The Unitarian belief that Jesus is not God causes those who offer worship to the Father's Throne (where Jesus sits) to be guilty of idolatry.

[Peterlag]

BTW.... the Greek word for "rock" is often a reference to a "rock formation". HUGE........

There is no difference in the Greek word in Matthew 16:18

I just looked the words up. The word "rock" and "Peter" are two completely different Greek words. Bullinger writes in his Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament on page 650 that Peter was like a rolling stone... in one place today and in another tomorrow, restless and changeable.

 

[Peterlag]

You read his commentary. Bullinger died on 1913. How old are you? You're not his student.

Bullinger changed significantly throughout his life. He never reconciled his change with his commentary. Men never do. They just pretend they always believed the same things.

I bet you do the same things. Isn't it ethical to acknowledge your changes?

Have you changed since you "wrote your book" in 2000?

I am a student of the man's work.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I simply asked you again,

You should indicate when you do this... Like "I ask again"... or something. Get it?

based on your stated religious philosophy that all men are the same as you, at your level, and that you work to drag others down to your level.,

Yes, I'm dragging you down from your lofty expectations of yourself. You're not what you pretend to me. No one is a good as they pretend to be. You included.

Your own words. I know you understand the question concerning Paul's words in Romans 3. I also know you are purposely refusing to answer again, for the 3rd time, by deflecting and directing the discussion away from your own preaching, to me personally. A practice your regularly engage in on this forum.

So your commentary on my "foolish" answers isn't "personal"..... Right? Geesh.... How disconnected from realty can YOU.. be?

You are quick to judge all others, even their women. But hide from questions and Scriptures which may expose the hypocrisy in you. The Pharisees engaged in exactly the same religious practice. I didn't make you act this way, you choose to. I'm loving you as Jesus Loved me, by showing you your sins so that you might turn away from them and be renewed in the spirit of your mind. I pray that you might engage in a little reflection of your own deeds.

Take some advice. Leave it to Jesus. He better at than you are. All I see in you are false claims of superiority. Jesus... now He is superior. YOU... not so much. I only exalt Christ. I'm not going to brag on another man because someone claimed they were wonderful like yourself. After all, you're just a handle on internet forums somewhere. All I can do is go by what you say. I don't believe you. Simple equation.

What an utterly foolish statement. All men have sinned.

Jesus didn't. Abel didn't. Men much better than yourself. I've explained this before. You're not actually listening to what I've said. I'm not going to pretend you're what you claim to be. Your claims are exaggerated. Overstated. Mankind has declined since the beginning. God gave mankind over to sin. It is recorded in first chapter of the book of Romans. Only 8 souls survived. Men have gradually devolved into a lesser sort than greater men before us. You are of lesser stock than those you want to compare yourself against. Even Paul made mistakes. Mistakes he openly regretted. Do you regret anything?

Even if a man did commit themselves fully to God, in obedience to His instruction in righteousness as Paul and Jesus both teach, they would still require Jesus' sacrifice to remove their past sins. The implication of your religion, that you must keep breaking God's Laws to give Jesus a purpose is foolishness.

I never said such a thing. Quote me. Again referencing me as being "foolish" isn't personal.... right? Can you even hear yourself speak?

1 John 2: 1 My little children, these things write I unto you, "that ye sin not". And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

Yeah. How many times have you repented lately. Be real and give me a number of how many times you've repented recently, it is nothing but conjecture to you. I ask God to forgive me continually because my mind is tainted by sin to the point that I struggle daily. I'm sure you're better than I am. Right?

If you've not repented recently, then you're not a man of faith. Faith brings you back to God when you fail. Believing God requires that a person believe Jesus will forgive you.

As always, you selectively quote John......

1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

John knew God better than you obviously do.

 

[Peterlag]

Where?

John told you to worship the son as you worship the Father

Do you worship them the same?

Where? Start with the verse you quoted.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I am a student of the man's work.

Which part of his commentary? The mistakes he changed later or the originals?

 

[praise_yeshua]

I just looked the words up. The word "rock" and "Peter" are two completely different Greek words. Bullinger writes in his Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament on page 650 that Peter was like a rolling stone... in one place today and in another tomorrow, restless and changeable.

Like I can't do the same.

Peter is a proper name and is more relative to "stone". There are differences between rocks and stone. There is more to this than just "size".

 

[Peterlag]

Sorry we are talking about Jesus being worshipped and him accepting worship

Now if he was not God, he sinned in accepting worship

It does not say Jesus sinned. You make up a lot of stuff. You add words to Scripture. You leave out stuff that's there. I think @Runningman is even more correct than I thought he was before. You have just made up your mind and you look for Bible to support your belief.

 

[Peterlag]

Like I can't do the same.

Peter is proper name is more relative to "stone". There are differences between rocks and stone. There is more to this than just "size".

Spin it anyway you want. Peter was not the first pope or head of the Church. The head is the resurrected Christ Jesus.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Spin it anyway you want. Peter was not the first pope or head of the Church. The head is the resurrected Christ Jesus.

Never said He was. I'm not Catholic. No need to keep treating every Trinitarian as a "Catholic". You're not being accurate with most anything you're doing.

No spin. Just fact.

 

[TomL]

It does not say Jesus sinned. You make up a lot of stuff. You add words to Scripture. You leave out stuff that's there. I think @Runningman is even more correct than I thought he was before. You have just made up your mind and you look for Bible to support your belief.

Wake up

I did not say Jesus sinned

I stated if he accepted worship and was not God he sinned

If you cannot read such a simple comment correctly how can anyone expect you understand scripture

 

[TomL]

Where? Start with the verse you quoted.

It doesn't say anything about not honoring him as you honor God

just the reverse

John 5:19–23 (NASB 2020) — 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in the same way. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes. 22 For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

It's amazing how Rev 3:12 is an introduction of what Rev 4-5 goes into details about.

I don't see how Rev 3:12 could be an introduction of Rev 4-5 .

Still, if we were to see it as an introduction, what Jesus states from the beginning is that He worships somebody. He worships God.
The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will they leave it. I will write on them the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on them my new name

Where are your buddies Muhammad and Bahá'u'lláh?????

Where is Jesus in the narrative of Noah and the Flood?
Muhammad and Bahaullah are in the Scriptures they revealed, just as Jesus is present in the Book he revealed.

 

[Peterlag]

It doesn't say anything about not honoring him as you honor God

just the reverse

John 5:19–23 (NASB 2020) — 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in the same way. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes. 22 For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

Which proves my point. Jesus can also be honored as the Son just as they honor the Father. So stop saying Jesus can't be honored too or that it's a sin if he accepts it.

 

[Peterlag]

Never said He was. I'm not Catholic. No need to keep treating every Trinitarian as a "Catholic". You're not being accurate with most anything you're doing.

No spin. Just fact.

I'm accurate with the following...

1.) Jesus is not God
2.) There's no trinity
3.) Peter was not the first pope
4.) The Catholics have never been right about anything
5.) Most Christians worldwide believe the Catholic doctrine and then say they are not Catholic

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Which proves my point. Jesus can also be honored as the Son just as they honor the Father. So stop saying Jesus can't be honored too or that it's a sin if he accepts it.

You're right, Peterlag.
Thanks for your insight.

In the passage our brother @TomL has quoted indicates, Jesus is presenting Himself as Ambassador of the Father. So we should treat Jesus the way we would treat He who sent Him to the world.
If we want to honor God, we must honor The One God sent to the world. Otherwise we would be rejecting God.


John 5:19–23 (NASB 2020) — 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in the same way. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes. 22 For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, 23 so that all will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

4.) The Catholics have never been right about anything

I strongly disagree.
The Catholics have been right about the really relevant things

5.) Most Christians worldwide believe the Catholic doctrine and then say they are not Catholic

I disagree.
Doctrines introduced during the first 3 centuries, whether right or wrong, are not "Catholic".
Those Christians who introduced the concept of Trinity were as devote followers of Christ as those who rejected that doctrine.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

OT Prophets were repeatedly exposed to the literal presence of a Deity called the "Angel of the Lord" and Word of God. Prophets like Daniel were given visions of a Deity called The Son of Man, alongside the Father. This presence of the Preincarnate Jesus happened over and over again in OT. That Preincarnate presence could not possibly be the Father because nobody can see the Father.

Then it seems that the OT Prophets did not understand anything they saw or experienced in visions. Or they understood, but God thought it was not a good idea to teach or admonish people in that subject.
What you are doing, synergy, is a post-hoc interpretation of those events, regardless on whether your interpretation is right or wrong.

What I mean is that even if the "Angel of YHWH" or the "Son of Man" were indeed the Second Person of a Trinity, as you believe, Jews didn't get it. All people surrounding Jesus didn't know anything about the Trinity. This was an unknown subject to scribes, Saducees, Pharisees, Essenes, and the common people.

So, in summary, those Pharisees who were enemies of Jesus denied Him as the Messiah.
Being the Messiah vs not being the Messiah was the question.
Being God vs not being God was a controversy that appeared many years later.

 

[Studyman]

You should indicate when you do this... Like "I ask again"... or something. Get it?

And yet you still refuse to answer the question I asked about Paul's description of men, concerning your religious philosophy that "ALL" men exist at your level.

Yeah. How many times have you repented lately. Be real and give me a number of how many times you've repented recently, it is nothing but conjecture to you. I ask God to forgive me continually because my mind is tainted by sin to the point that I struggle daily. I'm sure you're better than I am. Right?

No, I am not better than you. I believe what the Holy Scriptures teach, that God treats all men the same.

If you've not repented recently, then you're not a man of faith. Faith brings you back to God when you fail. Believing God requires that a person believe Jesus will forgive you.

If a man sin against God, like he tell lies about another whose refuge is the Lord.

"Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD."

And this Sin is made known to them. And they "say" I repent, but the very next day they tell another lie about a man whose refuge is the Lord.

And they bring the Blood of Jesus, and say, "I am justified" of my sin. But the next day they tell another lie about a man whose refuge is the Lord. they tell others, "you don't love Jesus", you can't please God". Or maybe, they tell someone that their wife is a hooker who doesn't love him as she should.

And you show up again, with the same Blood of an innocent righteous being, and declare, "I am justified" of my abhorrent behavior, by the Blood of Jesus". And they continue in this behavior over and over. Do you believe God is so dense, so clueless that HE doesn't know their repentance isn't real but fake, that they are simply honoring Him with their lips? That they really are not sorry for casting their judgments onto everyone who doesn't adopt their specific religious philosophy? Or they preach to others that if a man was obedient to God, this man may not need Jesus?

This is why Paul's words and the question I asked you is so important. To believe in your religion, I would have to believe God's way is not capable of bringing a man into righteousness. You boast about that many times. All these years of repentance, and you are still the same man. That the New Man we are to put on, is a fantasy, impossible for God to bring us there.

But not to fear, you are here to convince as many as "pay attention to you" that they will never please God or be of "them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality". That they will never be able to "put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; And be renewed in the spirit of their mind". That they will never be able to "put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness". That it's impossible for men to "repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance".

That Paul's teaching, "But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile" is a false teaching because in your religion, "There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes".

What I advocate for is what God instructs.

Is. 1: 16 Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;

17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

19 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:

Please stop discouraging those children who believe in Him and HIS WORD, who are "Striving" to enter the Path Jesus told them to Strive for.

 

[synergy]

Then it seems that the OT Prophets did not understand anything they saw or experienced in visions. Or they understood, but God thought it was not a good idea to teach or admonish people in that subject.

It's amazing how anti-Christians are so quick to denigrate God's Prophets, Apostles, and even Jesus Himself. Here you claim that they did not understand anything. You're claiming anything other than to admit that your thoughts of those of a Judaizer.

What you are doing, synergy, is a post-hoc interpretation of those events, regardless on whether your interpretation is right or wrong.

So I should be a Nihilist like you and just tear down whatever does not agree with my version of reality?

What I mean is that even if the "Angel of YHWH" or the "Son of Man" were indeed the Second Person of a Trinity, as you believe, Jews didn't get it. All people surrounding Jesus didn't know anything about the Trinity. This was an unknown subject to scribes, Saducees, Pharisees, Essenes, and the common people.

They certainly did know or should have known about the multiple times that the Preincarnate Jesus did visit many OT Prophets.

So, in summary, those Pharisees who were enemies of Jesus denied Him as the Messiah.
Being the Messiah vs not being the Messiah was the question.
Being God vs not being God was a controversy that appeared many years later.

That's your interpretation which do not fit the facts at all. Which Messiah was called "I Am"? Which Messiah continued to exist since Abraham's time?

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'm accurate with the following...

1.) Jesus is not God
2.) There's no trinity
3.) Peter was not the first pope
4.) The Catholics have never been right about anything
5.) Most Christians worldwide believe the Catholic doctrine and then say they are not Catholic

1. You will meet Him one day. Say it is His face then.
2. Sure there is.
3. Never had a pope.
4. They are right about a few things.
5. You don't even know what the word Catholic means. If you did, you would understand why Protestants and Catholics claim the same origins. Have you really been through Seminary and don't know this?