Peterlag
Active Member
Now if I live to be 300 years old, I will never understand that when the Bible says an Angel, that somehow that means Jesus.
The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
Peterlag
Active Member
The Bible says the Son will be subject to the Father even in the future “When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him [God] who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). The teaching that the two of them are “co-equal” must be wrong if Jesus is subject to the Father even in the eternal future.
“Then cometh the end, when he [Christ] shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he [Christ] shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
For he [Christ] must reign, till he [God] hath put all enemies under his [Christ's] feet.
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
For he [God] hath put all things under his [Christ's] feet. But when he [God] said all things are put under him, [Christ] it is manifest [obvious] that he [God] is excepted, [God is the only exception] which did put all things under him [Christ].
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, [Christ] then [not now, but at some future time] shall the Son also himself be subject unto him [God] that put all things under him, [Christ] that God may be all in all."
“Then cometh the end, when he [Christ] shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he [Christ] shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
For he [Christ] must reign, till he [God] hath put all enemies under his [Christ's] feet.
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
For he [God] hath put all things under his [Christ's] feet. But when he [God] said all things are put under him, [Christ] it is manifest [obvious] that he [God] is excepted, [God is the only exception] which did put all things under him [Christ].
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, [Christ] then [not now, but at some future time] shall the Son also himself be subject unto him [God] that put all things under him, [Christ] that God may be all in all."
amazing grace
Active Member
So Jesus is an angel? the JW's have it right? God's Son was an Angel?
If you want to reduce the Creator to an angel, that is another distortion that you can pursue. If you want to follow scripture as it appears to resolve itself, then the Messenger is a manifestation of the Word who then became incarnate. Otherwise, that Angel is left a mystery. I cannot believe the degree that unitarians get stuck in a rut,.
The problem of unitarians is to flatten scripture to meaningless ideas rather than writers inspired by God. Anything that takes a person beyond hyperliteralism is a step in the right direction.
I see part of the confusion here. The physical body of Jesus did not exist until the incarnation of the Word. Then, the Word appears to be the one who is described by the Angel of the Lord. This explains the greater probability rather than denying the preexisting One only appears in the New Testament.
No, for THE Angel of the Lord in the OT spoke for God as his messenger, and was also Himself very God
yes, for in the OT whenever God appeared and spoke to people seemed to always be the Son before his physical incarnation into human flesh, so was the one who spoke to Adam in garden, to Abraham, as Angel of the Lord etc
amazing grace
Active Member
I'm not the one who claimed or spoke of Jesus as being the Angel of the LORD in the Old Testament.
The Angel of the LORD is not a mystery......it's called the Angel of the LORD because it was an angel.
amazing grace
Active Member
First the Angel of the LORD was Jesus.....now the Angel of the LORD is God.....I suppose you mean that the Angel of the LORD was the Triune God??? Why can't the Angle of the LORD just be that --- the Angel of the LORD?
I agree that the Angel of the LORD in the OT spoke for God and AS God but the angel was not God Himself which is why he was called the Angel of the LORD --- he was an angel sent by God to act on his behalf. It's what's known as the 'principle of agency'.
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
Fiction.
Well, you are failing to understand that Christ is the Eternal Son of God. Not created but begotten by the Father. But I think I have asked you already. Who do you say the Son is?
The Unbelief of the People
John 14:36 While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.”
Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. 37Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:
“Lord, who has believed what he heard from us,
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”
39Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said,
40“He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their heart,
lest they see with their eyes,
and understand with their heart, and turn,
and I would heal them.”
41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him.
Isaiah’s Vision of the Lord
Isaiah 6:1 In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple. 2 Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called to another and said:
“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;
the whole earth is full of his glory!”
the whole earth is full of his glory!”
Runningman
Active Member
Your error is the same many trinitarians make because you all learned from the same flawed and debunked trinitarian apologetics book it seems. John 14:41 doesn't refer to what Isaiah 6:1 says, but rather refers to Isaiah 6:10. Isaiah 6:1 is never applied to Jesus in Scripture, no one ever said that's Jesus, and the very title of the chapter opens by saying it is a vision. It's a different subject from what John was talking about in John 14.
Similar threads
