civic
Well-known member
No there is no Unitarian mentioned in scripture just like no Trinity mentioned right . As the saying goes you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
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.
- Thread starter synergy
- Start date
Runningman
Well-known member
I am not the one making the argument from silence. Do you realize how mad it sounds for a man to claim to be God? Why do you suppose Jesus never made any such claims? Cease your false accusations against Jesus. He called such statements against him a false charge of wrong doing.
Runningman
Well-known member
Unitarian theology is that there is one God the Father. That's it. That's what Judaism and all of the early Christians say. Closely note, none of them described the Trinity. Catching on yet?No there is no Unitarian mentioned in scripture just like no Trinity mentioned right . As the saying goes you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
I know! I know!
I used "Joshua" as I have also used "Enoch"..
My point is that once we know that the Father of Jesus is the Only and True God, as per John 20:1 and John 17:1-5, we don't require any "explicit statement" from anyone else saying "I am not God".
So, if we find believers in the deity of Enoch, we won't have to argue with them if Enoch was just a man or not... whether he didn't die because he was a demi-God, or the Word incarnated, or a Fourth Divine Person of the Godhead.
If they demanded from us "Give me a single verse in which Enoch denies being God", we won't be able to provide it, but we won't care.
Why?
Because Unitarism is founded on the premise that God is a Person. Once I know who that Person is, there is no room for anyone else.
Let me know if you have understood the Unitarian premise.
Runningman
Well-known member
"I am God" would be an explicit declaration of being God. Jesus never said that. Jesus did explicitly say his Father and God is the only true God. Based on the testimony of Jesus, it can only be concluded that the Father is God.
John 17
3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.
If you don't like what Jesus declared then you can file an official complaint at your nearest neighborhood Church. I personally would not advise it.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Strictly speaking, @civic and Runningman, there was not "Unitarism" nor "Trinitarism" before the dispute, the controversy, during the second and third centuries (especially the third).
It is better to speak of "monotheism".
Jews were monotheists, and that always meant there is One Personal God, and not a family, association or Board of Three Divine Persons.
There was a period of time that many Hebrews were polytheists (YHWH was considered supreme among other gods, but not the only one), but there has never been a period in history in which Hebrews were Trinitarians. Never ever. Consult any theologian from any religion or non-religious.
Runningman
Well-known member
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
I like what Jesus declared.
I uphold that Christ existed before Abraham.
Trinitarians are fine with the Father being the only true God as is the Son and the Holy Spirit.
I understand that. The Pharisees understood and believed that also which is why they attempted to stone Jesus when he didn't fall in line with that Unitarian belief.
Runningman
Well-known member
Amen. I know and agree with that. I simply say and believe what God told the prophets about Him being a monotheistic God. The reason I use to term Unitarian is because it's a label to show distinction from Trinitarians who feel that they are the real Christians. Just saying "I'm a Christian" is true, but it isn't good enough anymore because the water is about as thick as mud what that really means nowadays. Where I find confirmation that what I am saying is true is that I am just saying what they said in the Bible. There can't be an only true God named the Father if there are other Gods.
Great! Now believe what John 1:1 says, not the JW butchered version, and you're Trinitarian. Easy Breezy.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Jesus never told the Holy Spirit "You are the only and True God" and never told his Father "We are the only and True God"
So, if you believe that what Jesus said to the Father can be said equally to other Persons, you are making an inference.
There is nothing wrong with making inferences, as long as we recognize honestly we are doing an inference.
Your inference comes from a premise: that God is not a Person, but a family, association or Board of persons.
I understand your premise. I am asking you to understand our premise.
Our premise, which we share with Jews, Unitarian Christians, Muslims, Zoroastrians and Baha'is, is that God is a Person.
John 1:1 proves that there are at least 2 Persons that are God. How does that prove unitarianism?
Runningman
Well-known member
The Father is never said to be sitting at the right hand of God, but rather the Father is that God. The Father is never said to be the image of the invisible God, or the representation of God, or had died, was resurrected, etc. The Father is that One and only God. That same monotheistic God in Christianity is the YHWH LORD GOD from Judaism. Christianity isn't a new religion, but rather the New Covenant in Judaism and all people are invited.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
To me John 1:1 is poetry, while John 17:1-3 and John 20:17 are unequivocal, non-poetic, literal, explicit declarations from Jesus Himself, saying that The Father was his God, our God, and the Only and True God.
Just compare John 1:1 with John 17:1-3 and 20:17.
Do it yourself, without prejudices.
Which declaration is made in easy breezy language, that a non educated peasant can understand, and which one is philosophical and poetic?
Nice of you to clue us in on what you think is nebulous/poetic and what is literal/concrete.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
If you are in doubt, read the verses to kids, atheists and iliterate peasants.
John 1:1 is highly poetic, very obscure, highly metaphysical, and therefore understood in so many ways.
John 17:1-3 and John 20:17 are killers, my friend.
Let me know who they can be poetic and metaphorical. Just try.
For John 1:1, it takes one second to declare it metaphorical: The Word was with God and The Word was God.
What is The Word? How can the Word be with God and God at the same time? Why "The Word"?
Runningman
Well-known member
Since you mention John 20, something important needs to be said because they will pile on John 20:28 about what Thomas said.
However, I have an interesting point to make about Jesus' hands of all things.
Want proof that, by the fact of Jesus having hands, that Thomas did not claim Jesus is God? Let me show you something.
Jesus has human hands and served God:
John 20 (NIV)
27Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”
28Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”
God is not served by human hands:
Acts 17 (NIV)
24“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else.
So Jesus has human hands, God is not served by human hands, then Jesus is not God. Thomas didn't address Jesus as God. There's a good one to keep in your back pocket.
Between your inference and Thomas' explicit statement, I'll take Thomas' explicit statement. We're still piling on...
Similar threads
