synergy
Active Member
The more one advances, the more light he sees from God, the more filth he sees in himself.
It's like lighting up a room. You only see the room's filth when there's enough light to see it.
Your Views on The Trinity
- Thread starter Cyrus
- Start date
The more one advances, the more light he sees from God, the more filth he sees in himself.
It's like lighting up a room. You only see the room's filth when there's enough light to see it.
Runningman
Active Member
This is a logical fallacy. If you make a claim you bear the burden to provide the evidence.
That they are a vision or prophecy is non-falsifiable.
This is a strawman argument. There is no claim to being God here.
In Exodus 3:14,15, the I AM is the God of Abraham, but in Acts 3:13 Jesus is not the God of Abraham. Jesus is not the I AM nor ever claimed to be.
Um, you are fooling yourself if you think I will be losing any battles against you or whatever spirit is guiding you into idolatry. I have been doing this for years and nothing you people say is challenging.
Runningman
Active Member
Well, yes but I believe God is attracted to the environment that is most suitable for Him, which is why the Bible refers to us as a temple for God. God doesn't want to live in some dirty temple overrun with sinners, which is why "walking in Christ" or "walking in the Spirit" are what is attractive to making your temple an appropriate dwelling place for God.
There are varrying degrees of closeness with God. God can be in you, God can be within earshot, and God can be with you face to face.
The walking in Christ/in the Spirit is simply your genuine righteous living, your humility and repentence before God, and your gratitude for what He has done for you. The more you become like Jesus the closer you will actually be with God.
Runningman
Active Member
You said I expect that but I didn't say it. Now you're running in circles. Maybe you should stop representing me and let me say what I want to say?
There's nothing but prophecy about Jesus in the old testament. Means he didn't exist yet.
Please show Jesus in the Old Testament then or I will assume you can't defend your faith.
I can only affect people by their ears. If they do not wish to hear, that is their problem or God has to send someone else that they might hear the truth. I feel no obligation to defend my faith for someone who is too confused to understand scripture. An overseer's role of defending the faith does not mean that the outliers will accept Christ.
Runningman
Active Member
Why do you involve yourself in Bible discussions just to refuse to participate? If you can't show Jesus anywhere in the Old Testament doing anything just come right out and say it, not publicly, but personally. I can tell you haven't even done this much due to your constant arguing to the contrary. You are simply trying to persuade others to see it your way, but I just want others to agree with the Bible. Our motivation is entirely different it seems. The truth is bigger than each of us and we owe it to the world to uphold it. Remember, Mike, the truth will set you free.
You cannot perceive the simplest things. I do not have to step out on fool's territory to make arguments in your arena. You deny all evidence and therefore no evidence of scripture is useful to share. You think you have given up bias that Trinitarians have but you take up this bias of Unitarians, who refuse to follow basic logic. If you cannot recognize simple logic and evidence nor are able to make convincing arguments, your activity and beliefs are useless and are against all biblical guidance.
Edited in: You missed the discussion on Heb 1:10 as showing that the Psalm refers to Christ as God. There's another scripture for you to deny its meaning. There is not enough scripture available to overcome all your doubts about the nature of Christ.
Last edited:
Peterlag
Active Member
I disagree.
Runningman
Active Member
What is it exactly?
Runningman
Active Member
I don't care about your opinions. Put up some Scripture or learn in silence, with all due respect, of course, and I mean that in the nicest way possible. If you can't defend the Trinity using the Bible, which you have proven you can't, then what is your point exactly?
Did you miss the part where Psalm 45 proves Jesus can't be God?
I have a litmus test for you. Do you agree with each of the below statements?
There is one body and one Spirit
Just as you were called to one hope when you were called
One Lord
One faith
One baptism
One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
IF we add this up there are four -- the Spirit, the Lord, the God, the Father.I don't care about your opinions. Put up some Scripture or learn in silence, with all due respect, of course, and I mean that in the nicest way possible. If you can't defend the Trinity using the Bible, which you have proven you can't, then what is your point exactly?
Did you miss the part where Psalm 45 proves Jesus can't be God?
I have a litmus test for you. Do you agree with each of the below statements?
There is one body and one Spirit
Just as you were called to one hope when you were called
One Lord
One faith
One baptism
One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
This is speaking of the unity in God, just as Deut 6:4 mentions. We do not have to go with four entities but the testimony is more about the three entities of the Godhead. So I will go with the Trinity.
You get confused thinking that each person of God would be a separate god and therefore you cannot conceive of the unity of Deut 6:4. I'm surprised you even like the passage you quoted.
Runningman
Active Member
But it explicitly says that One God is the Father. No?
Runningman
Active Member
It would seem you have no probem at all in believing there is litreally one Lord, literally one Faith, literally one baptism, etc but when we get to that "One God the Father" part is where you are running into issues.
That sounds fine. Jesus is the Son of God. His essence comes from his Father.
It works out okay. The Father has the Son who is in the Godhead as Lord. This certainly does not deny the divinity of Christ in the Godhead to which scripture testifies so broadly to. It is best to hold this understanding than to deny the rest of scripture like the Unitarians do.
The Unitarians just deprive the sense that God can do things that are behind what human minds can normally imagine.
Runningman
Active Member
That isn't what Ephesians 4:4-6 says. It defines the Father as the One Lord and God who is over all and God is a Spirit.
it did not say the Father is Lord. We confirm another error of your reading.
Runningman
Active Member
The grammar and puncution idenfities the Father as the one Lord because He is over all. The Father is that one Spirit, Lord, and God over Jesus and everyone else. This is a doctrine as well. Paul went around the Roman empure teaching others that Jesus belongs to God, that God is the head of Jesus, that Jesus will be made subject to God, Jesus is a man with a God, a man who serves God, etc.
Eph. 4
4There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
It has not been disputed in many representations that the Father is over all. That does not make the Son stop being Lord. Nor does this make the Spirit disappear out of his uniqueness. But if you wish to speak contrary to scripture, that is not unusual for you.
Peterlag
Active Member
Runningman
Active Member
The Father is still defined as the One God over all. There isn't any higher Lord than the Father.
Similar threads
