The Trinity study ,plural references to God in the Old Testament:Plural nouns, pronouns, verbs, adverbs

[Runningman]

Jesus is shown saying it. John 1 shares it. So I have no understanding what your obstacles are to understanding scripture. If you want to say the Word did nothing during the process of creation, you come to a rather odd interpretation.

And after that he wasn't there where you claim he was supposed to be. In the Bible, no one pre-exists their actual life, Jesus included. People can pre-exist in the sense of being pre-destined or pre-known by God, but not in the literal sense you are saying.

 

[synergy]

You did: "That clearly describes the nature of whom you worship."

I keep running into unitarians who possess a poor grasp of basic English grammar. Grammatically, “whom you worship” refers to a person, not an abstract nature. The relative pronoun "whom" can only take a personal object, so the sentence points to the one who is worshiped, while nature functions as a descriptor of that person rather than the object of worship itself. In other words, the statement means: the described nature reveals or characterizes the person you worship, not that the nature is independently worshiped. The worship is directed toward a personal subject, and the nature is predicated of that subject.

Not redirecting the conversation at all.

Jesus is a human being, therefore has a human nature.
He is the anointed of God, Jesus Christ, the Son of God who displays the characteristics of God NOT GOD'S INHERENT, INNATE ATTRIBUTES [omni's, invisibility, immortality (he was given immortality)] but God's characteristics of righteousness, justice, holiness, kindness, love, grace, merciful, faithfulness, truthfulness, etc.

So the "nature of God" that RM said Jesus has is a human nature. Do you see the contradiction here or do I have to spell it out for you?

 

[synergy]

I hear you, but I also know you cannot change the English translation of what the Word is in 1John 1:1-3, nor the Greek, so I am not inclined to accept anything other than an agreement about what it says. You can argue all day, but you can't change it.

Who wants to change anything? Not me. I'm perfectly happy with how the 1 John 1 is structured. Bible Scholars understand how Greek-styled neuter pronouns are used in the Bible. They understand that they can refer to an abstracted or collective reality, which doesn't always make the reality an inanimate thing. Perfect example is 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?

Why not just agree that the Word is eternal life and that eternal life is a thing Jesus and us can have and leave it as simple as that? I know why, it's because you need the Word to be a person even when it is demonstrably not.

Here's what's happening here: there is no way to make the Word a person in 1 John 1:1-3, but there is a valid way to make the Word a thing in John 1:1 and everywhere else in the Bible. See, you are outnumbered 10:1. It's you against Scripture at this point.

Since when can an inanimate thing be a God who tabernacles as Jesus? Explain that unitarian dogma to me.

 

[amazing grace]

I keep running into unitarians who possess a poor grasp of basic English grammar. Grammatically, “whom you worship” refers to a person, not an abstract nature. The relative pronoun "whom" can only take a personal object, so the sentence points to the one who is worshiped, while nature functions as a descriptor of that person rather than the object of worship itself. In other words, the statement means: the described nature reveals or characterizes the person you worship, not that the nature is independently worshiped. The worship is directed toward a personal subject, and the nature is predicated of that subject.

So the "nature of God" that RM said Jesus has is a human nature. Do you see the contradiction here or do I have to spell it out for you?

And I said I worship God. Repeat God is the person I worship.
I agree that Jesus has a human nature since he is a human being.