Trinitarian Training

[Runningman]

you neglect the parable of Luke 20:9ff to make your view. Obviously the sending of his son was personal. You depersonalize God. Instead, this was an act of love. The idea is that the appeal to the Jews was by God's personal act and interest and doing the most for them. It is not something to diminish that God sent his Son. We do not need to second guess why God worked it this way. We just know the pattern was demonstrated this way even back to Genesis.

Your argument seems to pivot around the concept of being sent. Many are sent by God in the Bible. What's your point exactly?

 

[mikesw]

Ah, you think the Word is literally God. It's not. According to 1 John 1:1-3, the Word is a thing that was revealed by or manifested in Jesus. John 1:14, regarding the Word becoming flesh can either be understood as as Jesus being created or the Word making it's "tabernacle" or "tent" inside of Jesus. The Word of God is something Jesus has, not something Jesus is, and the Word is eternal life according to 1 John 1:1-3. John 1:1 can best be understood as personification.

You are recycling old stale arguments and conflating the points in 1 John 1 with John 1. Maybe I can find some principles of exegesis to help you avoid the same mistakes.

So all your bowling pins just got knocked down. Without any explicit or clear statements about God incarnating you are simply providing an interpretation that is contradicted by the very chapter we are talking about. John 1:1-3 explains that all things were created by God. We can see in Genesis that God created using spoken words, not a surrogate god or additional person. God always creating alone in the Bible and being distinct from Jesus and the Word proves that the Word is not a co-creator or co-person with God. Case in point, you won't find anyone named "the Word" anywhere in the Old Testament saying or doing anything.

You can do a search on the Word of God coming to the prophets. This answers your question. There is some ambiguity whether this is specifically Jesus but you cannot deny the text of the scripture. I hope you are just pleading your ignorance in denying that all things were created through the Son.

And we still have John 17:3 and 1 Corinthians 8:6 removing all doubt about who God is: the one and only true God is the Father.

A good idea is that I'm just sharing scripture and not interested in bowling pins. If you want to deny John 1, knock yourself out but don't try sharing that denial with others. If you were right about Jesus being a different god, your argument would almost have some logic to it. You miss that Jesus is of that one and only true God. But you still have doubt because you reject that.

Next fallacy.

Okay. share the next fallacy that you follow.

 

[mikesw]

Your argument seems to pivot around the concept of being sent. Many are sent by God in the Bible. What's your point exactly?

I guess the point is that your failure to get the point is a problem of your errors in interpreting scripture. Try reading the parable in Luke 20:9ff again. Oops. I forget. You cannnot understand analogies.

 

[Runningman]

You are recycling old stale arguments and conflating the points in 1 John 1 with John 1. Maybe I can find some principles of exegesis to help you avoid the same mistakes.

So 1 John 1:1-3 is a mistake? I am not making an argument but telling you what John wrote about the Word. He is the only one who ever mentioned the Word in such a way, never repeated by anyone else in all of Scripture. He wrote primarily 3 things about the Word. The first one in John 1:1 where John pointed out that the Word is not The God. John 1:2,3 where God used the Word to create Jesus in John 1:14, hence the Word became flesh. In the Bible God creates using spoken words. Words aren't people. God isn't a Word.

Next, apostle John practically bent over backwards and shouted in his audiences' ears at the top of his lungs that the Word is a thing. God isn't a person and also a thing, hence John explicitly called the Word eternal life in 1 John 1:1-3. Eternal life is something someone has or something someone receives, it's immortality, not a God.

You can do a search on the Word of God coming to the prophets. This answers your question. There is some ambiguity whether this is specifically Jesus but you cannot deny the text of the scripture. I hope you are just pleading your ignorance in denying that all things were created through the Son.

No idea what you're talking about. The word of the Lord is is about God speaking using words, just like exactly how it sounds. It is not presented as a person but rather a message from God.

A good idea is that I'm just sharing scripture and not interested in bowling pins. If you want to deny John 1, knock yourself out but don't try sharing that denial with others. If you were right about Jesus being a different god, your argument would almost have some logic to it. You miss that Jesus is of that one and only true God. But you still have doubt because you reject that.

Okay. share the next fallacy that you follow.

You aren't just sharing Scripture unless your idea of "Scripture" is something from you trinitarian handbook. You keep saying God incarnated and you are going in circles with no evidence. Where does the Bible say God incarnated? I keep asking because I want you to eventually fess up that it doesn't exist. After you admit defeat on that, we can work through sorting out the rest of your messy theology.

 

[Runningman]

I guess the point is that your failure to get the point is a problem of your errors in interpreting scripture. Try reading the parable in Luke 20:9ff again. Oops. I forget. You cannnot understand analogies.

The parable of the prodigal son also has a son of God who was a sinner. Are you saying anyone who is God's son is God?

 

[mikesw]

So 1 John 1:1-3 is a mistake? I am not making an argument but telling you what John wrote about the Word.

You never learn. The focus topic is not Christ becoming incarnate in 1 John 1. You put scripture into a blender until it makes no sense. I keep recommending that you study exegesis, but that may not even help overcome your bias against its meaning. I will repeat for those hard of heart that the topic of 1 John 1 is the focus on life -- the scripture or message about life. It is not focused on the Word as the person of Christ.
You make the fatal mistake of assuming a "word" automatically centers around the same topic. You have the tail wagging the dog. Pure nonsense of interpretation there.

He is the only one who ever mentioned the Word in such a way, never repeated by anyone else in all of Scripture. He wrote primarily 3 things about the Word. The first one in John 1:1 where John pointed out that the Word is not The God. John 1:2,3 where God used the Word to create Jesus in John 1:14, hence the Word became flesh. In the Bible God creates using spoken words. Words aren't people. God isn't a Word.

I cannot believe you cannot comprehend these things. John 1:18 shows the divinity of Christ right under your nose
No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.

You cannot seem to accept scripture when it directly contradicts your view. You pretend these passages do not exist. That is not the proper way to interpret scripture. It makes a mockery of the unitarian view.

Next, apostle John practically bent over backwards and shouted in his audiences' ears at the top of his lungs that the Word is a thing. God isn't a person and also a thing, hence John explicitly called the Word eternal life in 1 John 1:1-3. Eternal life is something someone has or something someone receives, it's immortality, not a God.

No idea what you're talking about. The word of the Lord is is about God speaking using words, just like exactly how it sounds. It is not presented as a person but rather a message from God.

Indeed the Word came speaking to us and is recorded in the gospels. He died on the cross. Your hyperliteralist, word-dictionary dependency prevents you from recognizing how Christ Jesus is the Word.

You aren't just sharing Scripture unless your idea of "Scripture" is something from you trinitarian handbook. You keep saying God incarnated and you are going in circles with no evidence. Where does the Bible say God incarnated? I keep asking because I want you to eventually fess up that it doesn't exist. After you admit defeat on that, we can work through sorting out the rest of your messy theology.

I have no need to address further weaknesses of unitarians to make it clear the many errors their interpretation process reflects

 

[mikesw]

The parable of the prodigal son also has a son of God who was a sinner. Are you saying anyone who is God's son is God?

Wow. are you getting desperate to deny Christ? The prodigal son does not mention the Son of God. You are exceeding the bounds of decency in your ways of rejecting Christ. I hope this was just a mind fart that you did not catch in time because you were too tired when posting your idea.