Why The Trinity is Wrong: Definition

[101G]

to all,
when one Learn and fully understand the term ECHAD of the Godhead as ONE person in the diversity, or the EQUAL SHARE of himself in flesh then ONE will understand Salvation, and why God came in FLESH, (Isaiah 35:4), to REDEEM and SAVE man. for as Spirit there is nothing to crucify. and as Spirit, there is no blood to give. as Spirit there is not OBJECT Lesson to Learn from as the Perfect example.... Must 101G go on?

101G

 

[praise_yeshua]

yes, if the verse would have said, "EQUAL .... TO God", then one would have a separate and distinct person. but by saying "Equal WITH", then it's the same one Person. .... (smile), B.A.M.

for the Nature is the EQUAL SHARE.

101G.

There is context to "with" and "to". Without that context, you can not determine uniqueness. The issue here is one of Rank. I need to mediate to determine how to best express the difference to you. I will respond a little later.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Good, let 101G explain, "Diversified Oneness." simply put it the ECHAD of God in Ordinal Designations of First and Last. follow so far. the titles Father and Son are just that titles of the One PERSON GOD in this Ordinal Designations of First and Last.

Father/First, simply means CREATOR, and MAKER or the First. and this same one Person "SHARED" himself in Flesh, as the LAST, which was, was, was, as in John 1:1 was to Come in Flesh to REDEEM and SAVE what he CREATED and MADE.

follow so far. so, Jesus as the Ordinal First CREATED, and MADE ALL THINGS as Isaiah 44:24 states, all alone and BY HIMSELF. and in DUE TIME, or in the FULLNESS of TIME Galatians 4:4 God came, (the Ordinal Last, in flesh), to REDEEM and SAVE what he CREATED and MADE as the CHRIST... in flesh as a MAN.

this is just the overall basic of "Diversified Oneness", which answers all question, and doctrine of the BIBLE.

101G.

I don't see any meaningful difference in "Diversified Oneness" and the "Oneness" doctrine that has been traditionally taught by various denominations. Can you define the difference?

 

[synergy]

We are not deserving of such flattering praise and accolades. Tell us about yourself. Are you a "Biblical" Unitarian like @Wrangler? If so, tell us what Bible verses convinced you of Arianism. Let's start with that, if you may.

@APAK, now that we exchanged pleasantries, the floor is open to you to tell us what specific Bible verses convinced you of Arianism. If not the Bible then what else convinced you of Arianism? Looking forward to that further exchange of information. I'm hoping yours was not just a drive-by exchange.

 

[Wrangler]

And it says there is One Lord as well so by your standards the Father cannot be the One Lord.

In that context, correct. The President of my company is not my immediate supervisor. And once the President assigns an immediate supervisor, he cannot then also be my immediate supervisor.

 

[civic]

In that context, correct. The President of my company is not my immediate supervisor. And once the President assigns an immediate supervisor, he cannot then also be my immediate supervisor.

Except there was no assignment. That is argument from silence known as a fallacy

 

[Wrangler]

Except there was no assignment. That is argument from silence known as a fallacy

Oy vey! Sure there was an assignment. Jesus confessed that he was sent (on assignment). Indeed, that is why God gave his only begotten son, to be on assignment.

 

[civic]

Oy vey! Sure there was an assignment. Jesus confessed that he was sent (on assignment). Indeed, that is why God gave his only begotten son, to be on assignment.

Sent to this earth correct. But that’s a diversion. We were discussing creation as per 1 Cor 8:6.

 

[GeneZ]

I'll tell you all why these "Trinity" debates can not be resolved.

Those who can not see, will not see it, no matter how much proof you provide.

Here is why....

Matthew 16:13-17


When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples,
“Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others,
Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed
to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.

Those who see the Trinity do not see it because some person made them to perceive it.
We may share with each other passages that further clarify and confirm what we already know.
But the verses do not make us to see that God is One as a Trinity.

So you skeptics... Don't be frustrated with believers if you don't get it. For, its God who must open your eyes to see.

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, ​

for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.​

Finding yourself seeing the Trinity is God's way of reassuring the believer that he has been joined to something real. Something real and that others will not see.

Knowing it is like birds knowing to fly south for the winter. No one tells them to do so. God gives the ability...

“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

No man can say that.

Bye! You can keep that apple!

 

[101G]

There is context to "with" and "to". Without that context, you can not determine uniqueness. The issue here is one of Rank. I need to mediate to determine how to best express the difference to you. I will respond a little later.

ok, mediate on this. Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." the First is "WITH" the Last. let's see if this is ONE PSRSON. Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." ...... what you say, it's the same one PERSON. is this UNCOMMON? Revelation 1:11 "Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea." and this is ONE PERSON, as well as this, Revelation 2:8 "And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;" again ONE in the SAME .... one person. ..... can you believe that? is there a mental block going around?

101G.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'll tell you all why these "Trinity" debates can not be resolved.

Those who can not see, will not see it, no matter how much proof you provide.

Here is why....

Matthew 16:13-17


When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples,
“Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others,
Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed
to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.

Those who see the Trinity do not see it because some person made them to perceive it.
We may share with each other passages that further clarify and confirm what we already know.
But the verses do not make us to see that God is One as a Trinity.

So you skeptics... Don't be frustrated with believers if you don't get it. For, its God who must open your eyes to see.

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, ​

for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.​

Finding yourself seeing the Trinity is God's way of reassuring the believer that he has been joined to something real. Something real and that others will not see.

Knowing it is like birds knowing to fly south for the winter. No one tells them to do so. God gives the ability...

“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

No man can say that.

Bye! You can keep that apple!

My problem with this position is that it makes such a teaching an exclusively "Spiritual" impartation of knowledge. I disagree. Not that I don't believe it is Spiritual. I do. However, I believe it is also a rational teaching. Tt does take a little faith before someone can actually learn it properly. If you believe it is a lie from the beginning, there is less hope but I can't say there isn't hope at all.

 

[101G]

I don't see any meaningful difference in "Diversified Oneness" and the "Oneness" doctrine that has been traditionally taught by various denominations. Can you define the difference?

well I'm glad it's just U who cannot see the difference..... I very sure you have never heard of any EQUAL SHARING of only one PERSON as God in the ECHAD. if you do post a link where 101G can assess the difference .... if any. so far, 101G has never heard of ANY Oneness doctrine of the UPC and any others that speak of God in the ECHAD as the Equal Share of HIMSELF in Flesh.

101G.

 

[praise_yeshua]

ok, mediate on this. Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." the First is "WITH" the Last. let's see if this is ONE PSRSON. Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." ...... what you say, it's the same one PERSON. is this UNCOMMON? Revelation 1:11 "Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea." and this is ONE PERSON, as well as this, Revelation 2:8 "And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive;" again ONE in the SAME .... one person. ..... can you believe that? is there a mental block going around?

101G.

LOL..... mental block going around.... I resent/resemble that remark.

I applaud your position in that you're seeking to Glorify the Divinity of Christ. I do. The issue to me is the rudimentary nature of the teaching relative to the complexity of God. Divinity is complex. The Incarnation is complex. Complex deserves recognition in teaching others about the nature of God.

I'm not sure if you realize how the teaching of the Holy Trinity compliments your desire to see God as "One". I believe it does. I have believed this for a very long time. We have a process issue. I believe we need to get into the details before you will realize the complexity needed.

 

[praise_yeshua]

well I'm glad it's just U who cannot see the difference..... I very sure you have never heard of any EQUAL SHARING of only one PERSON as God in the ECHAD. if you do post a link where 101G can assess the difference .... if any. so far, 101G has never heard of ANY Oneness doctrine of the UPC and any others that speak of God in the ECHAD as the Equal Share of HIMSELF in Flesh.

101G.

The construct seems very similar to me and I see your position as a natural outgrowth of Oneness.

Echad, Yachid, and the Oneness of God

www.onenesspentecostal.com

 

[101G]

LOL..... mental block going around.... I resent/resemble that remark.

is your name on it? so, why worry about it.... (smile).

101G

 

[101G]

I applaud your position in that you're seeking to Glorify the Divinity of Christ. I do. The issue to me is the rudimentary nature of the teaching relative to the complexity of God. Divinity is complex. The Incarnation is complex. Complex deserves recognition in teaching others about the nature of God.

no complexity, it's Stright forward. Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" form here is the NATURE, and it's EQUAL, but HOW? look up the ROOT of G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') which is G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n. and you will have your answer.

101G.

 

[101G]

I'm not sure if you realize how the teaching of the Holy Trinity compliments your desire to see God as "One". I believe it does. I have believed this for a very long time. We have a process issue. I believe we need to get into the details before you will realize the complexity needed.

(smile), no problems on 101G's end.

101G.

 

[praise_yeshua]

no complexity, it's Stright forward. Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" form here is the NATURE, and it's EQUAL, but HOW? look up the ROOT of G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') which is G3313 μέρος meros (me'-ros) n. and you will have your answer.

101G.

Do you really believe that I haven't extensively studied this? The Incarnation is complex. To say otherwise is to not live in reality. It is "one" (pun intended) most Unitarians deny the Divinity of Christ.

 

[101G]

The construct seems very similar to me and I see your position as a natural outgrowth of Oneness.

Echad, Yachid, and the Oneness of God

www.onenesspentecostal.com

ERROR no OUTGROWTH of Oneness. Diversity was here before Oneness. .....

101G.

 

[101G]

Do you really believe that I haven't extensively studied this? The Incarnation is complex. To say otherwise is to not live in reality.

ERROR, no complexity. shoot your best shot.

101G.