Runningman
Active Member
So it seems you're the problem, not the language. When someone is called a he, do you believe that if referring to one person or more than one person?
The Trinity and the Incarnation
- Thread starter Rory Wilson
- Start date
Runningman
Active Member
Well, if you had something before Abraham was with Jesus saying something in a pre-existent state, which you have claimed repeatedly, you would have taken the slam dunk. I literally set you up to succeed and was willing to take a loss just so you could have proved Jesus pre-existed.
So you have no real argument. Thanks for trying and being a good sport.
Peterlag
Active Member
How trinitarians teach the Trinity...
I say...
If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it?
The trinitarian has only 3 to pick from...
1.) Use a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Use a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Not understand how the words were used in the culture they were written in.
And basically that's all trinitarians have. And I mean 100 percent of what they have. They have nothing else.
I say...
If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it?
The trinitarian has only 3 to pick from...
1.) Use a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Use a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Not understand how the words were used in the culture they were written in.
And basically that's all trinitarians have. And I mean 100 percent of what they have. They have nothing else.
We have the words of Jesus. "I and the Father are one" is found in the Bible in John 10:30. This statement by Jesus is a key declaration of his unity with God.
Bob Carabbio
Active Member
Simplest thing in the world!!! The word "Doctrine" is the key. A "Doctrine is nothing more than "Theological rhetoric" based on nothing more than the paradigmatic beliefs of the Denominational system formalizing it.
Humans know little or nothing about the totality of GOD, and He himself states that HIS WAYS are higher than our ways.
Theology / Doctrine is like noses. Everybody's got one.
Peterlag
Active Member
That would be number 3 you are using. See below...
John 10:30 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. There is no reason to take this verse to mean that Christ was saying that he and the Father make up "one God." The phrase was a common one, and even today if someone used it, people would know exactly what they meant... he and his Father are very much alike. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about his ministry there, he said that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, "... he who plants and he who waters are one..." (1 Corinthians 3:8 NKJV). In the Greek texts, the wording of Paul is the same as that in John 10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up "one being." Christ uses the concept of "being one" in other places, and from them one can see that "one purpose" is what is meant. John 11:52 says Jesus was to die to make all God's children "one." In John 17:11, 21 and 22, Jesus prayed to God that his followers would be "one" as he and God were "one." I think it's obvious that Jesus was not praying that all his followers would become one being in "substance" just as he and his Father were one being or "substance." I believe the meaning is clear: Jesus was praying that all his followers be one in purpose just as he and God were one in purpose.
The trinitarian has only 3 to pick from...
1.) Use a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Use a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Not understand how the words were used in the culture they were written in.
If that person is talking about you, I would say "he" is appropriate (based on my perception so far). If talking about God, we know that it can be perfectly fine speaking of "he" in recognition there is only one god who is distinguished from other gods. But it also becomes clear that God exists as a Trinity. This is quite different from the human experience and is strengthened within the New Testament writings. Your problem is that you cannot transition to the NT understanding of the god who is the same in the OT.
Exactly! Isn't that what everyone has recognized of me without me leading them to say that? (I hope people recognize sarcasm here.)
I'm quoting the Bible not your 123
The verse John 10:30, where Jesus states, "I and the Father are one," signifies the profound unity between Jesus and God the Father. This statement emphasizes the divine nature of Jesus, asserting that He shares the same essence as the Father, which is a central tenet of Christian theology regarding the Trinity.
Peterlag
Active Member
You think you are quoting the Bible but you are not. You are not understanding how the words are used which is number 3 that I listed...
The trinitarian has only 3 to pick from...
1.) Use a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Use a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Not understand how the words were used in the culture they were written in.
John 10:30 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. There is no reason to take this verse to mean that Christ was saying that he and the Father make up "one God." The phrase was a common one, and even today if someone used it, people would know exactly what they meant... he and his Father are very much alike. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about his ministry there, he said that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, "... he who plants and he who waters are one..." (1 Corinthians 3:8 NKJV). In the Greek texts, the wording of Paul is the same as that in John 10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up "one being." Christ uses the concept of "being one" in other places, and from them one can see that "one purpose" is what is meant. John 11:52 says Jesus was to die to make all God's children "one." In John 17:11, 21 and 22, Jesus prayed to God that his followers would be "one" as he and God were "one." I think it's obvious that Jesus was not praying that all his followers would become one being in "substance" just as he and his Father were one being or "substance." I believe the meaning is clear: Jesus was praying that all his followers be one in purpose just as he and God were one in purpose.
You think that I think that I'm quoting the Bible because I'm quoting the Bible.
Categorical Fallacies: Whenever you hear such questions as:
“If Jesus was God, who ran the universe the three days he was dead?”
“If God cannot be tempted, why was Jesus tempted?”
“If Jesus was God, then to whom did he pray?”
“Since Jesus did not know when he was coming back, how can he be God?”
“How can Jesus have faith in God if he was God?”
“Why would Jesus call the Father God if he himself was God?
“If Jesus was God, how could he die?
Such questions arise only if you fail to distinguish between the categories of the economical and ontological Trinity, the two natures of Christ, and the three persons in the Trinity. They are called “nonsense questions” in logic.
Categorical Fallacies: Whenever you hear such questions as:
“If Jesus was God, who ran the universe the three days he was dead?”
“If God cannot be tempted, why was Jesus tempted?”
“If Jesus was God, then to whom did he pray?”
“Since Jesus did not know when he was coming back, how can he be God?”
“How can Jesus have faith in God if he was God?”
“Why would Jesus call the Father God if he himself was God?
“If Jesus was God, how could he die?
Such questions arise only if you fail to distinguish between the categories of the economical and ontological Trinity, the two natures of Christ, and the three persons in the Trinity. They are called “nonsense questions” in logic.
Peterlag
Active Member
Two natures of Christ you say...
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.
Begotten
Active Member
Any Unitarian taint can be easily be rebuked. Christ who is a perpetual presence, an ever-living Christ.’ God ‘has come into human life, and is gradually filling it with himself.’ Be that so: but it is the historic Jesus ‘the Son,’ the second Person of the Trinity, that is the coming of God into human life.
Without Trinitarian Christianity you will not have God in your life.
I believe we can present an eirenicon to Unitarians which should reconcile them to Trinitarian Christianity.
We can use this Forum as a vehicle for expressing the close communion between God and man; and therefore to wrest it away from Unitarians to express God. What Unitarians have conceived as absolute and unknowable will do the utmost violence to the primitive vocabulary of Jesus, in which vocabulary the living essence of his teaching, and therefore of original Christianity, is enshrined.
Without Trinitarian Christianity you will not have God in your life.
I believe we can present an eirenicon to Unitarians which should reconcile them to Trinitarian Christianity.
We can use this Forum as a vehicle for expressing the close communion between God and man; and therefore to wrest it away from Unitarians to express God. What Unitarians have conceived as absolute and unknowable will do the utmost violence to the primitive vocabulary of Jesus, in which vocabulary the living essence of his teaching, and therefore of original Christianity, is enshrined.
Similar threads
