Thomas... My Lord and my God

[Peterlag]

You don't know Trinitarianism. While I believe in the Holy Trinity, I speak for myself. I don't allow others to speak for me.

Denying Jesus Christ like you do....... places in you a very large group of theological positions that you certainly can't possibly know.

My only goal in this is to defend Jesus Christ from your false claims.

There's no Trinity. The verses that are used to try to teach it are all taken out of context, or not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation. It's an evil Catholic concept that was sold to the world mostly by the power of the sword. The folks back then weren't allowed to have Bibles to read for themselves. The rejection of the Trinity often brought severe punishment including the loss of your job, intimidation, harassment, confiscation of property, jail or imprisonment, torture, and even burning at the stake.

 

[Peterlag]

“all authority” was given to him in heaven and on the earth (Matthew 28:18)...

He ascended to the right hand of God and assumed joint rulership of the cosmos as the Lord. First Corinthians 15:24-28 describes this present dynamic relationship.

“Then cometh the end, when he [Christ] shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he [Christ] shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

For he [Christ] must reign, till he [God] hath put all enemies under his [Christ's] feet.

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

For he [God] hath put all things under his [Christ's] feet. But when he [God] said all things are put under him, [Christ] it is manifest [obvious] that he [God] is excepted, [God is the only exception] which did put all things under him [Christ].

And when all things shall be subdued unto him, [Christ] then [not now, but at some future time] shall the Son also himself be subject unto him [God] that put all things under him, [Christ] that God may be all in all."

All of this was set up a very long time ago and it will not change because of the solid principles it's based upon. The Scripture fits perfectly, reason is preserved, God is glorified, Christ is magnified, and the individual Christian can enjoy the benefits both now, and throughout all eternity.

 

[mikesw]

There's no Trinity. The verses that are used to try to teach it are all taken out of context, or not understood how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation. It's an evil Catholic concept that was sold to the world mostly by the power of the sword. The folks back then weren't allowed to have Bibles to read for themselves. The rejection of the Trinity often brought severe punishment including the loss of your job, intimidation, harassment, confiscation of property, jail or imprisonment, torture, and even burning at the stake.

View attachment 2225

I did not realize he was an atheist.

 

[TibiasDad]

Do you have plans to classify yourself as Eternal in the future?

No

Eternal Life is "Eternal". Doesn't matter when it begins. It never ends.

Properly speaking something that is eternal has no beginning or end. Life is eternal only because the source of life is eternal. Life has always been, but we have not always had it.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Where does the Bible teach outside of John 1:1 that the Word is God?

What if John 1:1 were the only passage that did, is that not enough? But it is not the only passage:

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Isa 9:6
6For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

44:6-8:
This is what the Lord says—
Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty:
I am the first and I am the last;
apart from me there is no God.
7Who then is like me? Let him proclaim it.
Let him declare and lay out before me
what has happened since I established my ancient people,
and what is yet to come—
yes, let them foretell what will come.
8Do not tremble, do not be afraid.
Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago?
You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me?
No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.”

Matt 1:20-23
20But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (Which means “God with us.)

Titus 2:11-14
11For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. 12It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

2Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

These are but a few, I can give more later if desired, but we’ll start with these.

Doug

 

[Peterlag]

What if John 1:1 were the only passage that did, is that not enough? But it is not the only passage:

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Isa 9:6
6For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

44:6-8:
This is what the Lord says—
Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty:
I am the first and I am the last;
apart from me there is no God.
7Who then is like me? Let him proclaim it.
Let him declare and lay out before me
what has happened since I established my ancient people,
and what is yet to come—
yes, let them foretell what will come.
8Do not tremble, do not be afraid.
Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago?
You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me?
No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.”

Matt 1:20-23
20But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (Which means “God with us.)

Titus 2:11-14
11For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. 12It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

2Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

These are but a few, I can give more later if desired, but we’ll start with these.

Doug

I don't know if I should laugh or cry Doug. You have a photo that makes you look grown and yet you quote a verse that says...

"our God and Savior Jesus Christ"

And somehow you can't see that refers to two different creatures.

 

[Runningman]

What if John 1:1 were the only passage that did, is that not enough? But it is not the only passage:

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Isa 9:6
6For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

44:6-8:
This is what the Lord says—
Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty:
I am the first and I am the last;
apart from me there is no God.
7Who then is like me? Let him proclaim it.
Let him declare and lay out before me
what has happened since I established my ancient people,
and what is yet to come—
yes, let them foretell what will come.
8Do not tremble, do not be afraid.
Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago?
You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me?
No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.”

Matt 1:20-23
20But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (Which means “God with us.)

Titus 2:11-14
11For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. 12It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

2Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

These are but a few, I can give more later if desired, but we’ll start with these.

Doug

I understand, but you are saying the Word is God based on John 1:1 and nothing else in the entire Bible. I prefer to follow rules of exegesis to build a doctrine. If the Word is God with God then I should expect the Bible to be conssitent about that, but it is not. Actually, what I have found upon reading more about the Word is that no one else, not even John, repeated such a thing again.

We should consider a few things before proceeding. Is there a translation issue? Did John believe the Word is God elsewhere? Could a literary device be at play here?

Here's my honest take on it. The word "Logos" is used all over the Bible and it's a thing, not a person, 99.99999999% of the the time. I think we should begin with the fact we know that words are not a person, but are a thing. Could this be why John said the Word is a thing in 1John 1:1-3? How about in Acts 4:23-31 where John and Peter prayed to God the Sovereign Lord and Creator, instead of Jesus, and told God His servant are David and Jesus? The Word is being personified but isn't a person and isn't Jesus. Does John to have freedom to write a poem about the Word without being totally literal about it? I think he does because David did it in Psalms repeatedly. There are also examples of the word of God and Jesus being mentioned in the same sentence while being entirely distinct from one another, such as in Revelation 1:1,2. I dont know, your theory isn't convincing.

 

[Runningman]

I don't know if I should laugh or cry Doug. You have a photo that makes you look grown and yet you quote a verse that says...

"our God and Savior Jesus Christ"

And somehow you can't see that refers to two different creatures.

Nice avatar. One of my favorite classic movies of all time, btw.

 

[mikesw]

I understand, but you are saying the Word is God based on John 1:1 and nothing else in the entire Bible. I prefer to follow rules of exegesis to build a doctrine. If the Word is God with God then I should expect the Bible to be conssitent about that, but it is not. Actually, what I have found upon reading more about the Word is that no one else, not even John, repeated such a thing again.

We should consider a few things before proceeding. Is there a translation issue? Did John believe the Word is God elsewhere? Could a literary device be at play here?

Here's my honest take on it. The word "Logos" is used all over the Bible and it's a thing, not a person, 99.99999999% of the the time. I think we should begin with the fact we know that words are not a person, but are a thing.

You have done such an amateur interpretation mistake. That is not a surprise since you make so many similar mistakes. Namely, you have assumed the word 'logos' has some magical meaning that overrides the context of every passage that it is used in. That is an error of philosophy of the Concordant translation, whose creator seems to promote unitarian heresies. (The principle would have been nice if it would have been possible.) Words carry nuances based on the writer and the context. Sometimes the words will carry to a meaning from one context to another. Often times there are different meanings.
We have seen Peterlag make that rookie error too and how he fails to recognize any of the context of John 1:1 being in the description of Jesus -- not some words on a page. Sorry you got trapped into the same thinking.

 

[Runningman]

You have done such an amateur interpretation mistake. That is not a surprise since you make so many similar mistakes. Namely, you have assumed the word 'logos' has some magical meaning that overrides the context of every passage that it is used in. That is an error of philosophy of the Concordant translation, whose creator seems to promote unitarian heresies. (The principle would have been nice if it would have been possible.) Words carry nuances based on the writer and the context. Sometimes the words will carry to a meaning from one context to another. Often times there are different meanings.
We have seen Peterlag make that rookie error too and how he fails to recognize any of the context of John 1:1 being in the description of Jesus -- not some words on a page. Sorry you got trapped into the same thinking.

Basically, your take is ignore everything the Bible says, laser focus on in John 1:1 and be hyper-literal about it, then disparage those who actually take in the whole literal counsel of Scripture? I have seen you talk enough at this point to know this is exactly what you do. You're a hard-line logos theologian.

Question. If John 1:1 didn't exist, where would you turn to for logos theology?

 

[mikesw]

Basically, your take is ignore everything the Bible says, laser focus on in John 1:1 and be hyper-literal about it, then disparage those who actually take in the whole literal counsel of Scripture? I have seen you talk enough at this point to know this is exactly what you do. You're a hard-line logos theologian.

Question. If John 1:1 didn't exist, where would you turn to for logos theology?

If I were a one verse holder of the divinity of Christ, John 1:1 would be decent. However, it is just the clearest for those who wish to understand Christ's true divine nature.
I do not reject those who have looked at broad scripture and found the Triune God in all the glory of God. I just reject the hyper-literalist unitarians who deny so much of scripture to end up with a heresy.
John took a concept used in first century Judaism and applied it more directly to Christ Jesus. He only would need to be super clear on this point one time rather than repeating enough that the unitarian might recognize Christ's divinity. It is not like John was writing primarily to the die-hard unitarians.

You do not have sufficient background knowledge to create this new experimental unitarian doctrine

 

[FreeInChrist]

You are so forgetful. It is like sharing scripture with a person who suffers daily strokes. But I do hope you are not suffering from those.
Revelation 19:13–14 (ESV)
13He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God.
14And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses.

There. I have given you another passage to deny and forget.

I am not dure forgetful is the word to use. I think it more likely ignore is.

Could be that he and his counterpart simply do not read what is replied so their responses are copy and
pastes basically of what they wrote before.

Sad

 

[synergy]

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.

You're repeating your Gaffe #10.

We also never have Jesus being called the Word. Your interpretation is very narrowly focused on John 1:1.

You're repeating your Gaffe #2 where the Greek word ἐσκήνωσεν establishes the connection between the Word and Jesus.

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?

Huh? We are working from the beginning of John, his very first verse, and working forward from those foundational words. It's you who works backwards from John 17:3 thinking that verse is talking against Trinitarianism when it's talking about the prevailing Greco-Roman paganism at that time.

This has now been entered in the List as 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.

So John 1:1 is not about the Word being God.

You're repeating your Gaffe #7.

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 your Gaffe #6 about 1 John 1.

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.

That makes the Word God, not godly. Your attempt to rewrite John 1:1c from "the Word was God" to "the Word was godly" has been noted as your Gaffe #12.

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 of Gaffes and your reluctance to address them 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.
12. Your attempt to rewrite John 1:1c from "the Word was God" to "the Word was godly" was denied.

This List makes for a tidy even-dozen set of RM Gaffes.

 

[civic]

I know what the doctrine of Trintiarianism is completely. Where we are at is that you cannot find it in the Bible. Do you agree that the trinity is neither stated or described in Scripture? Some of you trins will admit that.

Do you agree that the unitarian god that is one person is neither stated or described in Scripture?

Will some of you Uni's admit that ?

 

[civic]

What if John 1:1 were the only passage that did, is that not enough? But it is not the only passage:

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Isa 9:6
6For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

44:6-8:
This is what the Lord says—
Israel’s King and Redeemer, the Lord Almighty:
I am the first and I am the last;
apart from me there is no God.
7Who then is like me? Let him proclaim it.
Let him declare and lay out before me
what has happened since I established my ancient people,
and what is yet to come—
yes, let them foretell what will come.
8Do not tremble, do not be afraid.
Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago?
You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me?
No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.”

Matt 1:20-23
20But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”

22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (Which means “God with us.)

Titus 2:11-14
11For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. 12It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

2Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

These are but a few, I can give more later if desired, but we’ll start with these.

Doug

Amen

 

[TibiasDad]

I don't know if I should laugh or cry Doug. You have a photo that makes you look grown and yet you quote a verse that says...

"our God and Savior Jesus Christ"

And somehow you can't see that refers to two different creatures.

The literal reading is “the God and Savior of us, Christ Jesus.” There is only one pronoun and it follows the statement in question. You cannot separate the identities as two distinct entities. They are a unified nomenclature.
If the intention is as you say, there would need to be two pronouns, one for each designation. But the actual Greek syntax does not allow this.

Doug

 

[synergy]

I am not dure forgetful is the word to use. I think it more likely ignore is.

Could be that he and his counterpart simply do not read what is replied so their responses are copy and
pastes basically of what they wrote before.

Sad

Maybe we should all carry forward everything @Runningman ignores, in note form, in the hopes that he might finally address them, in the fullness of time, instead of running away from them.

I can't say that his name didn't warn us of his tendencies to run away from reality.

 

[FreeInChrist]

Maybe we should all carry forward everything @Runningman ignores, in note form, in the hopes that he might finally address them, in the fullness of time, instead of running away from them.

I can't say that his name didn't warn us of his tendencies to run away from reality.

Too funny.

He is on a slightly different tactic at the moment with civic. Away, for the moment from Adam and Eve. But still basically copy and paste.

LOL I actually did save some of his comments so I could reply, but he moves too fast for me.

 

[TibiasDad]

I understand, but you are saying the Word is God based on John 1:1 and nothing else in the entire Bible.

No, I am not! All of the passages I cited are talking about the Lord God Almighty and are Messianic prophecies, so they do not reference the Father.

Doug

 

[synergy]

Too funny.

He is on a slightly different tactic at the moment with civic. Away, for the moment from Adam and Eve. But still basically copy and paste.

LOL I actually did save some of his comments so I could reply, but he moves too fast for me.

His technique is a Blitzkrieg style offence. He thinks that his rapid-fire copy and paste will win the day. His other technique, as you noted, is to ignore what we say in the hopes that his points overwhelm our truthful points. A running list of his failures will confront him as to how he's gone wrong and the fact that he can no longer run away from his failures until they're addressed.

We can all pool our lists together and confront him with that list. Hopefully he won't be true to his name and just run away.