praise.

Who is wiping out sins here? The Lord who sent Jesus or Jesus?

Acts 4
19Repent, then, and turn back, so that your sins may be wiped away, 20that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send Jesus, the Christ, who has been appointed for you.

 

[Alter2Ego]

Jesus' physical ascension to heaven? You are out of your mind!

Tell you what, Runningman, go and read 1 Corinthians 15:50. Read it dozens of times if necessary, and perhaps, by some miracle, it will sink in that physical beings CANNOT survive in the spirit realm aka heaven.

1 Corinthians 15 is what I am quoting too. The resurrected body is raised imperishable (1 Corinthians 15:42) and with God all things are possible. Anyway, I don't really mind if you think Jesus is not a man in heaven. I don't think that's a salvation issue, misunderstanding something isn't the same thing as willfully opposing it. I do see your point, but I disagree that the "kingdom of God" is the same thing as heaven. If you want to see heaven, just look up. That thing we call outer space is heaven. It's where the Bible says Jesus ascended to, not in a spiritual sense, but as in moving from one spatial location to another relative to the earth and sky and it mirrors the rapture doctrine. Don't ask me how that works, ask the Father.

Runningman:

Physical bodies cannot survive in heaven. What is it about that don't you get? I advised you to read 1 Corinthians 15:50. You steadfastly refuse to accept what it says because it debunks your nonsensical claim that Jesus--as a fleshly person--is in heaven despite the fact 1 Corinthians 15:50 says flesh and blood cannot inherit God's kingdom.


"But this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption."
(1 Corinthians 15:50 -- Anderson New Testament)

1 Corinthians 15 Anderson's New Testament

1 Corinthians 15 is what I am quoting too. The resurrected body is raised imperishable (1 Corinthians 15:42) and with God all things are possible. Anyway, I don't really mind if you think Jesus is not a man in heaven.

Telling me that with God all things are possible, according to 1 Corinthians 15:42, while deliberately ignoring 1 Corinthians 15:50 is your way of saying the Bible contradicts itself. You are no different from the Trinitarians that you are trying to correct. It's called hypocrisy.

 

[mikesw]

Runningman:

Physical bodies cannot survive in heaven. What is it about that don't you get? I advised you to read 1 Corinthians 15:50. You steadfastly refuse to accept what it says because it debunks your nonsensical claim that Jesus--as a fleshly person--is in heaven despite the fact 1 Corinthians 15:50 says flesh and blood cannot inherit God's kingdom.


"But this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption."
(1 Corinthians 15:50 -- Anderson New Testament)

1 Corinthians 15 Anderson's New Testament

Telling me that with God all things are possible, according to 1 Corinthians 15:42, while deliberately ignoring 1 Corinthians 15:50 is your way of saying the Bible contradicts itself. You are no different from the Trinitarians that you are trying to correct. It's called hypocrisy.

Wait!! We cannot have unitarians arguing against each other. That is totally unacceptable. Unitarians must unite!

 

[Alter2Ego]

1 Corinthians 15 is what I am quoting too. The resurrected body is raised imperishable (1 Corinthians 15:42) and with God all things are possible. Anyway, I don't really mind if you think Jesus is not a man in heaven. I don't think that's a salvation issue, misunderstanding something isn't the same thing as willfully opposing it. I do see your point, but I disagree that the "kingdom of God" is the same thing as heaven. If you want to see heaven, just look up. That thing we call outer space is heaven. It's where the Bible says Jesus ascended to, not in a spiritual sense, but as in moving from one spatial location to another relative to the earth and sky and it mirrors the rapture doctrine. Don't ask me how that works, ask the Father.

Runningman:

That's the same argument the Trinitarians make. You sound just like them. Scripture says Jesus was the first of ALL of Jehovah God's creation.


"Christ is the visible likeness of the invisible God. He is the first-born Son, superior to all created things. (Good News Translation -- Colossians 1:15)

Colossians 1 GNT

That means the prehuman Jesus existed in heaven BEFORE the earth was created and before all of the planets and all of the other angels were created. Scripture goes on to say that ALL other created things were created THROUGH the pre-human Jesus by means of Jehovah's power.

"For through him God created everything in heaven and on earth, the seen and the unseen things, including spiritual powers, lords, rulers, and authorities. God created the whole universe through him and for him."
(Good News Translation -- Colossians 1:16)


By rejecting what the Bible says about Jesus' pre-human existence, you are doing the exact opposing of what the Trinitarians are doing. The Trinitarians have turned Jesus into Almighty God, and you have demoted Jesus to the permanent position of a mere human. That means the Bible is lying when it says:

1. The Abrahamic God created the prehuman Jesus BEFORE he created all other things, as stated at Colossians 1:15.

2. The Abrahamic God worked through Jesus to create all other things, including the planets, the other angels, and everything else that was created, as stated at Colossians 1:16.

 

[Alter2Ego]

1 Corinthians 15 is what I am quoting too. The resurrected body is raised imperishable (1 Corinthians 15:42) and with God all things are possible. Anyway, I don't really mind if you think Jesus is not a man in heaven. I don't think that's a salvation issue, misunderstanding something isn't the same thing as willfully opposing it. I do see your point, but I disagree that the "kingdom of God" is the same thing as heaven. If you want to see heaven, just look up. That thing we call outer space is heaven. It's where the Bible says Jesus ascended to, not in a spiritual sense, but as in moving from one spatial location to another relative to the earth and sky and it mirrors the rapture doctrine. Don't ask me how that works, ask the Father.

Runningman:

You don't consider your behavior willfully opposing scriptural correction? Really?

That's the same argument the Trinitarians make. You sound just like them. And of course you are willfully opposing scriptural correction while minimizing your behavior.


What a hypocrite!

 

[Runningman]

Runningman:

You don't consider your behavior willfully opposing scriptural correction? Really?

That's the same argument the Trinitarians make. You sound just like them. And of course you are willfully opposing scriptural correction while minimizing your behavior.


What a hypocrite!

I'm not a JW. I don't believe Jesus pre-existed as an angel. I think you would make a fine Biblical Unitarian. There are good reasons why Jesus wasn't a pre-existent angel.

cc: @Peterlag

 

[Runningman]

Beware of what you promote because it might very well become true in your case.

Luke 18
13But the tax collector stood at a distance, unwilling even to lift up his eyes to heaven. Instead, he beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner!’ 14I tell you, this man, rather than the Pharisee, went home justified. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

 

[Runningman]

Wait!! We cannot have unitarians arguing against each other. That is totally unacceptable. Unitarians must unite!

Did you read my thread suggestion? It's Biblically accurate. Waiting on your reply.

 

[mikesw]

@mikesw I am thinking of opening a new thread. It's going to be called something to the effect of "There are no post-resurrection examples of Jesus forgiving sins in the Bible." Just thought I would see what you said first.

Not sure what that would accomplish. Jesus in his message pre-resurrection is showing his authority as the Son of God. After resurrection, he has entered his messiahship and has provided the means of justification through his blood. The power of resurrection demonstrates who he is but in a much greater way than what he shared while walking among the Jews.

 

[Runningman]

Not sure what that would accomplish. Jesus in his message pre-resurrection is showing his authority as the Son of God. After resurrection, he has entered his messiahship and has provided the means of justification through his blood. The power of resurrection demonstrates who he is but in a much greater way than what he shared while walking among the Jews.

Well, Jesus not forgiving sins post-resurrection would support his role as high priest and mediator for starters. That's a point for Unitarianism. Why are there post resurrection examples of how to get sin forgiveness that don't come through the sin sacrifice?

 

[mikesw]

Well, Jesus not forgiving sins post-resurrection would support his role as high priest and mediator for starters. That's a point for Unitarianism.

That sounds too ignorant of Christianity.
Maybe you heard that Jesus died on the cross and shed his blood to atone for the sins. What more does he have to do to make that effective? His death is mediation or do you not think that his blood mediates between the sins of man and God?

Why are there post resurrection examples of how to get sin forgiveness that don't come through the sin sacrifice?

I'm not sure what you mean here. People still are to turn away from individual sins they do. That is still covered by Christ.

I think you hope to be within the bounds of Christianity. It does not seem you are purposely straying. But you are not using this forum for feedback and correction but rather as sharing a private interpretation that you have grasped onto.

 

[Doug Brents]

Let's just take the first one for an example. It's the same story with the trinity whereby you read into it what you want it to say and not what is there. The fact that Gods knows us so well does not mean He knows the future. It just means He knows us well. Even I know 100 percent what a guy is going to do based on what I tell him and I'm not God.

Psalm 139:1-4 tells us much more than just that He knows us so well. It tells us that before we what we are going to say before it is even on our tongue (before we even think it). And there is much more there as well. But this is only one verse, and it does not tell us everything about who/what God is and knows. Remember, all of Scripture is true at the same time. One verse tells us that God knows us now. Another verse tells us that He knew us before He even created the universe. Another tells us that He knows our inmost secrets. Another tells us that He knew the end from the Beginning. All of these are true at the same time. All of them must be incorporated into what we believe/know about God. You cannot (as you seem to want to do) take each verse or passage separately, and think that each give a full accounting of who/what God is.

 

[Peterlag]

Psalm 139:1-4 tells us much more than just that He knows us so well. It tells us that before we what we are going to say before it is even on our tongue (before we even think it). And there is much more there as well. But this is only one verse, and it does not tell us everything about who/what God is and knows. Remember, all of Scripture is true at the same time. One verse tells us that God knows us now. Another verse tells us that He knew us before He even created the universe. Another tells us that He knows our inmost secrets. Another tells us that He knew the end from the Beginning. All of these are true at the same time. All of them must be incorporated into what we believe/know about God. You cannot (as you seem to want to do) take each verse or passage separately, and think that each give a full accounting of who/what God is.

You need to expend your brain because it's only thinking short term. If a man knows what his child will do after every meal based on what the child did after every meal for years. And then he had a few more kids is how he can know what kids do after every meal. Now think about God watching men for thousands of years. And the fact that He may have done this before maybe a million times on other planets in different galaxies. All of the above would not mean God saw the future.