Your Views on The Trinity

The Catholics had to kind a fall on their own sword with that one, so to speak, because to deny that Mary is the mother of God is to realize that Jesus is not God.
To deny Jesus is God is to deny all of scripture. Mary is not to be seen as contributing the divinity to Jesus, it is what scripture calls his Father by which is he not merely human. If you deny the Son, you deny the Father.
 
sure. your father and mother gave you birth. so you are of the same hypostasis as them.
Jesus is of his Father and mother and has the combined hypostases -- bith divinity and humanity.
Theology works well as long as people do not claim to be of the same hypostasis as Jesus
If that's the case, then where does Mary fit in?
 
If that's the case, then where does Mary fit in?
You may have heard she is the mother of Jesus and physically contributes the ovum. Do we now have to cover sex education for the unitarians? There is no reason to think she contributed divinity to Jesus and scripture does not convey that idea.
The Spirit's contribution should not be confounding since God had made all of creation. It is not difficult for God to send the one identified metonymically with the word logos in John 1. It seems that part of the reason for Jesus not having married is that people would be seeking the DNA of the Son who incarnated among humanity.
 
Last edited:
You may have heard she is the mother of Jesus and physically contributes the ovum. Do we now have to cover sex education for the unitarians? There is no reason to think she contributed divinity to Jesus and scripture does not convey that idea.
The Spirit's contribution should not be confounding since God had made all of creation. It is not difficult for God to send the one identified metonymically with the word logos in John 1. It seems that part of the reason for Jesus not having married is that people would be seeking the DNA of the Son who incarnated among humanity.
You know if that's the case that Jesus had to come to the Earth and He was already up there in Heaven. Then why start out as a baby with Mary? Why not just come down as a grown man?
 
Can Trinitarians Fellowship With Jesus Christ...

The written Word of God is made to shine with the glory of the divine presence of God through His wonderful Son Jesus Christ, because the one great subject of the whole Word of God is Jesus Christ. The Son of the living God is the master key to understanding God’s heart of love, the written Word of God, the Christian walk, and those Scriptures that pertain to power. I would like to note that I have become very aware that in the biblical field there is a vast difference between someone who has been "educated" on a subject versus someone who can do the subject successfully. Just because a person has studied a subject doesn't mean they can do it. A student who has been educated on a subject has only proven they can be a student successfully. They have not proven they can do the subject. With that in mind I set a goal to discover how to fellowship with Jesus Christ.

Jesus said "without me ye can do nothing" (John 15:5). Jesus commissioned his disciples and sent them out as representatives. They already knew him well enough to have had a rock-solid relationship with him whereby they could represent him as an ambassador. We talk all day until the cows come home on how it's Christ in us the hope of glory, and that the power of the holy spirit is born within us, thereby making us able body believers. But nobody seems to be talking about us being in Christ to the end we know him well enough to represent him on the Earth. We must first know someone well enough to be able to have a working relationship with them before we could represent them. I'm very interested in 1 John 3:6 that says "whosoever abideth in him" because 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. And therefore I was able to begin having a relationship with both Jesus Christ and the Father. E.W. Bullinger, defines the word "fellowship" in the following verses as an act of partaking, sharing—i.e., in participation.

1 Corinthians 1:9
God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 John 1:3
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.


Therefore, victory in the Christian life is as simple as renewing our minds to who we are and what we have already received in Christ. It’s not the struggle of two natures inside of us. We will continue to struggle with sin if we see ourselves as old sinners saved by grace. And so it's also true we will manifest the change that took place in our new nature when we understand we are not old sinners saved by grace. Thus, we act like being part of the senses world when we see ourselves as being part of the senses world. We act like being part of the Christian world when we see ourselves as being part of Christ—i.e., in our born-again spirits. I believe God gave us a new nature when we are born again and that this is what the apostle Paul taught.

John 4:24 says God is a Spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. And so this is why I'm so concerned with not only having fellowship with God, but also being able to do it in the spirit. We undergo a miraculous exchange at the center of our being once we have the spirit of Christ. Who we were in Adam is no longer there. We become a new person because we are now a child of God who is in Christ. The key event causing this exchange is a death, burial, and resurrection with Christ. This miraculous exchange is not figurative or symbolic, but literal and actual. The spiritual part of every Christian has literally and actually been crucified, buried, and raised with Christ. The fact that this occurs spiritually and not physically doesn’t make it any less real. So what happens to the old self that was in Adam? The old self is entirely obliterated once the spirit of Christ enters the Christian.

Jesus spent time telling his disciples about the new relationship he would have with them after he would be resurrected (John 14:1-4, 18, 28; 16:5-7, 16). For example, he told them they could ask him for things, that he would not leave them as orphans, and he would now call them “friends” not servants. One of the clearest points of Scripture that supports prayer to Jesus is John 14:14. Jesus taught “If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.” The manuscript evidence supports the word “me” in John 14:14 being in the original text. Modern textual scholars have concluded that scribes left the word "me" out of the text or changed “me” to “the Father" and this explains why “me” is not in the King James Version because the manuscripts used in making the King James did not have the word “me” in it. However, the weight of the manuscript evidence supports the word “me” being original, which is why almost all modern versions include it. Jesus telling his disciples that they could ask him for anything after his resurrection certainly fits with the scope of Scripture, since Jesus knew that he was about to be given great authority as the Son of God. Jesus telling his disciples they could ask him for things after his ascension is clearly seen in both Acts and the Epistles.

Another reason to have fellowship with Jesus and be able to ask him for stuff is because he's now both Lord and Christ (Acts 10:36; Romans 10:12), and the very essence of “lordship” is being in charge and running things. That is why the Greek word for “Lord” was used for rulers, landowners, and heads of households. Jesus is Lord because he is God’s “right-hand man” and is directly in charge of the Church. To be able to do that job, God gave him all authority in Heaven and on Earth (Matthew 28:18). In order for Jesus to be our “Lord” in any meaningful sense of the word, we have to be able to communicate with him and ask him for stuff. And this is why it is written that we should have “fellowship” with him “…and indeed, our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:3). The word “fellowship” in the Greek is [koinōnia] and it's used in several different ways in the New Testament. Fundamentally, it refers to a close association involving mutual interests and sharing; a close relationship characterized by involvement and sharing (Acts 2:42; 1 John 1:3).

Jesus told his followers they are his “friends” [philos] (John 15:13-15). He emphasizes his point by saying that slaves and servants do not know what the Lord does, but friends do. What Jesus said has huge implications for Christians, because Jesus has opened the door for us to be “friends” with him. One of the hallmarks of genuine friendship is that we can ask friends for things. It's quite inconceivable that Jesus would say that those disciples who followed him would be his “friends” but could not be in touch with him. Regular and intimate communication is part of friendship, and it makes perfect sense that we can ask our Lord, Head, Shepherd, and Friend, for whatever we need.

The Greek word [koinōnia] translated into English as "fellowship" has sometimes been defined as “full sharing” which has been more fully explained as “intimate joint participation.” In the Scriptures where people “fellowship” with each other, we can sometimes clearly see there is intimate joint participation. For example, in Acts 2:42, the people were meeting together, eating together, praying together, giving their possessions to one another, and following the Apostles’ teaching. In a similar vein, Galatians 2:9 says that James, Peter, and John extended the “right hand of fellowship” to Barnabas and Paul, meaning they jointly and fully shared things among themselves. Also, 1 John 1:3 shows that John told the disciples all about Jesus so they could have “fellowship” intimate joint participation with John and the other Apostles who had seen the Lord. In contrast, light has no “fellowship” with darkness because there's no intimate joint participation (2 Cor. 6:14).

Fellowshiping with Jesus Christ deals with “knowing” him (Philippians 3:8, 10). In Philippians, Paul wrote about knowing Jesus, and there is a huge difference between “knowing about” Jesus and actually knowing him. Paul did not just want to “know about” Jesus. In fact, he said he counted any position he could claim in the world to be just dung compared to knowing Christ. Really knowing someone involves personally interacting with the person. In fact, it's difficult to imagine how we could really “know” Christ without personal interaction with him. Christians can personally interact with the Lord Jesus Christ, via the gift of the holy spirit, and part of that interaction certainly includes feeling free to ask him for stuff.
 
You may have heard she is the mother of Jesus and physically contributes the ovum. Do we now have to cover sex education for the unitarians? There is no reason to think she contributed divinity to Jesus and scripture does not convey that idea.
The Spirit's contribution should not be confounding since God had made all of creation. It is not difficult for God to send the one identified metonymically with the word logos in John 1. It seems that part of the reason for Jesus not having married is that people would be seeking the DNA of the Son who incarnated among humanity.
Why would we need sex education for a miracle of creation?
 
To deny Jesus is God is to deny all of scripture. Mary is not to be seen as contributing the divinity to Jesus, it is what scripture calls his Father by which is he not merely human. If you deny the Son, you deny the Father.
Then you must confess that Jesus is a human lord, not a God lord. Anytime Jesus is called Lord in the Bible it's in reference to his humanity and nothing else. This is one of those verses where you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Luke 1
43And why am I so honored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
 
You know if that's the case that Jesus had to come to the Earth and He was already up there in Heaven. Then why start out as a baby with Mary? Why not just come down as a grown man?
Maybe you heard of Isa 9:6-7. You might have had a point if we threw out 50% of scripture.

He also had to be of the seed of David. He was also to be born of woman Gen 3:15. Women do not give birth to full grown men. John 1:18 and 3:16 show he is the Son of God who was in the bosom of God. So Christ's divinity is made clear too.
 
You may have heard she is the mother of Jesus and physically contributes the ovum. Do we now have to cover sex education for the unitarians? There is no reason to think she contributed divinity to Jesus and scripture does not convey that idea.
The Spirit's contribution should not be confounding since God had made all of creation. It is not difficult for God to send the one identified metonymically with the word logos in John 1. It seems that part of the reason for Jesus not having married is that people would be seeking the DNA of the Son who incarnated among humanity.
You seem to have forgotten that Jesus shares a genealogy with people who trace their lineage all the way back to God.

Luke 3
38the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
 
Why would we need sex education for a miracle of creation?
He did not seem to understand Mary's contribution. But the change in the ovum indeed is different at some level. We just should expect that something normal continued in the term of pregnancy even though a human father did not initiate this. Indeed there is a miracle somewhere in the process. I think this would be easier to understand among atheists.
 
Then you must confess that Jesus is a human lord, not a God lord. Anytime Jesus is called Lord in the Bible it's in reference to his humanity and nothing else. This is one of those verses where you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Luke 1
43And why am I so honored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
That is ignorant of how Jesus was conceived. But of course Jesus has always been Lord. That is the significance of his pre-existence. Elizabeth recognized this at least through revelation.

You claim gnostic type knowledge of a new concept of Jesus as a mere man instead of God's Son and of God's essence. That is a prideful claim to knowledge all to deny what Christians have known for 2000 years.
 
Wow. You found a single exception. You can really deny Christ in many ways.
Everyone else simply stated Jesus is a human with a genealogy. They out number John.

Matt 1
1This is the record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham:
 
Everyone else simply stated Jesus is a human with a genealogy. They out number John.

Matt 1
1This is the record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham:
I could forgive your ignorance but you have to hope that God forgives it too. then you go with a statistical manipulation to deny clear testimony like that in John 1.
Your gnostic claims are irreconcilable with the evidence of Christ's divinity.
 
I could forgive your ignorance but you have to hope that God forgives it too. then you go with a statistical manipulation to deny clear testimony like that in John 1.
Your gnostic claims are irreconcilable with the evidence of Christ's divinity.
Majority rules in exegesis.
 
That is ignorant of how Jesus was conceived. But of course Jesus has always been Lord. That is the significance of his pre-existence. Elizabeth recognized this at least through revelation.

You claim gnostic type knowledge of a new concept of Jesus as a mere man instead of God's Son and of God's essence. That is a prideful claim to knowledge all to deny what Christians have known for 2000 years.
I assume you must be smiling and laughing while you paste that here because even you know full and well that isn't what the Bible says. You must take great pleasure in your freedom to go around being deliberately deceptive.
 
Majority rules in exegesis.
I do not go by unitarian exegetical errant rules. I go by best practices exegesis.

The important rule is to read scripture finding out the resolution of seeming contradictions. You just disregard anything that conflicts with your unitarian bias.
 
The only places where the original words were maintained can only be where those words fit with the rest of the scope and context of the whole Bible. What you are posting concerning "the only begotten God" does not fit with any of the rest of the Bible. Therefore, those words are not even close to being original.
From Westcott and Hort's "The New Testament In The Original Greek" also renders the verse, "the only begotten God."
Note it is not a translation it is in they described as the "original Greek." Non-paraphrase translations renders it the same.

Personal incredulity, facing the hard truth with objective evidence.

(NT Westcott and Hort+) John 1:18 θεονG2316 N-ASM ουδειςG3762 A-NSM-N εωρακενG3708 V-RAI-3S-ATT πωποτεG4455 ADV μονογενηςG3439 A-NSM θεοςG2316 N-NSM οG3588 T-NSM ωνG1510 V-PAP-NSM ειςG1519 PREP τονG3588 T-ASM κολπονG2859 N-ASM τουG3588 T-GSM πατροςG3962 N-GSM εκεινοςG1565 D-NSM εξηγησατοG1834 V-ADI-3S

(NAS95+) John 1:18 R1NoG3762 oneG3762 has seenG3708 GodG2316 at anyG4455 timeG4455; R2
the onlyG3439 begottenG3439 GodG2316 who is R3in the bosomG2859 of the FatherG3962, R4He has explainedG1834 Him.

(Updated ASV+) John 1:18 No one has seen God at any time;
the only begotten GodN7 who is in the bosom of the Father,N8 that one has made him fully known.
 
Maybe you heard of Isa 9:6-7. You might have had a point if we threw out 50% of scripture.

He also had to be of the seed of David. He was also to be born of woman Gen 3:15. Women do not give birth to full grown men. John 1:18 and 3:16 show he is the Son of God who was in the bosom of God. So Christ's divinity is made clear too.
But why did he have to be born as a baby? Why not just come down as a man and not have him start as a baby? And if he's going to come down as a grown man then you would not have the Scriptures saying that he would start out as a baby.
 
But why did he have to be born as a baby? Why not just come down as a man and not have him start as a baby? And if he's going to come down as a grown man then you would not have the Scriptures saying that he would start out as a baby.
that would not fulfill prophecy. Your complaint is not against me but rather against God.

God laid it out the way he wants it. He has creative rights and the ability to bring those forth. He also lets people stumble over such perceived foolishness that the Greek wisdom refuses to accept the gospel of Christ.
 
Back
Top Bottom