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

[Runningman]

View attachment 2808

If God is a trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit co-equal in every way, then this means that the Son in the trinity doesn't know what the Father knows. This also proves that God can't be defined as a trinity, it rules the Son out of being a member of such. In trinitarian theology, the Son and Father and Holy Spirit must always know the same things, but in the Bible that isn't how it is.

 

[synergy]

Revelation 5:7-14 proves that the Lamb is not the One on the throne because not only did the Lamb approach the throne, the Lamb isn't on the throne where they were worshipping. Conclusion, no worship of the Lamb in Revelation 5 either explicitly or inferred.

Actually, Rev 3:21 does say that Jesus did sit down with the Father on His Throne. That makes no difference to you because you always disregard that verse.

(Rev 3:21) To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame and have sat down with My Father in His throne.

So stop running away from my question: Do you offer the same worship to Jesus as you do to “the One who sits on the throne”?

Jesus doesn't share any of God's names, and there are about a dozen titles he doesn't share with God. Probably the biggest issue is that Jesus isn't even the same person as God, never called The God, never called Lord God Almighty, never called YHWH, etc. It's a long list.

Scripture nowhere requires Jesus to be called “the Father” or to merge the persons in order to share the divine name. On the contrary, the New Testament explicitly applies YHWH texts, divine titles, divine functions, and divine worship to Jesus: He is called God (John 1:1; John 20:28; Titus 2:13), Lord in the YHWH sense (Phil 2:9–11 citing Isa 45:23), Alpha and Omega / First and Last (Rev 1:17; 22:13), Creator (John 1:3; Col 1:16), Judge of all (John 5:22–23), and the rightful recipient of prayer and worship. The claim that Jesus is “never called Lord God Almighty” proves nothing—titles are not checklists, and divine identity in Scripture is revealed through shared prerogatives, glory, and worship, not through wooden repetition of phrases.

 

[Runningman]

Actually, Rev 3:21 does say that Jesus did sit down with the Father on His Throne. That makes no difference to you because you always disregard that verse.

(Rev 3:21) To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame and have sat down with My Father in His throne.

So stop running away from my question: Do you offer the same worship to Jesus as you do to “the One who sits on the throne”?

Scripture nowhere requires Jesus to be called “the Father” or to merge the persons in order to share the divine name. On the contrary, the New Testament explicitly applies YHWH texts, divine titles, divine functions, and divine worship to Jesus: He is called God (John 1:1; John 20:28; Titus 2:13), Lord in the YHWH sense (Phil 2:9–11 citing Isa 45:23), Alpha and Omega / First and Last (Rev 1:17; 22:13), Creator (John 1:3; Col 1:16), Judge of all (John 5:22–23), and the rightful recipient of prayer and worship. The claim that Jesus is “never called Lord God Almighty” proves nothing—titles are not checklists, and divine identity in Scripture is revealed through shared prerogatives, glory, and worship, not through wooden repetition of phrases.

Yeah, not the same throne as God. You'll see now that the Lamb approached the throne, after getting up from his own throne.

Revelation 5
7And He came and took the scroll from the right hand of the One seated on the throne.

So your idea about the Lamb literally sitting on the throne of God lacks consistently, and con be demonstrated repeatedly to be a poor interpretation of Scripture. Soon we will show you seven ways to Sunday how Jesus isn't on the throne of God and isn't even permanently at the right hand of God. Just depends how well you humbly receive the truth.

 

[synergy]

Yeah, not the same throne as God.

You continue to flat out deny Rev 3:21 where Christ said, “I sat down with My Father on His throne,” which explicitly affirms the very same Throne as God the Father.

Continuing to discuss Scripture with those who deny it like you do is useless.

You'll see now that the Lamb approached the throne, after getting up from his own throne.

Revelation 5
7And He came and took the scroll from the right hand of the One seated on the throne.

So your idea about the Lamb literally sitting on the throne of God lacks consistently, and con be demonstrated repeatedly to be a poor interpretation of Scripture. Soon we will show you seven ways to Sunday how Jesus isn't on the throne of God and isn't even permanently at the right hand of God. Just depends how well you humbly receive the truth.

The Lamb approaching “the One seated on the throne” shows personal distinction, not inferiority or exclusion from the throne. The same book later declares the exact opposite of your claim: “the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it” (Revelation 22:1, 3), using a singular throne shared jointly, not two competing thrones. Scripture also repeatedly affirms His permanent exaltation at the right hand of God (Hebrews 1:3; 10:12–13), language denoting supreme authority, not temporary seating arrangements. Your reading continues to deny verses upon verses.

 

[Runningman]

You continue to flat out deny Rev 3:21 where Christ said, “I sat down with My Father on His throne,” which explicitly affirms the very same Throne as God the Father.

Continuing to discuss Scripture with those who deny it like you do is useless.

No he's not sitting on the Father's throne as evidenced by the whole of Scripture about Jesus setting at the right hand of God, or approaching the throne of God, etc. Different thrones. What Revelation 3:21 is about is Jesus sitting on the throne that the Father gave him, not sharing deity or Godhood, etc.

Where you flop on this point is that the very verse you're using also says that those who overcome sit on the throne of Jesus. If the throne of Jesus is the throne of God then that makes Paul the same as Lord God Almighty. You've been stuck in this pickle for months now.

The Lamb approaching “the One seated on the throne” shows personal distinction, not inferiority or exclusion from the throne. The same book later declares the exact opposite of your claim: “the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it” (Revelation 22:1, 3), using a singular throne shared jointly, not two competing thrones. Scripture also repeatedly affirms His permanent exaltation at the right hand of God (Hebrews 1:3; 10:12–13), language denoting supreme authority, not temporary seating arrangements. Your reading continues to deny verses upon verses.

This demonstrates that Jesus isn't God too. It shows that he isn't being worshipped as God in heaven nor are there any examples of such in all of Scripture. Pretty hard to sell an argument about Jesus being God when in all of Scripture he is never treated as such. You have the wrong idea about Jesus.

 

[Peterlag]

Compare this verse with verses where Jesus accepts worship, forgives sin itself, walks on water, calms the storm. Obviously having fully divine attributes.

There is no contradictions in scripture, so what is going on?

Jesus was 100 percent God...but also 100 percent human.

So when only the Father knows something, this would be to do with Jesus as limiting Himself in human form.

But also.. what are the verse around this saying? It doesn't stand alone. Is it actually saying Jesus doesn't know at all, or something else?

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100% man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

For example, in his God nature he would not have been tempted by anything (James 1:13), and his human part would not have been tempted either since his human nature had access to that same knowledge and assurance. It is written he was tempted in every way like we all are (Hebrews 4:15). Furthermore, God does not have the problems, uncertainty, and anxieties that humans do, and Jesus would not have had those either if he knew he was God. Also, Luke 2:52 says Jesus grew in wisdom, but his human part would have had access to his God part, which would have given him infinite and inherent wisdom. Hebrews says Jesus “learned obedience” by the things that he suffered, but again, the human part of Jesus would have accessed the God part of him and he would not have needed to learn anything.

Kenotic Trinitarians claim that Jesus put off or limited His God nature, but that theology only developed to try to reconcile some of the verses about what Christ experienced on the earth. The idea that God can limit what He knows or experiences as God is not taught or explained in Scripture, and Kenotic Trinitarianism has been rejected by orthodox Trinitarians for exactly that reason. The very simple way to explain the “difficult verses” that Kenotic Trinitarians are trying to explain about Christ’s human experiences is to realize that Jesus was a fully human being, and not both God and man at the same time. Some assert we have to take the Trinity “by faith” but that is not biblical either.

 

[mikesw]

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100% man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

For example, in his God nature he would not have been tempted by anything (James 1:13), and his human part would not have been tempted either since his human nature had access to that same knowledge and assurance. It is written he was tempted in every way like we all are (Hebrews 4:15). Furthermore, God does not have the problems, uncertainty, and anxieties that humans do, and Jesus would not have had those either if he knew he was God. Also, Luke 2:52 says Jesus grew in wisdom, but his human part would have had access to his God part, which would have given him infinite and inherent wisdom. Hebrews says Jesus “learned obedience” by the things that he suffered, but again, the human part of Jesus would have accessed the God part of him and he would not have needed to learn anything.

Kenotic Trinitarians claim that Jesus put off or limited His God nature, but that theology only developed to try to reconcile some of the verses about what Christ experienced on the earth. The idea that God can limit what He knows or experiences as God is not taught or explained in Scripture, and Kenotic Trinitarianism has been rejected by orthodox Trinitarians for exactly that reason. The very simple way to explain the “difficult verses” that Kenotic Trinitarians are trying to explain about Christ’s human experiences is to realize that Jesus was a fully human being, and not both God and man at the same time. Some assert we have to take the Trinity “by faith” but that is not biblical either.

as long as you know the pre-existing One that was with God and was God is shown to become incarnate, you are closer to reality than the unitarian view. It can be the difficulty of explaining how God does this, but the good news is you do not have to tell God how to do this. God already knows everything.
The other thing is that the hyperliteralist cannot tell how mere words become a living human walking on earth and talking with people. For a unitarian to deny that is to deny the very basis of unitarianism.

 

[360watt]

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100% man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

For example, in his God nature he would not have been tempted by anything (James 1:13), and his human part would not have been tempted either since his human nature had access to that same knowledge and assurance. It is written he was tempted in every way like we all are (Hebrews 4:15). Furthermore, God does not have the problems, uncertainty, and anxieties that humans do, and Jesus would not have had those either if he knew he was God. Also, Luke 2:52 says Jesus grew in wisdom, but his human part would have had access to his God part, which would have given him infinite and inherent wisdom. Hebrews says Jesus “learned obedience” by the things that he suffered, but again, the human part of Jesus would have accessed the God part of him and he would not have needed to learn anything.

Kenotic Trinitarians claim that Jesus put off or limited His God nature, but that theology only developed to try to reconcile some of the verses about what Christ experienced on the earth. The idea that God can limit what He knows or experiences as God is not taught or explained in Scripture, and Kenotic Trinitarianism has been rejected by orthodox Trinitarians for exactly that reason. The very simple way to explain the “difficult verses” that Kenotic Trinitarians are trying to explain about Christ’s human experiences is to realize that Jesus was a fully human being, and not both God and man at the same time. Some assert we have to take the Trinity “by faith” but that is not biblical either.

Again, from a while ago...

Being tempted.. doesn't mean taking the temptation. Having the offer of sin, doesn't mean they have partook in sin.

Jesus was tempted by the devil, but never gave in. In regards to Jesus' development as human... experiencing human things, doesn't mean He is not God. Jesus could teach the old testament in the synagogue before the teachers of the law, before he was of age as a man.

What is the context around Jesus learning obedience through the things He suffered? Preceding and following verses? Is it saying Jesus wasn't God, because He learned obedience?