Thomas... My Lord and my God

[mikesw]

No they are not the same Lord. You ignored Acts 3:20 as I figured you probably would, because it refutes you completely.

Here's another example of God and Jesus not being the same Lord:

Matthew 11
25At that time Jesus declared, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because You have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.

Oops. You have just quoted this passage against yourself.

I think one significant problem with unitarians is that they now just read scripture to see how it might be understood if one is avoiding Jesus's divinity. So, you, or others before you, have had to meditate "how does this scripture read if Jesus is not divine?"

This means that neither the individual passages nor the fullness of scripture can be appreciated for what they share.

 

[Runningman]

Context kills all your arguments. You still cannot include John 1:14 without contradicting what you say of John 1:1. Your blindness to that context becomes too evident. I know that the points contrary to your belief make it hard to accept John 1:14. We are here to help you beyond that blindness.

John 1:14 is a prooftext that Jesus was created. Try me.

I assume by your confusion that you do not comprehend vivid descriptions. Again you divide the scripture as if trying to conquer and destroy it instead of trying to accept it. We have Jesus as the Light.

John 8:12 (ESV) Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

You're exposing your Biblical illiteracy. Jesus taught his disciples are the light of the world as well.

Matthew 5
14You are the light of the world.

It is not as if John distinguishes John 8:12 from John 1:9-10. Stop chopping up the scripture. Keep it properly divided.

Stop it. Your persistent weird interpretations almost are funny. Maybe you forget that the humanity of Jesus is recognized along with his divinity. Again, you try to chop up scripture as if the previous 29 verses of John disappeared suddenly. You are too eager to deny who Christ Jesus is.

Stop now. Got it?

Jesus and the discples are both the light of the world. Jesus is not the true Light according to John 1:9,10 because the true Light was coming into the world on a different timeline than Jesus.

The rest of the Bible also proves Jesus is not the true Light.

Epehsians 5
8For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light,

James 1
17Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, with whom there is no change or shifting shadow.

1 Timothy 6
16He alone is immortal and dwells in unapproachable light. No one has ever seen Him, nor can anyone see Him. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.

 

[Runningman]

Oops. You have just quoted this passage against yourself.

I think one significant problem with unitarians is that they now just read scripture to see how it might be understood if one is avoiding Jesus's divinity. So, you, or others before you, have had to meditate "how does this scripture read if Jesus is not divine?"

So the Father is the Lord of heaven and earth, a title Jesus is never called in the Bible. Not the same Lord as Jesus then.

Another example of God and Jesus not being the same Lord.

Acts 2
36Therefore let all Israel know with certainty that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ!”

 

[mikesw]

John 1:14 is a prooftext that Jesus was created. Try me.


You're exposing your Biblical illiteracy. Jesus taught his disciples are the light of the world as well.

Matthew 5
14You are the light of the world.

Stop now. Got it?

Jesus and the discples are both the light of the world. Jesus is not the true Light according to John 1:9,10 because the true Light was coming into the world on a different timeline than Jesus.

The rest of the Bible also proves Jesus is not the true Light.

Epehsians 5
8For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light,

James 1
17Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, with whom there is no change or shifting shadow.

1 Timothy 6
16He alone is immortal and dwells in unapproachable light. No one has ever seen Him, nor can anyone see Him. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.

I think you are trying to make an argument here of some fashion.
You have just equated Jesus as the Light with the heavenly Father. Maybe you have not heard there is the greater light and the lesser light. As we see in Ephesians 5:8, the believers' light is because they are in Christ, the greater light. Jesus is the approachable light since he comes among humanity without being too bright.

 

[Runningman]

I think you are trying to make an argument here of some fashion.
You have just equated Jesus as the Light with the heavenly Father. Maybe you have not heard there is the greater light and the lesser light. As we see in Ephesians 5:8, the believers' light is because they are in Christ, the greater light. Jesus is the approachable light since he comes among humanity without being too bright.

Now your tactic seems to be to imagine I am helping you when I am refuting you.

Didn't we already cover John 1:9 where the true Light was coming into the world (present tense) when Jesus was already 30 years old?

How about John 8:12 and Matt 5:14 where Jesus and the disciples are both the light of the World?

How about Revelation 21:23 where Jesus is not God who gives the city light?

Does anything get through to you?

 

[mikesw]

So the Father is the Lord of heaven and earth, a title Jesus is never called in the Bible. Not the same Lord as Jesus then.

Another example of God and Jesus not being the same Lord.

Acts 2
36Therefore let all Israel know with certainty that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ!”

Like I shared earlier, you spend all your effort of interpretation finding out how to deny the divinity of Christ. Jesus is the physical incarnation and can be expressed in the sense of God making the man. But more critical is the sense of God assigning or defining through this man the role of Lord and Christ.
Also, Jesus is not just "man" at this point in time. He also is resurrected man. The preaching in Acts 2 speaks at the level of description by which the Jews knew of Jesus -- as a man among them. Their preaching finally reveals him as the King whom they waited for -- the divine one of Daniel 7:13-14.

Thanks for pointing out Jesus' divinity.

 

[mikesw]

Now your tactic seems to be to imagine I am helping you when I am refuting you.

Didn't we already cover John 1:9 where the true Light was coming into the world (present tense) when Jesus was already 30 years old?

How about John 8:12 and Matt 5:14 where Jesus and the disciples are both the light of the World?

How about Revelation 21:23 where Jesus is not God who gives the city light?

Does anything get through to you?

Only the truth got through to me. Thanks for the scriptures. I just rejected the confusion that you inject into the passages.

 

[Runningman]

Like I shared earlier, you spend all your effort of interpretation finding out how to deny the divinity of Christ. Jesus is the physical incarnation and can be expressed in the sense of God making the man. But more critical is the sense of God assigning or defining through this man the role of Lord and Christ.
Also, Jesus is not just "man" at this point in time. He also is resurrected man. The preaching in Acts 2 speaks at the level of description by which the Jews knew of Jesus -- as a man among them. Their preaching finally reveals him as the King whom they waited for -- the divine one of Daniel 7:13-14.

Thanks for pointing out Jesus' divinity.

You're not making any sense. Jesus isn't the same Lord as God since Jesus was "made" Lord according to Acts 2:36. Doesn't that explain how an entirely distinct Lord can "send Jesus Christ" in Acts 3:20? You are not saying the same things the apostles said. They were all Unitarian and knew that Jesus is not God or the same Lord as God. The verses are still there. They refuted you and you just keep droning on about this and that is if you can somehow null and void them.

 

[Runningman]

Only the truth got through to me. Thanks for the scriptures. I just rejected the confusion that you inject into the passages.

What i've learned is you reject the truth completely and pretend like you didn't. This is no way to debate. I want some honest Trinitarians to man up. I have already called all of you out and this is the best I can get?

 

[synergy]

These are all false accusations. Feel free to increase the list to 100 if you want.

Doesn't make a difference to me.

It's true that your failures do not make any difference to you. Your name did forewarn us of your tendencies to run away from reality.

Keep in mind the Bible context. What we have its literally every page of the Old Testament with no one there named the Word saying or doing anything. We also have the entire New Testament, where the Word never said or did anything. We also never have Jesus being called the Word. Your interpretation is very narrowly focused on John 1:1.

You're repeating your Gaffe #10.

The problem is you are working backwards to attempt to represent the entire Bible around one verse. When has that ever been a good in theology or Biblical disucssions? Never, right?

You're repeating your Gaffe #11.

Here's what I am doing. I am taking the entire Old Testamnet where God is exhaustively identified in the singular as a He, Him, His, etc. I am taking this precedent about who God is and carrying it into the New Testament where God is once again called a He, Him, His, the only true God, the one God, etc. The Bible is clear, explicit, and exhaustive about God being a singular person. Yet God is never referred to as a they or them, referred to as more than one person, never said to be three persons, etc.

You forget about Genesis wherein God said "Let us make man in our Image". That proves that there are multiple Creator Persons. This is now your Gaffe #13.

So John 1:1 is not about the Word being God. If that was the only thing apostle John ever said, you may have a point, but that isn't all he said. In Acts 4:23-31, John was clear he did not believe Jesus is God or the Creator, but rather God's servant. In 1John 1:1-3, John was clear that the Word is a thing called eternal life.

You're repeating Gaffe #6.

I believe @synergy put it best several comments back where he made the argument that the Word posesses the qualitiies of God and that makes the Word godly, but not God. Hence, John 1:1 ultimately shows that the Word is not The God. John 1:1 is totally in line with Unitarianism.

You're repeating your Gaffe #12.

Your reluctance to address any of your Gaffes is why I carry your List of Gaffes forward. Until you address your List of Gaffes properly, they will continue to convict you ad infinitum.

List of RM's Gaffes:

1. You mistake us for Modalists by falsely accusing us that we do not differentiate between the Word and the God (the Father).
2. Your ignorance of the Greek word ἐσκήνωσεν in John 1:14.
3. You have difficulty understanding the grammatical fact that pronouns implicitly point back to the Primary Subject as their Antecedent.
4. Your categorical mistake when you think that partaking of an item transforms your nature into that item.
5. Your ignorance of the Greek word κοινωνία,
6. Your ignorance of Greek neuter pronouns in 1 John 1.
7. You said that "the Word is not actually God" which flat out contradicts John 1:1c that says "the Word was God".
8. At no time does Jesus ever has to "partake" of divine nature. That's because he is God to begin with (John 1:1c).
9. The REV translates from God only knows which originals when they dreamt up the phrase "what God was the word was".
10. Your ignorance of the Word of God in the OT (1 Kings 12:22 and 1 Ch 17:3).
11. You ignore the prevailing Greco-Roman paganism at that time when you mistakenly present John 17:3 as being against Trinitarianism. You're also working backwards from John 17:3 to wipe out what John wrote in John 1:1.
12. Your attempt to rewrite John 1:1c from "the Word was God" to "the Word was godly" was denied.
13. You forget that God said "Let us make man in our Image". That proves that there are multiple Creator Persons.

 

[mikesw]

You're not making any sense. Jesus isn't the same Lord as God since Jesus was "made" Lord according to Acts 2:36. Doesn't that explain how an entirely distinct Lord can "send Jesus Christ" in Acts 3:20? You are not saying the same things the apostles said. They were all Unitarian and knew that Jesus is not God or the same Lord as God. The verses are still there. They refuted you and you just keep droning on about this and that is if you can somehow null and void them.

haha. You are getting into cyclic unreasoning here. You say they apostles were unitarian so we have to accept unitarian readings of the text. Those unitarian readings of the text means the apostles were unitarians. I do not think such cyclic arguments and your incorrect division of scripture (i.e., where John contradicts himself all over the place) will convince people of anything. I am glad you show the confusion in your thinking so that people will be cautioned against what you say.

 

[mikesw]

What i've learned is you reject the truth completely and pretend like you didn't. This is no way to debate. I want some honest Trinitarians to man up. I have already called all of you out and this is the best I can get?

I have shown your contradictions and we have shown the passages you neglect or just have silly interpretations. John 1 shows the divinity of Christ so clearly it takes ... you just will not accept it.

you do deserve a compliment though. You do a better job of getting deeper into the discussion than Peterlag and Kewl1

 

[Runningman]

haha. You are getting into cyclic unreasoning here. You say they apostles were unitarian so we have to accept unitarian readings of the text. Those unitarian readings of the text means the apostles were unitarians. I do not think such cyclic arguments and your incorrect division of scripture (i.e., where John contradicts himself all over the place) will convince people of anything. I am glad you show the confusion in your thinking so that people will be cautioned against what you say.

Apprently repetition of seeing the same things doesn't help you. If you don't believe God is the Lord who "made Jesus Lord and Christ" and sent him then it's a personal matter. I don't need to convince you, the matter is that I have proven that Jesus is not the same Lord as God nor is God. Maybe eventually you'll catch up to it.

 

[Runningman]

I have shown your contradictions and we have shown the passages you neglect or just have silly interpretations. John 1 shows the divinity of Christ so clearly it takes ... you just will not accept it.

you do deserve a compliment though. You do a better job of getting deeper into the discussion than Peterlag and Kewl1

No idea what you're talking about. 1 John 1:1-3 explains that the Word is a non-person thing.

 

[Runningman]

It's true that your failures do not make any difference to you. Your name did forewarn us of your tendencies to run away from reality.

You're repeating your Gaffe #10.

You're repeating your Gaffe #11.

You forget about Genesis wherein God said "Let us make man in our Image". That proves that there are multiple Creator Persons. This is now your Gaffe #13.

You're repeating Gaffe #6.

You're repeating your Gaffe #12.

Your reluctance to address any of your Gaffes is why I carry your List of Gaffes forward. Until you address your List of Gaffes properly, they will continue to convict you ad infinitum.

List of RM's Gaffes:

1. You mistake us for Modalists by falsely accusing us that we do not differentiate between the Word and the God (the Father).
2. Your ignorance of the Greek word ἐσκήνωσεν in John 1:14.
3. You have difficulty understanding the grammatical fact that pronouns implicitly point back to the Primary Subject as their Antecedent.
4. Your categorical mistake when you think that partaking of an item transforms your nature into that item.
5. Your ignorance of the Greek word κοινωνία,
6. Your ignorance of Greek neuter pronouns in 1 John 1.
7. You said that "the Word is not actually God" which flat out contradicts John 1:1c that says "the Word was God".
8. At no time does Jesus ever has to "partake" of divine nature. That's because he is God to begin with (John 1:1c).
9. The REV translates from God only knows which originals when they dreamt up the phrase "what God was the word was".
10. Your ignorance of the Word of God in the OT (1 Kings 12:22 and 1 Ch 17:3).
11. You ignore the prevailing Greco-Roman paganism at that time when you mistakenly present John 17:3 as being against Trinitarianism. You're also working backwards from John 17:3 to wipe out what John wrote in John 1:1.
12. Your attempt to rewrite John 1:1c from "the Word was God" to "the Word was godly" was denied.
13. You forget that God said "Let us make man in our Image". That proves that there are multiple Creator Persons.

You don't think I am actually going to keep reading the same nonsense regardless of how many times you post it right? Post it all day if it makes you happy. Open a thread devoted to it and post it. I really don't care.

Right off the bat after John 1:1 proves the Word is not The God, John 1:2,3 proves the Word is not the Creator. Rather, the God the Word was with is the Creator.

Forward a bit to John 1:9,10 and there is another key passage that proves the True Light was coming into the world in the present tense while Jesus was already 30 years old. So Jesus had been alive for 30 years already before the True Light was coming into the world. John 1:14 teaches Jesus was created, John 1:18 teaches Jesus was begotten. John 1:30-31 calls the Lamb of God a man.

Context kills all of the arguments. The Word or Jesus are not God the Creator. It only gets more sobering for Trinitarainism the more of the Bible we read. Your arguments don't match the context... meaning your "Greek expertise" is hogwash.

 

[mikesw]

No idea what you're talking about. 1 John 1:1-3 explains that the Word is a non-person thing.

I know you have no idea what I'm talking about. Standard understanding of scripture is beyond you.

You just have to learn that even "logos" is not some magical word that only exists in one sense. I recognize that you cannot realize that Jesus is the message or logos of God to humanity. You have to pretend his pre-existence means nothing. You even have to deny any passages showing his pre-existence since that does not fit in the unitarian's narrative.

 

[mikesw]

You don't think I am actually going to keep reading the same nonsense regardless of how many times you post it right? Post it all day if it makes you happy. Open a thread devoted to it and post it. I really don't care.

Right off the bat after John 1:1 proves the Word is not The God, John 1:2,3 proves the Word is not the Creator. Rather, the God the Word was with is the Creator.

You mean you are starting off batty. The verses say nothing of the Word (Christ) being created. Then you also forgot that Christ has the life and light in him in verse 4-5. Verse 3 does not say he is created there. It says the world was created through him. Somehow you want some sayings or teachings, as some impersonal thing, is involved here instead of the topic of John 1, namely Christ.
I'm not sure how you could speak worse about Jesus that you have done here.

 

[Runningman]

I know you have no idea what I'm talking about. Standard understanding of scripture is beyond you.

You just have to learn that even "logos" is not some magical word that only exists in one sense. I recognize that you cannot realize that Jesus is the message or logos of God to humanity. You have to pretend his pre-existence means nothing. You even have to deny any passages showing his pre-existence since that does not fit in the unitarian's narrative.

I mean, I know what the Bible is talking about. I don't know what you are talking about. The God isn't trinitarian, but rather Unitarian. Jesus' God is The God. It's amazing how many of you people there are who just flat out deny what the Bible says. Is that why what the Bible literally says upsets you?

 

[Runningman]

You mean you are starting off batty. The verses say nothing of the Word (Christ) being created. Then you also forgot that Christ has the life and light in him in verse 4-5. Verse 3 does not say he is created there. It says the world was created through him. Somehow you want some sayings or teachings, as some impersonal thing, is involved here instead of the topic of John 1, namely Christ.
I'm not sure how you could speak worse about Jesus that you have done here.

I intentionally skipped those verses, but I am glad you mentioned them because it's a perfect segue into my next point. There are different usages of the word light in this passage. So you are confessing the Word is an it, a thing?

John 1
5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

 

[mikesw]

I mean, I know what the Bible is talking about. I don't know what you are talking about.

That is where your confusion lies. You read the bible in the flesh and think you know it, but you deny the reality of what it says. You cannot even acknowledge the pre-existence of Christ.

The God isn't trinitarian, but rather Unitarian. Jesus' God is The God. It's amazing how many of you people there are who just flat out deny what the Bible says. Is that why what the Bible literally says upsets you?

the bible upsets my flesh that denies Christ but informs my spirit to the divinity of Christ. It is true the Jesus's God is the true God. Jesus shares in that divinity.