Your Views on The Trinity

[mikesw]

Since baptism into John does not imply infer deity, then the same must hold true for Jesus. That's the mistake you keep making. You so much on Jesus that you miss how he is like others in so many ways.

I cannot trust anything you say after missing such an obvious point that I mentioned. Hyperliteralism and blending of unrelated topics has messed up your thinking to the max. I am starting to think you always make God in man's image rather than man being in God's image.
The one aspect that might be confusing you is the case where some had been baptized in John's baptism. They were introduced to Jesus and needed to be baptized in Christ Jesus. But that is the only moment where your confusion has some apparent basis. You maybe have heard that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of humanity. John did not. So you really distort things by making Jesus just a limited figure like John.

 

[civic]

I cannot trust anything you say after missing such an obvious point that I mentioned. Hyperliteralism and blending of unrelated topics has messed up your thinking to the max. I am starting to think you always make God in man's image rather than man being in God's image.
The one aspect that might be confusing you is the case where some had been baptized in John's baptism. They were introduced to Jesus and needed to be baptized in Christ Jesus. But that is the only moment where your confusion has some apparent basis. You maybe have heard that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of humanity. John did not. So you really distort things by making Jesus just a limited figure like John.

Didn’t you know John’s baptism wasn’t water either , cmon get with the program

 

[mikesw]

Didn’t you know John’s baptism wasn’t water either , cmon get with the program

I'm trying. It is so difficult to realize these new truths they are presenting.

 

[Runningman]

I cannot trust anything you say after missing such an obvious point that I mentioned. Hyperliteralism and blending of unrelated topics has messed up your thinking to the max. I am starting to think you always make God in man's image rather than man being in God's image.
The one aspect that might be confusing you is the case where some had been baptized in John's baptism. They were introduced to Jesus and needed to be baptized in Christ Jesus. But that is the only moment where your confusion has some apparent basis. You maybe have heard that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of humanity. John did not. So you really distort things by making Jesus just a limited figure like John.

I know. You are at the point where no matter what Scripture I put in front of you, you are so jaded against me, that you will reject the Bible if I refer to it. I think it would be a mercy to stop showing you what the Bible says at this point, or maybe it's your fault for not wanting out of your spiritual prison?

Being a sin sacrifice means Jesus is not God.

Please tell me you aren't so confused that you cannot understand that the church was purchased by Jesus for God, not the other way around. If someone buys something for you, do you understand you aren't the one who bought it?

Revelation 5
9And they sang a new song:
“Worthy are You to take the scroll and open its seals,
because You were slain,
and by Your blood You purchased for God
those from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.
10You have made them to be a kingdom
and priests to serve our God,
and they will reign upon the earth.”

 

[mikesw]

I know. You are at the point where no matter what Scripture I put in front of you, you are so jaded against me, that you will reject the Bible if I refer to it. I think it would be a mercy to stop showing you what the Bible says at this point, or maybe it's your fault for not wanting out of your spiritual prison?

Being a sin sacrifice means Jesus is not God.

Please tell me you aren't so confused that you cannot understand that the church was purchased by Jesus for God, not the other way around. If someone buys something for you, do you understand you aren't the one who bought it?

Revelation 5
9And they sang a new song:
“Worthy are You to take the scroll and open its seals,
because You were slain,
and by Your blood You purchased for God
those from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.
10You have made them to be a kingdom
and priests to serve our God,
and they will reign upon the earth.”

It was the blood of Jesus, the divine Son, that was sacrificed on the cross. There can be confusing details how Jesus's divine glory was followed by his humanity, but those can be worked out with in-depth study of theology. As a prerequisite to your limited concept you have rejected Jesus' divinity shown in John 1. Until you catch up and recognize that, your comprehension of Jesus will remain defective.
But the overall detail is Jesus can die on the cross and mediate between humanity and God while returning to all his divine glory, as found in scripture. The lesson here is to trust scripture rather than leaning on your own views.

I know you feel like you have found some new, novel, gnostic, private understanding. However, it would be better if you sort of worked this out with people more competent than you rather than just spouting out your theories.

 

[Runningman]

It was the blood of Jesus, the divine Son, that was sacrificed on the cross. There can be confusing details how Jesus's divine glory was followed by his humanity, but those can be worked out with in-depth study of theology. As a prerequisite to your limited concept you have rejected Jesus' divinity shown in John 1. Until you catch up and recognize that, your comprehension of Jesus will remain defective.
But the overall detail is Jesus can die on the cross and mediate between humanity and God while returning to all his divine glory, as found in scripture. The lesson here is to trust scripture rather than leaning on your own views.

I know you feel like you have found some new, novel, gnostic, private understanding. However, it would be better if you sort of worked this out with people more competent than you rather than just spouting out your theories.

So your sacrifice is only a human body, not different than what any other human has. Are you sure you want to put your faith in flesh alone? Scripture teaches Jesus' soul and spirit was sacrificed, too, but I am sure you reject Jesus' sacrifice as well.

Acts 2
27because You will not abandon my soul to Hades,
nor will You let Your Holy One see decay.

Isaiah 53
10Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush Him
and to cause Him to suffer;
and when His soul is made a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days,
and the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

 

[amazing grace]

I cannot trust anything you say after missing such an obvious point that I mentioned. Hyperliteralism and blending of unrelated topics has messed up your thinking to the max. I am starting to think you always make God in man's image rather than man being in God's image.
The one aspect that might be confusing you is the case where some had been baptized in John's baptism. They were introduced to Jesus and needed to be baptized in Christ Jesus. But that is the only moment where your confusion has some apparent basis. You maybe have heard that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of humanity. John did not. So you really distort things by making Jesus just a limited figure like John.

Nope, that's not us that always make God in man's image . . .

the Word was God = the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, the only Son from the Father = Jesus is God!!!!

 

[mikesw]

Nope, that's not us that always make God in man's image . . .

the Word was God = the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, the only Son from the Father = Jesus is God!!!!

seems like you are mocking God here. I hope that is not what you meant to do.

 

[synergy]

Now that we have proven that believers are no sitting on the throne of God, we know that Jesus isn't sitting on the throne of God. Any more questions?

I've got a question. Why do you always disregard Rev 3:21 where it explicitly says that Believers will "sit with Me (Jesus) on My Throne" and not "with My Father on His throne" as you falsely claim? Is it because you have poor reading abilities or is it because you know that it blows up the whole unitarian con game sky high?

21 To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.

 

[civic]

I know. You are at the point where no matter what Scripture I put in front of you, you are so jaded against me, that you will reject the Bible if I refer to it. I think it would be a mercy to stop showing you what the Bible says at this point, or maybe it's your fault for not wanting out of your spiritual prison?

Being a sin sacrifice means Jesus is not God.

Please tell me you aren't so confused that you cannot understand that the church was purchased by Jesus for God, not the other way around. If someone buys something for you, do you understand you aren't the one who bought it?

Revelation 5
9And they sang a new song:
“Worthy are You to take the scroll and open its seals,
because You were slain,
and by Your blood You purchased for God
those from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.
10You have made them to be a kingdom
and priests to serve our God,
and they will reign upon the earth.”

Gods own blood.

Acts 20:28
Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood

Hebrews 9:15-17
For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. 17For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives

Next fallacy

Conclusion: God blood, Gods covenant

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

Here for the readers. The Son was on the throne ruling from eternity past.

We know from the N.T. that Christ is the One Lord, the Only Lord. We know that Christ is also identifies as the Holy One in the N.T. and our King all titles and descriptions of YHWH in the Isaiah passages.

John 12:41
These things Isaiah said, because he saw His glory, and he spoke of Him

Isaiah 6:1-10
In the year of King, Uzziah's death, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple. 2 Seraphim stood above Him, each having six wings; with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called out to another and said,

"Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts,,

The whole earth is full of His glory."

4 And the foundations of the thresholds trembled at the voice of him who called out, while the temple was filling with smoke. 5 Then I said,

"Woe is me, for I am ruined!,

Because I am a man of unclean lips,

And I live among a people of unclean lips;,

For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts."


One need only follow the pronouns and the verbs. Isaiah saw the glory of YHWH. There is only ONE time that Isaiah saw the glory of YHWH; its in Ish 6. John says that Isaiah saw "his" glory, the glory of Jesus. That Isaiah ALSO foretold the suffering and rejection of Christ is true but irrelevant. You are confusing what Isaiah foretold (Christ's suffering and rejection) with what he literally "saw" (the glory of YWHW).

The verb Isaiah used for "saw" in 6;1 is רָאָה ("ra'ah"). In the qal, it refers to the act of seeing in the literal sense, to see with the eyes (as opposed to, for example, מַחֲזֶה "machazeh", which is the act or event of an ecstatic "vision"). In referring to this event, John uses the Greek word εἶδον ("eidon") - also a verb referring to the act of seeing with the eyes in the natural sense.

We know that God the Father is invisible, "whom no man hath seen, nor can see" (1 Tim 6:16). He is transcendent and lives in unapproachable light (1 Tim 6:16). But the Son is "the image of the invisible God" (Col 1:15). Thus the one whom Isaiah "saw" in the literal sense with his eyes is the one whom he explicitly identified as "YHWH" - the same one whose glory he saw according to John (Jn 12:41). Jesus himself makes this clear at v.45 "And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me."

There is only ONE time when Isaiah saw someone he, speaking by the Holy Spirit identified as "YHWH", and John's spirit-inspired narrative of the interactions of Jesus with the Jews in the 11th and 12th chapter of his gospel, including their rejection of Christ, says that what Isaiah saw was HIS (ie Jesus') glory. This works in perfect harmony with John's whole purpose, given the FACT that John had previously identified the one who became flesh and dwelt among us (Jn 1:14) as "God" (Jn 1:1). Nowhere in the context of this narrative (ie Ch 12) does John speak of Christ's "glorification" in his rejection and crucifixion. To claim that this is what John was talking about in referring to what Isaiah SAW with his eyes ignores the grammar and the immediate context, including the clear and unmistakable words of Christ himself in that very context.

hope this helps !!