Your Views on The Trinity

[mikesw]

Deny the words of the text when flipping back to the Old Testament? Okay, please show me the words from the text in the Old Testament where Jesus Christ is there since you put it that way.

You wish to require more evidence that what Paul has said?
Here is the verse Paul seems to address so that you can now deny the OT
Deuteronomy 32:15 (ESV)
15“But Jeshurun grew fat, and kicked; you grew fat, stout, and sleek; then he forsook God who made him and scoffed at the Rock of his salvation.
Okay. So I help you dig your hole deeper. I'm not sure whom there is left to believe. You deny Jesus' words. You deny Paul's words. You deny John's testimony. We are running out of scriptures for you to trust.

 

[Runningman]

You wish to require more evidence that what Paul has said?
Here is the verse Paul seems to address so that you can now deny the OT
Deuteronomy 32:15 (ESV)
15“But Jeshurun grew fat, and kicked; you grew fat, stout, and sleek; then he forsook God who made him and scoffed at the Rock of his salvation.
Okay. So I help you dig your hole deeper.

Comparing Jesus to a rock isn't evidence of Jesus pre-existing. There are many foreshadowing events in the Old Testament. Show me where Jesus is in the Old Testament being active as God. Go for it.

 

[mikesw]

Comparing Jesus to a rock isn't evidence of Jesus pre-existing. There are many foreshadowing events in the Old Testament. Show me where Jesus is in the Old Testament being active as God. Go for it.

There are no scriptures left to teach you. You deny all of the testimony of scripture. Oh well.

 

[Runningman]

There are no scriptures left to teach you. You deny all of the testimony of scripture. Oh well.

As a Trinitarian, it should set off some major alarm bells that you don't have any 1-to-1 connections between Jesus in the New Testament and your claims that Jesus pre-existed in the Old Testament. Of course, that also makes all of the "theophanies" that you people like to refer to impossible to prove are a Trinity.

 

[mikesw]

As a Trinitarian, it should set off some major alarm bells that you don't have any 1-to-1 connections between Jesus in the New Testament and your claims that Jesus pre-existed in the Old Testament. Of course, that also makes all of the "theophanies" that you people like to refer to impossible to prove are a Trinity.

You remain confused by thinking the the Son of God was identified by the name of Jesus in the Old Testament. We previously covered that you would not find Barbara Bush as an entry in the 1940 high school yearbook because she had not married into the Bush family yet.
I will not be steered by your preference to deny the words of Jesus, the words of John, the words of Paul, and now the words of Moses. You just prove yourself a hyper-literalist who wants to claim to know the infinite God despite your inability to understand that God is more complex than you imagine.
We can add that you are even blind compared to the devil who recognized Jesus's divinity as the Son of God in Matt 4:1-4.
If you do not have any argument to make against all the testimony of scripture, it is better that you just be quiet.

 

[Runningman]

You remain confused by thinking the the Son of God was identified by the name of Jesus in the Old Testament. We previously covered that you would not find Barbara Bush as an entry in the 1940 high school yearbook because she had not married into the Bush family yet.
I will not be steered by your preference to deny the words of Jesus, the words of John, the words of Paul, and now the words of Moses. You just prove yourself a hyper-literalist who wants to claim to know the infinite God despite your inability to understand that God is more complex than you imagine.

Jesus isn't identified under any name in the Old Testament. There is only prophecy of a coming human messiah. That's it.

We can add that you are even blind compared to the devil who recognized Jesus's divinity as the Son of God in Matt 4:1-4.
If you do not have any argument to make against all the testimony of scripture, it is better that you just be quiet.

Then Jesus told the Devil to worship the Father. I can pop off 1-to-1 conenctions between God, the Father, and YHWH all day. You can't do the same for Jesus. You just can't win.

Matthew 4
10“Away from Me, Satan!” Jesus told him. “For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve Him only.’

Deuteronomy 6
13Fear the LORD your God, serve Him only, and take your oaths in His name.

Isaiaih 64
16Yet You are our Father,
though Abraham does not know us
and Israel does not acknowledge us.
You, O LORD, are our Father;
our Redeemer from Everlasting is Your name.

 

[mikesw]

I know what. Runningman can trust the Jewish debate on the Two Powers in Heaven

Jesus isn't identified under any name in the Old Testament. There is only prophecy of a coming human messiah. That's it.

Then Jesus told the Devil to worship the Father. I can pop off 1-to-1 conenctions between God, the Father, and YHWH all day. You can't do the same for Jesus. You just can't win.

Matthew 4
10“Away from Me, Satan!” Jesus told him. “For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve Him only.’

Deuteronomy 6
13Fear the LORD your God, serve Him only, and take your oaths in His name.

Isaiaih 64
16Yet You are our Father,
though Abraham does not know us
and Israel does not acknowledge us.
You, O LORD, are our Father;
our Redeemer from Everlasting is Your name.

If I cannot win, then you have probably lost your chance to be justified in Christ. Sorry I have not been able to help you. Maybe God will break through your doubt and disbelief. We can hope that much. Maybe you will then trust Jesus and Paul and John and Moses.

 

[Runningman]

I know what. Runningman can trust the Jewish debate on the Two Powers in Heaven

If I cannot win, then you have probably lost your chance to be justified in Christ. Sorry I have not been able to help you.

God is explicitly referred to as the Father, YHWH, and never as Son, Lamb, Jesus, Messiah, etc. Thank you, but one day you will realize how tremendously deceived you are for missing what is plainly in the Bible.

 

[mikesw]

God is explicitly referred to as the Father, YHWH, and never as Son, Lamb, Jesus, Messiah, etc. Thank you, but one day you will realize how tremendously deceived you are for missing what is plainly in the Bible.

You are suggesting that 99.9999% of people who are Christians are wrong and fallen for a false understanding. That is a rather ambitious claim that you cannot even make a successful argument against the testimony of Jesus, John, Paul and Moses. Even the devil was smarter than you to recognize the divinity of Christ in being able to convert stones into bread. But none of that is sufficient for you.

 

[Runningman]

You are suggesting that 99.9999% of people who are Christians are wrong and fallen for a false understanding. That is a rather ambitious claim that you cannot even make a successful argument against the testimony of Jesus, John, Paul and Moses. Even the devil was smarter than you to recognize the divinity of Christ in being able to convert stones into bread. But none of that is sufficient for you.

Yes and I have proven it repeatedly using Scripture that Trinitarianism is a strawman religion. It lacks precedent and Scriptural support. I can accept that you have your religion and beliefs, but what really bugs us Christians is that you keep attaching it to the Bible. Just stick with the creeds your founders made and leave it at that, but leave our Scripture out of it.

 

[Runningman]

Also, I might add, if I were a Trinitarian I would go all in and be a Catholic. I know a very fine man who is a Catholic, he's my friend, too. He does quote the Bible, but when it comes to defining Trinitarianism he can quote the dogmas for days. I totally respect that he can actually explain his beliefs using the manuscripts that explain it even though they are extra-Biblical writings.

 

[Peterlag]

It's very well written and thoughtful. While all praying is essentially communicating, all communicating isn't essentially prayer. Different ideas regarding speaking to Jesus, who needs to be informed about what his disciples need since he isn't omniscient, and the Father who already knows what we need before we ask. This is why the Bible never teaches to pray to Jesus, but is explcit about praying to the Father. I believe they just didn't want to give anyone the idea that Jesus is the same as God. One is worshipped and prayed to, the other is not.

We differ on this.

 

[mikesw]

Also, I might add, if I were a Trinitarian I would go all in and be a Catholic. I know a very fine man who is a Catholic, he's my friend, too. He does quote the Bible, but when it comes to defining Trinitarianism he can quote the dogmas for days. I totally respect that he can actually explain his beliefs using the manuscripts that explain it even though they are extra-Biblical writings.

Yes and I have proven it repeatedly using Scripture that Trinitarianism is a strawman religion. It lacks precedent and Scriptural support. I can accept that you have your religion and beliefs, but what really bugs us Christians is that you keep attaching it to the Bible. Just stick with the creeds your founders made and leave it at that, but leave our Scripture out of it.

You just have a denial of the testimony of scriptures on your side. You also are expecting everything of God to be described in the Old Testament and that you find the name Jesus in its Greek form expressed in a fashion that you would recognize it. That the bible be written specifically to convince a skeptic such as yourself is simply an expectation that God never has had to meet. The testimony of Christ's preexistence is obvious by Jesus, John, and Paul. It is really biased to reject their testimony. Maybe you will get over your fear and listen to the Catholic friend. If he believes and follows the true Jesus, then that is great to know.
On the other hand, if he shares with you testimony of the true Christ, that just gives you more scriptures to reject.

I almost wish I could understand your skepticism to the testimony of Christ's preexistence. Your rejection of scripture just defies all logic and maybe is beyond what I would want to study.

 

[Red Baker]

It's perfectly clear you don't care about what is true.

I can say the same concerning you and your running mate, @Peterlag. I made a post to both of you and neither of you responded.

#2288 #2253, 2254, for starters.

 

[Peterlag]

I can say the same concerning you and your running mate, @Peterlag. I made a post to both of you and neither of you responded.

#2288 #2253, 2254, for starters.

Oh... I can respond. I just looked at post 2288 and saw it was not addressed to me but rather @Runningman. I did see you wrote this...

John 8:58
“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”​

I am who?

John 8:58
At the last super, the disciples were trying to find out who would deny the Christ. They said literally, "Not I am, Lord" Matthew 26:22, 25. No one would say the disciples were trying to deny they were God because they were using the phrase "Not I am." "I am" was a common way of designating oneself and it did not mean you were claiming to be God. The argument is made that because Jesus was "before" Abraham, Jesus must be God. Jesus figuratively existed in Abraham's time. He did not actually physically exist as a person, but rather he existed in the mind of God as God's plan for the redemption of man. In order for the Trinitarian argument that Jesus' "I am" statement in John 8:58 makes him God, his statement must be equivalent with God's "I am" statement in Exodus 3:14. The two statements are very different. The Greek phrase in John does mean "I am." The Hebrew phrase in Exodus means "to be" or "to become." God was saying "I will be what I will be."

 

[Runningman]

We differ on this.

Biblical Unitarians differ on few points but this is one of them that is common to find those who believe in prayer to Jesus and those who don't. Thankfully, we Christians are not fractured into 10s of thousands of denominations like the Catholics and Protestants are. Anyway, It's not a deal breaker in my honest opinion, but I believe prayer and communicating aren't really the same things and carry entirely different connotations.

I think of it like this. If you heard an ad for used cars on the radio and they said "Just send us your prayers inquiring about our special deals and low finance rates." Would you start praying to them or would you choose a more fitting approach like a phone call, stopping by the dealership, and having a talk with them?

 

[Runningman]

You just have a denial of the testimony of scriptures on your side. You also are expecting everything of God to be described in the Old Testament and that you find the name Jesus in its Greek form expressed in a fashion that you would recognize it. That the bible be written specifically to convince a skeptic such as yourself is simply an expectation that God never has had to meet. The testimony of Christ's preexistence is obvious by Jesus, John, and Paul. It is really biased to reject their testimony. Maybe you will get over your fear and listen to the Catholic friend. If he believes and follows the true Jesus, then that is great to know.
On the other hand, if he shares with you testimony of the true Christ, that just gives you more scriptures to reject.

I almost wish I could understand your skepticism to the testimony of Christ's preexistence. Your rejection of scripture just defies all logic and maybe is beyond what I would want to study.

I got you on the run at this point. First of all, you have not actually engaged my position. You have not confessed that Jesus is not stated to be active in the Old Testament in any way, shape or form. You also are setting some unreasonable expectations. For example, "You expect everything of God to be described in the OT" which is not something I ever said and demonstates the absurdity of your arguments that you need gaslight me rather than talk about my arguments. You also said I have "fear" which is also false.

Your reply is clearly emotional. You have lost the debate, sir, but if you need to cry some more go for it.

 

[Peterlag]

Spiritual death is separation from God the Father and His Son.

Many false believers (John 4:23-24) and false worshipers do not have a relationship with God the Father and his Son (1 John 1:3).
Trinitarians usually aren't even aware they are spiritually dead as they have NO relationship with their fictional Trinity God.

 

[mikesw]

I got you on the run at this point. First of all, you have not actually engaged my position. You have not confessed that Jesus is not stated to be active in the Old Testament in any way, shape or form. You also are setting some unreasonable expectations. For example, "You expect everything of God to be described in the OT" which is not something I ever said and demonstates the absurdity of your arguments that you need gaslight me rather than talk about my arguments. You also said I have "fear" which is also false.

Your reply is clearly emotional. You have lost the debate, sir, but if you need to cry some more go for it.

I'm sorry. Are you saying that everything of God does not have to be described in the OT? In that case you can accept that the divinity of Christ in the OT does not have to be stated so explicitly that a hyper-literalist would find it.
If you can make the case that the Son of God has to be mentioned in such an explicit way that all Jews would have recognized him in the OT, then do so. So far you deny Jesus's words, John's words, Paul's words, and even the devil's recognition of the divinity of Christ. Not too many other sources left for you to deny.
You have not had real arguments. You have had a preference on how Christ is to be known in the OT. You deny the NT testimonies of that. There is nothing for you to argue for. You only argue against their testimonies.

 

[Peterlag]

Biblical Unitarians differ on few points but this is one of them that is common to find those who believe in prayer to Jesus and those who don't. Thankfully, we Christians are not fractured into 10s of thousands of denominations like the Catholics and Protestants are. Anyway, It's not a deal breaker in my honest opinion, but I believe prayer and communicating aren't really the same things and carry entirely different connotations.

I think of it like this. If you heard an ad for used cars on the radio and they said "Just send us your prayers inquiring about our special deals and low finance rates." Would you start praying to them or would you choose a more fitting approach like a phone call, stopping by the dealership, and having a talk with them?

I'm an advanced Christian and I see it this way...

I now spend much of my time right inside the spirit as close as I can get right in their face.The Greek word menō translated "abide" often deals with being in him, which I'm very concerned about when it comes to walking in Christ, which I believe is the same as walking in the spirit. To be in him or to abide in him deals with remaining or continuing to be present.To dwell, live, and be within him to the end that we are operative in him by his divine influence and energy. My first red flag that started me looking into how to do this was when I realized it's the Catholics that teach we are sinners. They teach us to look at ourselves and our sin. I teach that we should look at Christ and to walk in his spirit.