The Trinity and all of its supporting doctrines are all circular in reasoning
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
you are providing the new, novel, gnostic, private interpretation that disregards the deity of Christ -- or more specifically how the preexisting One became flesh. It is hardly my duty to figure out your belief system and adapt it without sufficient defense of your system of belief.
Like mentioned before, the argument does not have to focus on the Trinity defense of God but only on how you dismiss the deity of Christ. That alone exposes the unitarian fallacy. Had scripture not been sufficiently clear about the deity of Christ, you would have had better ground for your belief system. Of course the problem is that you have spent two years here without having an sufficient argument to deny the deity of Christ. If yours had been consistent with scripture, some would have converted to your religion by now. Nor does there seem to be such great arguments from unitarians so as to draw forth a grand church council to reconsider the matter.
What was your first step that led you away to unitarianism?
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
Did you know that Scripture is the revelation? It doesn't need you to come along and tell us what it means. It was already made perfectly clear by Jesus and the prophets who overwhelmingly referred to God as a singular person who created alone.
Christadelphians make the error of assuming that what they find as the meaning of verses is somehow correct but that others are all wrong in their finding of the meaning. I think this leads them to accept simple, surface meaning of some verses while avoiding study of the verses that expose the errors of the Christadelphian reliance on their starting point.
Doug Brents
Active Member
The OT prophets did not understand what they were writing. The revelation was given, but that doesn't mean that the understanding of it was given as well (1 Pet 1:10-12).
And while you are correct that the overwhelming majority of references to God are in the singular, there are some that are in the plural. And since there is not a single word, or even a jot or tittle, in Scripture that is in error, these plural references are Truth, and are there to help us understand the nature of God.
Runningman
Active Member
So Scripture is the revelation, you aren't. You're not a prophet, you have no spiritual gifts, you speak on no one's authority except your own. Why do you reject God being He as Scripture states?
Runningman
Active Member
If you disagree with God being a He who created alone, but instead is a them who created with others, now's the time to start quoting some Scripture. I am pretty sure we already tried this before and you couldn't. Wanna try again?
Last edited:
Doug Brents
Active Member
Sure, Scripture is the revelation, and I am not. No argument there.
But I do have spiritual gifts; who are you to claim I do not. I do speak the truth of God. And I fully accept God as He says He is in Scripture: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Runningman
Active Member
Singular personal pronouns always have one referent, never multiple persons. Ever. Not once. If you know of any instances where a He is clearly more than one person I would like to see it.
Doug Brents
Active Member
Plural personal pronouns never have a single referent, always multiple persons. Always.
Runningman
Active Member
Now we're getting somewhere sir! And God, aka YHWH, is always referred to as a He, Him, His, thousands of times and never a they or them, correct? That's why I know for 100% certainty God is a single person, not plural persons as so many trinitarians have been saying. I feel like you are on the edge of making a breakthrough.
Doug Brents
Active Member
No, He is not ALWAYS referred to in the singular. God said to "Himself", "Let US make man in OUR image." The breakthrough is yours to make.
Runningman
Active Member
That doesn't say it is God referring to Himself. After that, for the rest of the entire Bible, literally, God is always a He, Him, His. You're getting close to that breakthrough.
You have not learned that theos is a general term. It can be applied to false gods and, in a broad sense, to both the Father and the Son. But since they are One, as per Deut 6:4, the singular use of "god" is applicable, especially in showing that other so-called gods are false ones who lack the ultimate role as Creator and Almighty One.
Your effort has to be how the testimony of scripture of the deity of Christ is somehow errant -- and that you can convince people of that.
Runningman
Active Member
You have not learned even basic pronoun usage. If you understand the difference between a singular person and a plural person we wouldn't need to resort to this being an English lesson instead of a Biblical lesson. This shows you have no business telling anyone what the Bible says. It's scarier to consider that you know the meaning of personal pronouns, but have made it your life mission to deceive as many people as possible. Fortunately, I have you. You're going to spend massive amounts of energy arguing and getting nowhere on this particular subject because you do not speak the truth.
you have not learned about Jesus. You are stuck in Pharisaical status. All you have to do is give a strong argument as to why the scriptural testimony of the preexisting One becoming flesh as Jesus should not be trusted. The heart of the discussion does not concern whether there is one God or many gods. Nor is there a conflict on whether Jesus came as human. The heart of the discussion is the essence of God and how the deity of Christ does not contradict the fact of God's oneness. If you think that sharing scripture is deceit, you should just stick with your religion. Do not however keep debating points that are not in conflict.
amazing grace
Active Member
Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:5-9; and Isaiah 6:6-8 - In each we have the singular God/LORD speaking to someone else----clearly to persons other than himself. In two of the 'us' references Gen. 3:22 and Isaiah 6:6-8 - cherubim and seraphim are present and it's highly likely that God is speaking to them. It wouldn't be beyond impossible for Gen. 1:26 and Gen. 11:5-9 to also be God speaking to his heavenly host, to the angelic beings.
Four verses in all of scripture referencing plural pronouns isn't really significant among the many (approximately 25,000) usages of the singular verbs, adjectives, and pronouns used in reference to God.
Diserner
Active Member
"Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. (Jn. 3:11) Forgot one. And yes, these verses are extremely significant, not throwaways. They give the plural divine attributes, "our image" and "what we know" and "go for us." Complete cop out to punt to angels.
Runningman
Active Member
You have not shown any evidence of a "pre-existent one who became flesh" using Scripture. I have asked you at least a dozen times to refer to the Old Testament where said pre-existent one pre-existed and/or where anyone else outside of John 1 supports your interpretation. None of that exists, though, as we have seen. So you are not sharing Scripture, you are sharing a random man's pet religion and trying to pass it off as Scripture. The wall you are up against is that there are people here who will not enable you add to nor take away from the Bible like you seem to used to have been doing.
Runningman
Active Member
The issue is that you never have gotten God defined as more than one person in all of Scripture. There are no "They are God" or "We are God" verses. There are only "He is God" or "You are God" or "I am God" kind of statements with overwhelming consistency.
Similar threads
