Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
I didnt understand your argument.
Every person has a single will. We agree in that, right?
God has a single will. So He is only one person.
The Trinity The Touchstone of Truth
- Thread starter Rowan
- Start date
Every person has a single will. We agree in that, right?
God has a single will. So He is only one person.
Let's look at 1 Pet 1:19-20:
1 Pet 1:19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot;
1 Pet 1:20 indeed having been foreknown before the foundation of the world, but revealed in the last times for you,
Where exactly in Micah 5:2 is the "precious blood of Christ" or even the Cross revealed?
Every person has a single common human will. It's the same human will that is part of the same human nature that God designed for everyone.
God has a single Divine will common to all 3 Divine Persons. So there is clashing of "wills" for God.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
You’re right, my brother,
It does not contradict, since Jesus was not claiming to be other than the person He had always claimed to be.
“I am” means “I am the One sent by God” “I am the Son of God” “I am the Messiah”. “I am the Way” “I am the Good Shepherd”, etc. This is what Jesus had always claimed to be. The Gospel of John collects the words of Jesus stating, over and over, that He was the Messenger. Representative of his Father. We can review those statements
“I am” does not mean “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” for 3 main reasons, solidly supported by Scripture:
1. The apostles taught in unequivocal terms that Jesus was the Son of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,
2. The person who spoke to Moses from the burning bush was an angel, a Messenger, speaking on behalf of God. Not God.
3. Jesus cannot contradict Himself. In the most intimate conversation ever recorded, Jesus called His Father “the Only True God”.
Please let me know if you are interested in reviewing together the scriptural evidence of these three reasons.
Micaiah
Active member
The context is Christ’s preeminence, not the blood nor the cross.
You lost the argument so now you bring up a point I wasn’t making.
Sheesh!
Huh? We're you the one who referred to 1 Peter 1:19-20? See the evidence below. And now you want to backtrack away from it I see.The context is Christ’s preeminence, not the blood nor the cross.
You lost the argument so now you bring up a point I wasn’t making.
Sheesh!
You now want to run away from it as fast as you can. Run Micaiah Run!
Micaiah
Active member
Are you sure you are following the discussion?
Let me put it all together for you in one post since you have difficulty following the points I made:
Christ was foreordained (before Abraham was, I am).
Christ’s goings forth were from everlasting (before Abraham was, I am).
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Why do you say that?
By nature, There is not such a thing like a “common human will”
My will is not your will. That’s why Pancho Frijoles and Synergy want different things and make different choices
That’s why God will judge each person and reward each person differently.
If we believe that Jesus submitted his will to the will of his Father, this implies the existence of at least two wills. Not a single will held in common.
Otherwise it would have been unnecessary such submission, and such prayer.
Dear Synergy: Loving Jesus does not need from us any intellectual gymnastics. Following Jesus does not demand to be able to explain what we cannot fathom. Let me tell you what my aim is in this conversation: not to change your mind, but to open your eyes to the fact that people who believe different have reasons to believe differently. In the end, whether we believe in the Trinity or not, we owe our lives and full devotion to God. In God we live, move and exist. Praised be God!
I already explained that. I'll copy and paste what I wrote:
What you do with your human will is a totally different story based on your personality and personal choice. We all possess the God-given ability to make personal choices but we never refer to our human will as human wills.
Exactly! Now you're catching on. There are 2 wills because we are talking about 2 natures (Divine and human). That's why Jesus said not my will but your (His Father's) will be done.
There are no gymnastics when you consider the fact that if Jesus is not God then we are not saved.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Personal choice necessarily requires personal will. So, if you believe in personal choices, you can’t believe in a “common” human will.
Perhaps you are confusing concepts, my friend.
We humans have “physicality” in common, as an attribute. But we do not share bodies. There is no “common human body”.
You and me are different persons because we have different bodies and different wills.
Jesus was not submitting his will to a “second will” residing within Himself, as part of a “second nature”
Jesus was explicitly appealing to the will of His Father, who you recognize as another person.
What the evangelist recorded in John 17 was a person (Jesus) praying to another person (His Father) … not a person praying to another part of Himself.
There is no “single common will” between Jesus and his Father just as there is no “single common will” between you and me.
Such consideration would require even more sophisticaded and unnecesary gymnastics, as it has absolutely no biblical nor rational support.
It would make things worse… and it would need to be discussed in a separate thread, I guess.
So you want us to backtrack from your prooftext (1 Peter 1:19-20). Fine. Let's see what further spin you will put on it.
Christ is talking about "I Am" here. Who do you think "I Am" is?
Let me help you out. When Moses asked God what is His name, God responded with "I Am". (Ex 3:14)
Do you need any further help?
14 And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’
Micaiah
Active member
Run Micaiah Run from the Biblical points I made.This must be a chat bot or something…
Micaiah
Active member
You made no biblical points.
I have showed with scripture what the “I am” in the book John contextual agrees with in the other scriptures (new and old).
You’re locked into the Trinity error.
What do you think of when I say human nature?
Wasn't it God who designed human nature (body, soul, spirit, mind, will) which contains the human will?
Why do we always refer to human will as singular and never as human wills?
Of course, your personal choices can easily override your human will which is why it's very easy to overlook human will.
There are definitely two wills being referred to by Jesus in Luke 22:42. There is no getting around that fact.
saying, “Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done.”
What Jesus did for our salvation is the Gospel. The Gospel is summarized in John 3:16. It is very necessary or else we are no better than Muslims. In fact, Muslims would be better.
Ex 3:14 is not a "Biblical point"? You must have ripped that verse out of your Bible.
Where is "I Am" mentioned anywhere in any of the verses you forwarded?
Actually, you’re locked into the Trinity-Slandering error.
Micaiah
Active member
If Jesus was implying that he is the “I AM” of Exodus 3:14 in John 8:58, then it’s awfully strange that no other book in the New Testament cites that fact. Paul quoted the Old Testament many times and never mentions Exodus 3:14 for anything.
It’s ridiculous that trinitarians tie John 8:58 to Exodus 3:14 without any authority from the scriptures.
But his statement of “before Abraham was, I am” fully agrees with:
“…whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” (Micah 5:2, KJV)
And agrees with:
“Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,” (1 Peter 1:20, KJV)
And in other places where Christ’s preeminence is mentioned…
How can you possibly tie in the "I Am" of John 8:58 with verses that don't even mention "I Am"? Now that's "awfully strange" in no uncertain terms.
Micaiah
Active member
Because the “I am” in John 8:58 is referring to Christ’s preeminence over Abraham, not that he is God.
If it was referring to the “I AM” in Exodus 3:14 the apostles surely would have quoted it in other books of the New Testament. Such a major teaching as this would have surely been expounded upon.
You have made an argument from silence. You try to propose what other writers in the NT would have in their letters. Then you use that to argue against the clear meaning. Even if pretending to miss the obvious, at least you should acknowledge the idea that Jesus pre-exists Abraham. Maybe someone just needs to write a common sense bible.
