Thomas... My Lord and my God

[mikesw]

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.

Jesus is the source of light here. It is true the light in verse 5 is different. It is Christ's light in some sense more real that light of the sun. It is the light of God and truth. The verse speaks of the analogy of rays with the truth of the spiritual overcoming the lack of light.
I know that you cannot understand analogies or nuances of scripture. You will just have to trust the actual meaning explained for you. I have not studied carefully but this analysis exposes the sense of light in a reasonable quick analysis.

 

[Runningman]

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 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.

Then prepare for a bumpy ride for the next X amount of years. Get in line with scripture or get out of the way. It's going to just be straight truth from the Bible and refuting trinitarianism every day.

2 Corinthians 5
3For though we live in the flesh, we do not wage war according to the flesh. 4The weapons of our warfare are not the weapons of the flesh. Instead, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5We demolish arguments and every presumption set up against the knowledge of God; and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, as soon as your obedience is complete.

 

[Runningman]

Jesus is the source of light here. It is true the light in verse 5 is different. It is Christ's light in some sense more real that light of the sun. It is the light of God and truth. The verse speaks of the analogy of rays with the truth of the spiritual overcoming the lack of light.
I know that you cannot understand analogies or nuances of scripture. You will just have to trust the actual meaning explained for you. I have not studied carefully but this analysis exposes the sense of light in a reasonable quick analysis.

Jesus isn't mentioned until John 1:9 when the true Light was coming into the world afer Jesus was already 30 years old. Try again. The Light is called an "it" in John 1:5 and later called a "who" in John 1:9. Actually, compare this passage in a few different Bibles. They can't make up their mind where to capitalize Light and where not to.

 

[mikesw]

Jesus isn't mentioned until John 1:9 when the true Light was coming into the world afer Jesus was already 30 years old. Try again. The Light is called an "it" in John 1:5 and later called a "who" in John 1:9. Actually, compare this passage in a few different Bibles. They can't make up their mind where to capitalize Light and where not to.

I think I understand your viewpoint. You think John was just doodling or was working on some philosophical deviation from the gospel before he started talking about Jesus and important details we need to know as Christians.

 

[mikesw]

Jesus isn't mentioned until John 1:9 when the true Light was coming into the world afer Jesus was already 30 years old. Try again. The Light is called an "it" in John 1:5 and later called a "who" in John 1:9. Actually, compare this passage in a few different Bibles. They can't make up their mind where to capitalize Light and where not to.

I will not join your cult Prophet Runningman. I will follow Jesus instead.

 

[mikesw]

Then prepare for a bumpy ride for the next X amount of years. Get in line with scripture or get out of the way. It's going to just be straight truth from the Bible and refuting trinitarianism every day.

2 Corinthians 5
3For though we live in the flesh, we do not wage war according to the flesh. 4The weapons of our warfare are not the weapons of the flesh. Instead, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5We demolish arguments and every presumption set up against the knowledge of God; and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, as soon as your obedience is complete.

you cannot acknowledge Christ. You cannot acknowledge the Jewish perception of Two Powers in Heaven about the Angel of the Lord being equally called Yahweh. You cannot recognize John writing about the Logos as clarifying Jesus as the Logos from the vague sense of the logos as a person shared by Philo and known among Jews. You would rather hide the meaning in some vague obscurity of a logos that has no relevance.

 

[Runningman]

I think I understand your viewpoint. You think John was just doodling or was working on some philosophical deviation from the gospel before he started talking about Jesus and important details we need to know as Christians.

I will not join your cult Prophet Runningman. I will follow Jesus instead.

you cannot acknowledge Christ. You cannot acknowledge the Jewish perception of Two Powers in Heaven about the Angel of the Lord being equally called Yahweh. You cannot recognize John writing about the Logos as clarifying Jesus as the Logos from the vague sense of the logos as a person shared by Philo and known among Jews. You would rather hide the meaning in some vague obscurity of a logos that has no relevance.

As I have been continually saying, now that I have been able to pry you all away from John 1:1, the reality about what John was talking about is sobering for you people. John is employing a literary device in a poetic fashion in John 1 regarding the Word. For example, in John 1:5 there is Light an Darkness and both are being spoken of with characteristics like those of a person, i.e., personification. It's like the several poems in the Old Testament that are already in place regarding the word of God.

We know that Words, Light, and Darkness are not different persons, which is why John also called the Light a thing in John 1:5. John switches gears in John 1:6-8 and seems to describe the Light as a person. Then in John 1:9 the Light is suddenly explicitly described as a person who was coming into the world after John and Jesus were both already around 30 years old.

As I said, the context anhiliates the trinitarian's arguments. I keep pinging @synergy but he keeps going offline immediately after pasting the same comment. You might want to shake him and wake him up, trinairainism is getting wrecked while while he wastes time on John 1:1.

I'm ready to get to John 1:14 already. "The Word become flesh..." means Jesus was created.

 

[mikesw]

As I have been continually saying, now that I have been able to pry you all away from John 1:1, the reality about what John was talking about is sobering for you people. John is employing a literary device in a poetic fashion in John 1 regarding the Word. For example, in John 1:5 there is Light an Darkness and both are being spoken of with characteristics like those of a person, i.e., personification. It's like the several poems in the Old Testament that are already in place regarding the word of God.

We know that Words, Light, and Darkness are not different persons, which is why John also called the Light a thing in John 1:5. John switches gears in John 1:6-8 and seems to describe the Light as a person. Then in John 1:9 the Light is suddenly explicitly described as a person who was coming into the world after John and Jesus were both already around 30 years old.

As I said, the context anhiliates the trinitarian's arguments. I keep pinging @synergy but he keeps going offline immediately after pasting the same comment. You might want to shake him and wake him up, trinairainism is getting wrecked while while he wastes time on John 1:1.

I'm ready to get to John 1:14 already. "The Word become flesh..." means Jesus was created.

You are not ready for John 1:14. you are not ready for John 1. Maybe when you come out with something that makes sense in the earlier verses then you can pretend to have something useful on John 1:14.
The reason that Light is a person because Jesus is a person rather than some additional person beyond Jesus. I think you have to forget everything you believe and then read the scripture as it reveals things.
I have not even heard you admit your error about John 1:1-3 of saying the Word was created. That is not mentioned there. You also neglect the apologetics answer to Philo's conception of the logos. The more you share, the less reliable you sound in your arguments.

 

[synergy]

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.

Your reluctance to address any of your Gaffes is why I carry your List of Gaffes forward.

Right off the bat after John 1:1 proves the Word is not The God,

You repeated your Gaffe #7.

John 1:2,3 proves the Word is not the Creator. Rather, the God the Word was with is the Creator.

You repeated your Gaffe #3.

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.

This is talking about the Shekinah Light (το φως το αληθινον) that radiated out of the OT Tabernacle and out of Jesus at his Transfiguration. Just as God tabernacled and radiated his Shekinah in the OT, the Word now tabernacles and radiates his Shekinah Light as Jesus. This is now your Gaffe #14.

John 1:14 teaches Jesus was created,

You repeated your Gaffe #2.

John 1:18 teaches Jesus was begotten.

How many men do you know were begotten from "the bosom of the Father"?

John 1:30-31 calls the Lamb of God a man.

Jesus was human, in addition to being God (John 1;1c).

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.

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.
14. You are denigrating God's Shekinah Light (το φως το αληθινον) that radiated out of the OT Tabernacle and out of Jesus at his Transfiguration. Just as God tabernacled and radiated his Shekinah in the OT, the Word now tabernacles and radiates his Shekinah Light as Jesus.

 

[Peterlag]

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.

Don't hold your breath.

 

[mikesw]

Here's Running man's verse and Synergy's response

John 1:18 teaches Jesus was begotten.

How many men do you know were begotten from "the bosom of the Father"?

John refers to Jesus as God who is at the Father's side. I may have to remember this verse. John ramped up his message to make this direct statement about the divinity of Christ.
John 1:18 (ESV)
18No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.

I may have to memorize this verse.

It is crazy that unitarians will share verses that so clearly identifies Christ's divinity while the continue to deny it.

 

[Peterlag]

What on earth are the trinity folks thinking...

For anything to be achieved one side has to be able to win and one side has to be able to lose. We would not have a football game if one side could not lose. Jesus could not have redeemed us if he could not sin. He could not be resurrected if he could not die. He could not have walked a sinless life if he could not have been tempted to sin. It would never be fair to have God fix what a man (Adam) broke. Adam and Jesus had to be on equal grounds. What on earth are the trinity folks thinking?

 

[mikesw]

What on earth are the trinity folks thinking...

For anything to be achieved one side has to be able to win and one side has to be able to lose. We would not have a football game if one side could not lose. Jesus could not have redeemed us if he could not sin. He could not be resurrected if he could not die. He could not have walked a sinless life if he could not have been tempted to sin. It would never be fair to have God fix what a man (Adam) broke. Adam and Jesus had to be on equal grounds. What on earth are the trinity folks thinking?

I think the Trinity folks just are more informed by scriptures and allow the scriptures' testimony to the Triune nature of God. Nothing more to share here since unitarians trample on scriptures.

 

[synergy]

As I have been continually saying, now that I have been able to pry you all away from John 1:1, the reality about what John was talking about is sobering for you people. John is employing a literary device in a poetic fashion in John 1 regarding the Word. For example, in John 1:5 there is Light an Darkness and both are being spoken of with characteristics like those of a person, i.e., personification. It's like the several poems in the Old Testament that are already in place regarding the word of God.

We know that Words, Light, and Darkness are not different persons, which is why John also called the Light a thing in John 1:5. John switches gears in John 1:6-8 and seems to describe the Light as a person. Then in John 1:9 the Light is suddenly explicitly described as a person who was coming into the world after John and Jesus were both already around 30 years old.

As I said, the context anhiliates the trinitarian's arguments. I keep pinging @synergy but he keeps going offline immediately after pasting the same comment. You might want to shake him and wake him up, trinairainism is getting wrecked while while he wastes time on John 1:1.

In the Old Testament, God’s presence among His people was revealed in the Shekinah glory—the radiant, manifest light of His dwelling. When Moses completed the Tabernacle according to the Lord’s command, “the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle” (Exod. 40:34). This visible radiance was not mere natural light but the sign of the divine presence, a supernatural brightness that shone around the sanctuary to show that the transcendent God had chosen to dwell in the midst of His people. The Shekinah was the radiant evidence of His covenantal nearness, both awesome and comforting, terrifying in holiness yet gracious in accessibility.

This same divine reality comes to its fullness in the New Testament. John writes of Christ: “The Word became flesh and dwelt [literally, tabernacled] among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). Here the evangelist deliberately echoes the Tabernacle language of Exodus: just as God once caused His Shekinah to shine from the Holy of Holies, so now the eternal Word “tabernacles” in human flesh. The divine light, το φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν (the True Light), shines not from a tent of animal skins, but from the incarnate Son.

The Transfiguration makes this explicit. On the mountain, Jesus’ face shone like the sun, and His garments became dazzling white (Matt. 17:2). The Shekinah that once filled the Tabernacle and Temple now streaming forth from the Son Himself. Peter, James, and John were given a foretaste of the unveiled glory of Christ, who is Himself the locus of God’s presence with humanity.

Thus, the Shekinah Light of God that once radiated from the Tabernacle and later the Temple is fully realized in Christ. The Word made flesh is now the true meeting place between God and man, the living Tabernacle in whom the divine presence shines. What once appeared in shadow and symbol now blazes in reality. Jesus Christ is the true Shekinah, the true Light who enlightens every person (John 1:9), and through Him God continues to dwell with His people—not in a structure made with hands, but in the radiant glory of His Son.

 

[Runningman]

Don't hold your breath.

I'm not. lol

 

[Runningman]

You are not ready for John 1:14. you are not ready for John 1. Maybe when you come out with something that makes sense in the earlier verses then you can pretend to have something useful on John 1:14.
The reason that Light is a person because Jesus is a person rather than some additional person beyond Jesus. I think you have to forget everything you believe and then read the scripture as it reveals things.
I have not even heard you admit your error about John 1:1-3 of saying the Word was created. That is not mentioned there. You also neglect the apologetics answer to Philo's conception of the logos. The more you share, the less reliable you sound in your arguments.

You have no prophecies in the Bible about God incarnating or becoming flesh and no one ever said that happened in all of the New Testament as well.

Going to be pretty tough for you to argue God incarnated at all, but I can prove Jesus is a man, I can prove men were created, and I can prove that "became" is used with creation rather an an incarnation anywhere in the Bible. I have already won this debate.

 

[Runningman]

Here's Running man's verse and Synergy's response


John refers to Jesus as God who is at the Father's side. I may have to remember this verse. John ramped up his message to make this direct statement about the divinity of Christ.
John 1:18 (ESV)
18No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.

I may have to memorize this verse.

It is crazy that unitarians will share verses that so clearly identifies Christ's divinity while the continue to deny it.

At a glance I found a couple dozen Bible verses that the Word who became flesh was begotten in John 1:18. It's an honest translation and Biblically viable from cover to cover. God wasn't begotten Sherlock.

 

[Runningman]

In the Old Testament, God’s presence among His people was revealed in the Shekinah glory—the radiant, manifest light of His dwelling. When Moses completed the Tabernacle according to the Lord’s command, “the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle” (Exod. 40:34). This visible radiance was not mere natural light but the sign of the divine presence, a supernatural brightness that shone around the sanctuary to show that the transcendent God had chosen to dwell in the midst of His people. The Shekinah was the radiant evidence of His covenantal nearness, both awesome and comforting, terrifying in holiness yet gracious in accessibility.

This same divine reality comes to its fullness in the New Testament. John writes of Christ: “The Word became flesh and dwelt [literally, tabernacled] among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). Here the evangelist deliberately echoes the Tabernacle language of Exodus: just as God once caused His Shekinah to shine from the Holy of Holies, so now the eternal Word “tabernacles” in human flesh. The divine light, το φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν (the True Light), shines not from a tent of animal skins, but from the incarnate Son.

The Transfiguration makes this explicit. On the mountain, Jesus’ face shone like the sun, and His garments became dazzling white (Matt. 17:2). The Shekinah that once filled the Tabernacle and Temple now streaming forth from the Son Himself. Peter, James, and John were given a foretaste of the unveiled glory of Christ, who is Himself the locus of God’s presence with humanity.

Thus, the Shekinah Light of God that once radiated from the Tabernacle and later the Temple is fully realized in Christ. The Word made flesh is now the true meeting place between God and man, the living Tabernacle in whom the divine presence shines. What once appeared in shadow and symbol now blazes in reality. Jesus Christ is the true Shekinah, the true Light who enlightens every person (John 1:9), and through Him God continues to dwell with His people—not in a structure made with hands, but in the radiant glory of His Son.

Nonsense. Moses' face also shined with the glory of God in Exodus 34:29.

The transfiguration is explicitly said to be a vision rather than an event that actually happened in real time.

Matthew 17
9And as they were coming down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, “Tell no one the vision, until the Son of Man is raised from the dead.”

The fact that your whole argument got destroyed with simplicity means it was half baked.

 

[mikesw]

You have no prophecies in the Bible about God incarnating or becoming flesh and no one ever said that happened in all of the New Testament as well.

you lack any insight. that is a problem of hyper-literalist unitarians who cannot follow even blatant passages about the pre-existence of Jesus. That pre-existence alone testifies to Christ's incarnation. So I'm not sure where you start to make an argument for your position of denial of Christ.
You totally failed to explain John 1 and its identification of Christ as the logos that Philo only treated as a vague concept. You have too many denials to make your opinion seem worthwhile.

Going to be pretty tough for you to argue God incarnated at all, but I can prove Jesus is a man, I can prove men were created, and I can prove that "became" is used with creation rather an an incarnation anywhere in the Bible.

I'm sure in your imagination you can prove lots of stuff. The problem is that the real argument you make disregard the passages that testify against you.

I have already won this debate.

I have some pity on you for having only an imaginary win instead of making a real argument for your view. A real win is where you make an argument for something true that also changes someone's mind. Still waiting . . .

 

[synergy]

Nonsense. Moses' face also shined with the glory of God in Exodus 34:29.

More Gaffes on your part.

It is true that Moses’ face radiated after he descended Mount Sinai, but the nature of that radiance is fundamentally different from that of Christ at the Transfiguration. When the encounter ended, the radiance faded (2 Cor. 3:7).

(2 Cor 3:7) But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away,

Instead, Christ’s radiance was HIS Intrinsic Glory as confirmed in John 1:14 (“we beheld HIS GLORY”) which is the Glory of God (Heb 1:3).

The transfiguration is explicitly said to be a vision rather than an event that actually happened in real time.

The Greek word translated “vision” in Matthew 17:9 is ὅραμα which means “something seen” or “spectacle.” In fact, its root word is the verb ὁράω which means "to see". It does not imply that the event was imaginary or unreal. Also, it is used elsewhere for further real historical experiences (e.g., Acts 7:31 for Moses seeing the burning bush).

Matthew 17
9And as they were coming down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, “Tell no one the vision, until the Son of Man is raised from the dead.”

Far from diminishing the Transfiguration, as heretics like you try to do, the use of ὅραμα underlines its prophetic significance: it was a revelation that Christ is truly God, as John 1:1c confirms.

The fact that your whole argument got destroyed with simplicity means it was half baked.

Simpleton remarks on your part cannot undo what God has revealed no matter how much you nihistically wish it that way. You continue to produce Gaffes after Gaffes.