Your Views on The Trinity

[Peterlag]

Ah. So you don't mind showing your disdain for Trinitarians.

What happened to your "attack the subject" and "not the person" requirement from earlier?

Don't worry. I've found over the years that very few people actually mean this. It is just an empty play to try to look superior. Good job failing your own requirement.

I'm just looking at the facts. Nothing personal. I have noticed intelligent and informed input on the subject of debating the Trinity comes from the unitarian camp. It seems low intelligence, ignorance, and an incapacity for critical thought are prerequisites for membership in trinitarian circles.

 

[synergy]

You're amused by your attempts to distort the word "only" and "until?" That's sad.

Actually, it's your distortion of how "until" was understood during NT times that causes you to think that Michal had children after she died, since 2 Samuel 6:23 says, “Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.” Carry on with your pure fictional beliefs.

Also, your distortion of how "until" was understood during NT times causes you to think that Timothy completely ceased reading Scripture after Paul arrived according to 1 Timothy 4:13 which says “Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture...” Your way of thinking continues to get caught with its pants down.

Your pure fiction pattern continues to be consistent with your manipulation of John 17:3. Carry on with your heresies and pure fictional fairy tales.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'm just looking at the facts. Nothing personal. I have noticed intelligent and informed input on the subject of debating the Trinity comes from the unitarian camp. It seems low intelligence, ignorance, and an incapacity for critical thought are prerequisites for membership in trinitarian circles.

Just admit your bias. Nothing personal is just posturing from you. Everyone does it. At least acknowledge this happens and be sincere about what you say. That is all I ask and what I give. No posturing. No pretense. Just me.

None of us can hide from God. None of us. Why be any different?

 

[synergy]

I'm just looking at the facts. Nothing personal. I have noticed intelligent and informed input on the subject of debating the Trinity comes from the unitarian camp. It seems low intelligence, ignorance, and an incapacity for critical thought are prerequisites for membership in trinitarian circles.

If we are so ignorant then it will be easy for you to give us at least one verse that proves unitarianism. Do that and we'll see who are those with "low intelligence, ignorance, and an incapacity for critical thought".

 

[Peterlag]

If we are so ignorant then it will be easy for you to give us at least one verse that proves unitarianism. Do that and we'll see who are those with "low intelligence, ignorance, and an incapacity for critical thought".

1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

 

[praise_yeshua]

1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

You didn't get it did you?

 

[101G]

John 1:14 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

it's not a teaching on the trinity.... it's a FACT THAT THE Lord JESUS IS GOD, AND THE ONLY GOD. what you need to do is to LEARN is that the Word is not a "IT" ...... LOL, but a WHO. it's your ignorance that you refuse to accept the TRUTH written in John 1:14...... it's not changing .... it is written.

101G.

 

[101G]

The Lord God laid the foundation of the earth. Not the Lord Jesus.

ANOTHER ERROR on your part. is not the Lord God .... Jesus, let's see. Zechariah 12:1 "The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him."

Well Pete, the book of Zechariah 12:1 clearly states " the LORD" laid the foundation of the EARTH. are you saying that the "Lord" God and ... or the "LORD" is the same Person?, yes or NO. looking to hear your answer.

101G.

 

[Runningman]

Actually, it's your distortion of how "until" was understood during NT times that causes you to think that Michal had children after she died, since 2 Samuel 6:23 says, “Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death.” Carry on with your pure fictional beliefs.

Also, your distortion of how "until" was understood during NT times causes you to think that Timothy completely ceased reading Scripture after Paul arrived according to 1 Timothy 4:13 which says “Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture...” Your way of thinking continues to get caught with its pants down.

Your pure fiction pattern continues to be consistent with your manipulation of John 17:3. Carry on with your heresies and pure fictional fairy tales.

More fiction. Aside from "until" referring to a temporary reign of Jesus, a temporary reign is decribed, with the end result having Jesus eternally subordinate to God. With both the language and narrative being firmly against you, I am sure you will still try to argue your way out of it.

Scriptures not only explicitly states Jesus' reign is temporary, but also describes Jesus being eternally subordinate to God. Pack your bags, trins, your circus is over.

1 Corinthians 15
24Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. 25For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For “God has put everything under His feet.” Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him. 28And when all things have been subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will be made subject to Him who put all things under Him, so that God may be all in all.

 

[synergy]

1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Thank you for forwarding one of the strongest verses for the Deity of Jesus, massively supporting Trinitarianism.

The context here is the New Covenant that bridges the massive gap between God and man. To reconcile two estranged parties, a mediator must be representative of both parties. No angel, prophet, or agent could fill this role. Read Job 9:33. The Word, who was God, had not yet dwelt on Earth as Jesus, the only possible Mediator. Thus, only Jesus bridges that infinite gap, fulfilling Job’s longing.

Job 9:33 (NKJV):
"Nor is there any mediator between us, Who may lay his hand on us both."

• Job laments that there is no one who can place a hand on both God and man—showing that humanity lacked a true Mediator who could fully represent both parties.

Christ alone is qualified. Only because Jesus is both God and man can He be the Mediator who brings salvation. That's why the Word, who was God (John 1:1c), tabernacled on Earth as Jesus (John 1:14) in order to save man, as only God has the capability to save man.

Conclusion:
1 Timothy 2:5 does not support Arianism. Instead, it teaches the very opposite:

• The New Covenant offers salvation through a Mediator (Heb 9:15, Acts 4:12).
• That Mediator must be both God and man (Job 9:33).
• Jesus uniquely fulfills this role (John 1:1c,14).
• The verse itself affirms Monotheism without excluding Christ from deity (Titus 2:13, Colossians 1:15–17).

Keep those Trinitarian verses coming!

 

[Peterlag]

Thank you for forwarding one of the strongest verses for the Deity of Jesus, massively supporting Trinitarianism.

The context here is the New Covenant that bridges the massive gap between God and man. To reconcile two estranged parties, a mediator must be representative of both parties. No angel, prophet, or agent could fill this role. Read Job 9:33. The Word, who was God, had not yet dwelt on Earth as Jesus, the only possible Mediator. Thus, only Jesus bridges that infinite gap, fulfilling Job’s longing.

Job 9:33 (NKJV):
"Nor is there any mediator between us, Who may lay his hand on us both."

• Job laments that there is no one who can place a hand on both God and man—showing that humanity lacked a true Mediator who could fully represent both parties.

Christ alone is qualified. Only because Jesus is both God and man can He be the Mediator who brings salvation. That's why the Word, who was God (John 1:1c), tabernacled on Earth as Jesus (John 1:14) in order to save man, as only God has the capability to save man.

Conclusion:
1 Timothy 2:5 does not support Arianism. Instead, it teaches the very opposite:

• The New Covenant offers salvation through a Mediator (Heb 9:15, Acts 4:12).
• That Mediator must be both God and man (Job 9:33).
• Jesus uniquely fulfills this role (John 1:1c,14).
• The verse itself affirms Monotheism without excluding Christ from deity (Titus 2:13, Colossians 1:15–17).

Keep those Trinitarian verses coming!

Where in the following verse does it say...

• That Mediator must be both God and man

1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

 

[Peterlag]

ANOTHER ERROR on your part. is not the Lord God .... Jesus, let's see. Zechariah 12:1 "The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him."

Well Pete, the book of Zechariah 12:1 clearly states " the LORD" laid the foundation of the EARTH. are you saying that the "Lord" God and ... or the "LORD" is the same Person?, yes or NO. looking to hear your answer.

101G.

I don't understand your question. There are many Lord's mentioned in the Bible. Which one are you referring to?

The Greek word for Lord is kurios and is a masculine title of respect and nobility, which is why we see many others besides God and Jesus being called the “Lord."

• Property owners are called the "Lord" (Matthew 20:8) kurios is “owner” in the NIV.
• Heads of households are called the "Lord" (Mark 13:35) kurios is "owner."
• Slave owners were called the "Lord" (Matthew 10:24) kurios is "master."
• Husbands were called the "Lord" (1 Peter 3:6) kurios is "master" in the NIV.
• A son called his father the "Lord" (Matthew 21:30) kurios is "sir."
• The Roman Emperor was called the "Lord" (Acts 25:26) kurios is "His Majesty."
• Roman authorities were called the "Lord" (Matthew 27:63) kurios is "sir."

 

[Peterlag]

it's not a teaching on the trinity.... it's a FACT THAT THE Lord JESUS IS GOD, AND THE ONLY GOD. what you need to do is to LEARN is that the Word is not a "IT" ...... LOL, but a WHO. it's your ignorance that you refuse to accept the TRUTH written in John 1:14...... it's not changing .... it is written.

101G.

John 1:3 “Everything came to be through it.” The logos is an “it” not a “him.”

Translators have deliberately chosen to use “him” because they wanted to emphasize that the Word was the male person we know as Jesus. This was a theological choice, not a linguistic one.

"Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you” (Proverbs 4:6).

Is the Wisdom in Proverbs 4:6 a distinct divine person?

The "Word" is not literally a person for the same reason that "Wisdom" is not literally a person. Both are to be taken metaphorically.

Jesus is the personification of the Word because He speaks the words of God. To listen to Jesus equals listening to the Word of God.

People often say I'm wrong when I post this because they say I looked it up in an Interlinear or Concordance and it shows the word is a "him" and not an "it." Those reference books show how the Bible translates a word and not what the Greek actually means. The pronoun is an "it" when it refers to an inanimate noun like the "Word" because Greek has grammatical gender and the "Word" in John 1 is a thing so the Greek says it's an "it."

Here's a partial list of how "logos" is translated in the New Testament...

cause, communication, sayings, saying, word, words, account, talk, question, treatise, intent, tidings, speaker, matter, mouth, work, utterance, preaching, speech, concerning, show, do, doctrine, reason, with, and thing.

The trinitarian has only 3 to pick from...

1.) Use a verse from a bad translation.
2.) Use a verse that is taken out of context.
3.) Not understand how the words were used in the culture they were written in.

And basically that's all trinitarians have. And I mean 100 percent of what they have. They have nothing else.

 

[Runningman]

You don't even realize what you're doing.......

So how does Jesus "come to you".

Spiritually. We Christians are united spiritual in one body as believers, but we don't literally come to one another. Not like that, yet we are still united in the same body. Same is true of Jesus.

 

[Runningman]

Thank you for forwarding one of the strongest verses for the Deity of Jesus, massively supporting Trinitarianism.

The context here is the New Covenant that bridges the massive gap between God and man. To reconcile two estranged parties, a mediator must be representative of both parties. No angel, prophet, or agent could fill this role. Read Job 9:33. The Word, who was God, had not yet dwelt on Earth as Jesus, the only possible Mediator. Thus, only Jesus bridges that infinite gap, fulfilling Job’s longing.

Job 9:33 (NKJV):
"Nor is there any mediator between us, Who may lay his hand on us both."

• Job laments that there is no one who can place a hand on both God and man—showing that humanity lacked a true Mediator who could fully represent both parties.

Christ alone is qualified. Only because Jesus is both God and man can He be the Mediator who brings salvation. That's why the Word, who was God (John 1:1c), tabernacled on Earth as Jesus (John 1:14) in order to save man, as only God has the capability to save man.

Conclusion:
1 Timothy 2:5 does not support Arianism. Instead, it teaches the very opposite:

• The New Covenant offers salvation through a Mediator (Heb 9:15, Acts 4:12).
• That Mediator must be both God and man (Job 9:33).
• Jesus uniquely fulfills this role (John 1:1c,14).
• The verse itself affirms Monotheism without excluding Christ from deity (Titus 2:13, Colossians 1:15–17).

Keep those Trinitarian verses coming!

So now that we have officially debunked the eternal rule of Jesus using Scripture, what do you have to say about Jesus being eternally subordinate to God? Someone subordinate to God isn't God. Don't you agree with Paul?

 

[Runningman]

Thank you for forwarding one of the strongest verses for the Deity of Jesus, massively supporting Trinitarianism.

The context here is the New Covenant that bridges the massive gap between God and man. To reconcile two estranged parties, a mediator must be representative of both parties. No angel, prophet, or agent could fill this role. Read Job 9:33. The Word, who was God, had not yet dwelt on Earth as Jesus, the only possible Mediator. Thus, only Jesus bridges that infinite gap, fulfilling Job’s longing.

Job 9:33 (NKJV):
"Nor is there any mediator between us, Who may lay his hand on us both."

• Job laments that there is no one who can place a hand on both God and man—showing that humanity lacked a true Mediator who could fully represent both parties.

Christ alone is qualified. Only because Jesus is both God and man can He be the Mediator who brings salvation. That's why the Word, who was God (John 1:1c), tabernacled on Earth as Jesus (John 1:14) in order to save man, as only God has the capability to save man.

Conclusion:
1 Timothy 2:5 does not support Arianism. Instead, it teaches the very opposite:

• The New Covenant offers salvation through a Mediator (Heb 9:15, Acts 4:12).
• That Mediator must be both God and man (Job 9:33).
• Jesus uniquely fulfills this role (John 1:1c,14).
• The verse itself affirms Monotheism without excluding Christ from deity (Titus 2:13, Colossians 1:15–17).

Keep those Trinitarian verses coming!

Being a mediator necessitates being a go between for parties. Means Jesus isn't God. Super easy to understand.

 

[Peterlag]

cc: @synergy

 

[mikesw]

attachment 2612

cc: @synergy

Great. Peter recognized Jesus as the essence of God. Can't ever escape these facts. It is hard to believe that people miss this.

 

[Capbook]

None of this undoes the fact the Jesus was carried to heaven which means there is a carrier and the one who receives the carrying. Easy to understand English.

All of the disciples recalled Jesus as having been taken to heaven, not under his own power, but by God:

Luke 24
51While He was blessing them, He left them and was carried up into heaven.

Mark 16
19After the Lord Jesuse had spoken to them, He was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God.

Firstly Runningman, you hadn't proven that the phrase "the Father decided to carry Jesus" can be read as it is in the Bible.
And I know that you know Jesus before His ascension already had the all power in heaven and in earth.

(KJV) Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

(NASB) Mat 28:18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.

Here we are again. You have shown nothing that distinguishes Jesus from others. Repeating the same point won't provide a different outcome.

Scripture states others can have the divine nature and the fullness of the Deity welling in them too. You don't add anything that would distinguish Jesus from anyone else.

1 Peter 1
4Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Ephesians 3
19of the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

So are you attempting to make a meaningless distinction between the word Deity and God?

You just missed the Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain that defined Jesus as in the state or nature of being God.

 

[Capbook]

The Trinity does not come from Scripture. It comes from the doctrine of devils that the churches teach (and in most cases it's the first thing they teach) and then they begin to look for Scripture that supports such a concept. They do this by taking the verses out of context, or not understanding how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation.

I think I could also say, Unitarian beliefs does not come from the Scriptures. It also comes from the doctrine of the devils especially if they cannot provide Bible texts in their main opposition to Jesus nature, middle column below.

Let me elaborate Unitarians' position;

. . . . . . . . . . . . .Trinitarian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unitarians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Unitarians
. . . . . . . . .(Jesus is God/Man) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Jesus is not God) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Other Arguments)
. . . . . . . . . . . John 1:1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .nothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John 14:28 Father is greater that I
. . . . . . . . . . .John 1:18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .nothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John 5:19 Jesus can do nothing
. . . . . . . . . . .Phil 2:6-8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .nothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Matt 24:36 Jesus do not know His coming
. . . . . . . . . . .Col 2:9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .nothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John 7:16 Jesus teaching not His
. . . . . . . . . . .1John 5:20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . nothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Tim 2:5 Jesus as man

We can post many more but I believe the middle will always be nothing.
Maybe Unitarians can supply some verses in the middle.
We'll just wait.