Should you believe in the trinity II

[yashualover]

God is one spirit not one person, ergo, none of the above. No scripture says that God is a person.

Jesus the God Man stood among His disciples in His glorified body.


Luk 24:37 They were startled and terrified, thinking they were seeing a ghost.
Luk 24:38 He said to them, "Why are you frightened, and why are doubts arising in your hearts?
Luk 24:39 Look at my hands and my feet, for it is I myself. Touch me and see, for a ghost doesn't have flesh and bones as you see that I have."
Luk 24:40 After he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet.
Luk 24:41 While they still could not believe it for joy and were full of amazement, he said to them, "Do you have anything here to eat?"
Luk 24:42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish,
Luk 24:43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.

 

[Kris10leigh]

Jesus the God Man stood among His disciples in His glorified body.


Luk 24:37 They were startled and terrified, thinking they were seeing a ghost.
Luk 24:38 He said to them, "Why are you frightened, and why are doubts arising in your hearts?
Luk 24:39Look at my hands and my feet, for it is I myself. Touch me and see, for a ghost doesn't have flesh and bones as you see that I have."
Luk 24:40 After he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet.
Luk 24:41 While they still could not believe it for joy and were full of amazement, he said to them, "Do you have anything here to eat?"
Luk 24:42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish,
Luk 24:43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.

Your argument assumes Yeshua IS God. To me, you've proven that Yeshua is a man and I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

 

[yashualover]

Your argument assumes Yeshua IS God. To me, you've proven that Yeshua is a man and I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

Yeshua is the God-Man.

Yeshua is fully divine and fully man.

 

[Kris10leigh]

Yeshua is the God-Man.

Yeshua is fully divine and fully man.

Yes, I agree. I'm just saying I don't think the one thread made any particular point. If I am wrong, I'm not seeing your point. I guess I'm asking for you to elaborate.

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

So if you are "annointed" by Jehovah God then you are Jehovah God? Do you seriously believe that? If so, then Moses, Ehud, Othniel, etc... were all Jehovah God. This is what is called a bad equivocation. You will say when "annointed" is applied to Jesus (Yehoshua) that it means he is God and yet when applied to "anyone" else it doesn't. Your problem lies not only in this type of bad logic but also in the fact that God can't be made "LORD and SAVIOR" because who would make him such?

I never said any of this. So the one making the mistake of assuming that is you!

Acts 2:38 does not use "Lord Jehovah" or "Jehovah Messiah" or any other combinations that you are trying to use. You are taking what a word means (Jesus = Jehovah is Salvation, Christ = annointed one)

Problem with your analysis is that you are ignoring the fact that Yeshua transliterated into the Greek as Ishu should be translated as
Salvation, for that is what Yeshua means in Hebrew!

As for Acts 2:38 > Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The Aramaic uses the exact translation of the Tetragarammaton which is MarYah for being baptized in the name of Jesus!

and trying to say that since the divine name is a part of the name then this person must be him. This would cause several problems since the divine name appears in MANY people's names such as JEHU (Jehovah is he). This is the problem with "targums" and people who use them as "proof texts". Targums are "interpretive" and not literal translations. Let's stick with what the texts actually says and not what some folks decided to think someone meant.

In the instance i presented the divine name is not just part of the name, it is the very name in which baptism was preformed!

Speculation that has no basis from Scriptures.

It has no basis. Isaiah 40: 3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of YHVH, make straight in the desert a highway for our Elohiym.
Mark 1: 1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of YHVH, make his paths straight.

4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

5 And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

6 And John was clothed with camel's hair, and with a girdle of a skin about his loins; and he did eat locusts and wild honey;

7 And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.

8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Yeshua My Salvation > John the baptist is the voice in the wilderness preparing the way and making the path straight for Yeshua. Yeshua is the YHVH the voice in the wilderness (John) is preparing the way for! Please click on the word Lord for the Strong Concordance on Isaiah 40:3 > LORD.
Proof that the word in use is not Adonai but the Tetragrammaton YHVH.

Zechariah 12: 8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.
9And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.


10And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

Yeshua My Salvation > YHVH himself says that he will seek to destroy all the nations that seek to destroy Yerushalayim. He further mentions that he will pour the spirit of grace and supplication upon the house of David and upon the house of Yerushalayim, and they shall look upon him whom they have pierced.

This is the first mistake. Jehovah God has made his Son Jesus the One Lord by giving him ALL AUTHORITY and being the chief cornerstone on which the "congregation" is built. This does not take away from God himself but puts Jesus in the highest position that one could be "exalted" by God.

So according to you YHVH ceased to be Lord making Yeshua now the one Lord. You are not making sense! That would mean that we cannot call YHVH Lord because Yeshua is Lord not YHVH, for he forfeit the Lord statues.

If Jehovah created "through" (dia in Greek)Jesus then that would make his Word an agent.

Read Chapter 1 of Genesis. YHVH the one true Elohiym did not create all things through an agent. He created all things through his dabar (Speech). The Dabar is simply his spoken phrase not a person nor an agent! You can't prove from creation that God's word had a personality of his own leaving God speechless in creation. You are trying to use the word through to mean through someone else. Unfortunately through doesn't have to mean what you want it to mean; he can certainly do it through his expression of thought and not through some other entity. What you are assuming is polytheistic, for there is no other creator nor participator of creation but YHVH!

What's interesting is that you say later on that Jesus was not a person in John 1:1 but "an idea or what proceeds from him, his spoken phrase".

That is exactly what Logos means which is the equivalent of the Hebrew Dabar and the Aramaic Mem'ra.
Taken from > Wikipedia English - The Free Encyclopedia: Dabar
The word dabar (Hebrew: word, statement, act, thing) occurs in various contexts in the Hebrew Bible. It is sometimes used in reference to the "Divine Word": "Dabar Yahweh" or Ha-Dabar Elohim. The Divine Word brings God's message to his people, especially to his prophets. The phrase appears for the first time in Genesis 15, in which the Word of Yahweh assures Abraham of his reward.

Taken from the Hebrew Dictionary > Dabar
Dabar (Hebrew) plural debarim. Word, speech, frequently a cosmic spiritual conscious energy, thus equivalent to the Greek logos or cosmic spirit; also, an oracle or divine communication; cause, reason. In the Chaldean Qabbalah, equivalent to the Logos, "which Word, though it becomes in fact a plural number, or 'Words' -- D(a)B(a)RIM, when it reflects itself, or falls into the aspect of a Host (of angels, or Sephiroth, 'numbers') is still collectively One, and on the ideal plane a nought -- 0, a 'No-thing'" (SD 1:350).

Greek Dictionary > logos
The word logos" in Greek has an extraordinary range of meanings -- the heart of which is both meaning" and reckoning. Hence, it may refer to a thought" or a spoken phrase or an idea or that which conveys something which, to the hearer, is meaningful and, thus, can move them. It can be an accounting or a story, a tale, narrative, or fable. It can refer to a theory, a rule of law or of conduct, a scientific hypothesis or lawful observation regarding reality or nature. Within the individual it can refer to a mental argument or a pondering of the reasons for/against. Thus, it also means thinking or the faculty of reason. More generally, it may refer to speech, talk, spoken stories or tales, and, even, rumors or everyday conversation. There is often a connotative sense of a deepened reality which is referenced by. Hence, for example, the gospel of John in the Christian Bible begins with the phrase the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" --and logos" is the word used for Word" in all three places (en arche ein ho logos kai ho logos ein pros ton theon kai theon ein ho logos").

Yeshua My Salvation > Again, it is not what you want it to mean but what it actually means.

To be continued >

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

How could his "idea, spoken phrase" be "facing or towards" himself? Besides this we have many other texts that show that the son was indeed in existence before "becoming flesh". Here is but one example from many:

Easy, because it is God's idea, and sense all things were created through that idea, it is not hard to figure how that happens. The Greek pros means face to face, this is interesting for there is no other who can actually be face to face with God but his expression of thought or Mashiyach representing that expression to the fullest become flesh as John 1:14 has it. You are assuming this is speaking of another God which is far from scriptural! John 1:1 makes it explicitly clear that the word was divine! And through that word all things were made, and without him was not made anything that was made John 1:2. You are left without the slightest proof that God created things through someone else, for you cannot prove this from the creative account.

Hebrews 1:1,2 - God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

There you have it. The Son is the word, that is his expression of thought become flesh, that is why the worlds were created through him. The Son became a person when he became flesh John 1:14 for the Greek word Ginomai means that he became not that he was made! Weather you want to hear it or not God himself became flesh and dwelt among us while never ceasing in being full divinity simultaneously. If you don't believe God can do this then what you have is a limited deity not an almighty one!

I understand that this is what you want it to say, but it says quite the contrary. Let's look at it again.
1 Corinthians 8:6 - But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him.
The One God is who?

The context is clear, for it is speaking about many false deities, that is Lords and God's, but none the less it is speaking of deities. Now, for the context to Say there is but one Deity, the Father of whom are all things and we in him, and Mashiyach through whom are all things and we by him, is a clear reference that Mashiyach is deity and is the Father for in him consists all things and we by him. Note it does not say the Father as opposed to the Son. It says one God and one Lord the Lord being Mashiyach, it does not say that the Father is the one true God and Yeshua is the one true Lord. But rather that the Father is both the one true God and Lord of which everything consists!

The Father! There is a big distinction being made in this verse. Notice it says the Father is the one "OUT OF" whom all things are (ek in Greek) and Jesus is the one "through" whom all things are (dia in Greek). The use of these words is quite interesting because it shows that the Father is the "source" and that Jesus is the "agent".

Again, the Greek dia supports my case and refutes yours. For Scripture does not teach Polytheism but strict monotheism. Elohiym created all things through his dabar, through does not have to mean someone separate from him with a personality of his own, for then that would leave God speechless by your own standers.

Jesus is not the Source but the Father is. How could anyone conclude from this verse that there is only one individual being spoken about there when it clearly makes a distinction by the grammar it uses?

We can easily conclude that, for one is speaking of God (Mashiyachs divinity) and the other of his dabar. The only distinction is that Mashiyach is the manifestation of God's dabar in the flesh.

The problem is that this analogy doesn't work for the Trinity, which is the topic yes? Reason being, the Trinity says there are 3 distinct persons who are One God.

I hope you are not assuming i believe in the Trinity!

With that being said, what you are describing would be "Modalism" in which you perform different roles but you yourself are the same person.

Yes, God is one person who can simultaneously manifest in two or three as he wants when he wants. I don't fully agree with Modalism for i don't believe God has to go into modes to fulfill a task.

In order for you analogy to work for the Trinity you would have to say that You are the officer and someone else is the property owner and yet you are not two beings but one being and yet personally distinct from the other.

Perhaps you have not read my icon, but unfortunately you are not speaking to a Trinitarian.

By the way, there are several reasons that myself and even Trinitarians believe that Jesus is the Word of God and was an actual person. Here is but one reason.
Rev 19:13 - And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. RKittles

Yes, we agree he is the word of God. Now, there is a double standard in what you are proposing. Namely, that his saying is different and separate from God which is not the case! The reason why he is called the word of God is because he literally is the word of God become flesh as explained in John Chapter 1. The definitions of Dabar and Logos have already been provided and it refutes everything you are saying!

 

[2ducklow]

Jesus the God Man stood among His disciples in His glorified body.


Luk 24:37 They were startled and terrified, thinking they were seeing a ghost.
Luk 24:38 He said to them, "Why are you frightened, and why are doubts arising in your hearts?
Luk 24:39Look at my hands and my feet, for it is I myself. Touch me and see, for a ghost doesn't have flesh and bones as you see that I have."
Luk 24:40 After he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet.
Luk 24:41 While they still could not believe it for joy and were full of amazement, he said to them, "Do you have anything here to eat?"
Luk 24:42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish,
Luk 24:43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.

None of these verses prove that God is a person. THey only prove that Jesus is a person.

 

[Kris10leigh]

None of these verses prove that God is a person. THey only prove that Jesus is a person.

That's what I said.

 

[2ducklow]

That's what I said.

Sorta.

 

[Simonline]

Absolutely not. You are very honest in your arguments, but I see that others who have participated are as well. Everyone is just looking at this quite differently. I see proof on both sides of this very complex issue.

Firstly, there are some who post on this site who are manifestly dishonest in the way that they discuss/debate (no names - no pack drill). Everyone it looking at the issue differently, that's true but not everyone is looking at the issue honestly. There cannot be 'proof' to establish both sides of a contradictory issue. Either God is Tri-Personal [Trinitarian] in Nature or He is Mono-Personal [Unitarian] in Nature but He absolutely CANNOT simultaneously be both so either the Trinitarians are wrong or the Unitarians are wrong but both parties CANNOT be right?!

I think you may ignore scripture that non-trinitarians bring to the table. Ignore may too harsh a word.

No. Orthodox Christian theology is based upon all that the Scriptures reveal about God and not just carefully selected 'proof-texts' dishonestly used to make the Bible appear to vindicate someone's theological and/or metaphysical presupposition(s). A text taken out of context is nothing more than a pretext to justify a false supposition that someone is not willing to test and reject if/when it is found to be false.

In any case, everyone here seems to have put real thought AND heart into the argument.

With respect, the fact that people are passionate about their theological position does not make them right. The sole arbiter in all matters of faith and doctrine is the Bible itself, not our passions. This is why it is so important to correctly interpret the Scriptures (2Tim.2:15)

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Ignoring scriptures and arguments is universal in CF theology.

You speak for yourself! Just because you are deceitful and dishonest to the core doesn't mean that everyone else is?!

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Greetings Simonline,

I think you jump to conclusions concerning my belief by thinking that I base it on "one" verse taken "completely out of context".

Not being omniscient, I can only respond to what you actually say rather than what you may or may not actually believe, so berating me for responding to your original comments is out of order.

What you fail to realize is that your answer hurts your position. Why? Because Jesus as a man would not "live because of" any person of the Trinity if he was 100% God and 100% man at the same time.

Actually, for the record, Jesus isn't Divine. He's only human. It is the Messiah who is both Divine and human. As Divine, the Messiah is YHWH, whilst as human, the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth.

He would live because of his "godly nature" which he supposedly shared with the Father and holy spirit, but not by an individual "person" of that divine nature. Notice too what the Father granted "the Son":

John 5:26 - For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

This "life in himself" was some that was given to the Son by the Father.

Assuming, of course, that Jn.5:26 is referring to the Messiah as human rather than to the Messiah as Divine (an assumption you have yet (Q.E.D.) to vindicate)?

Again, this does not work in a Trinitarian Godhead because all 3 would have life in themselves, not because of the other 2 persons but because of the divine nature they share.

This ignores the fact the the Son is eternally begotten of the Father and it is on this basis that the Father gives Life to the Son.

Are you saying that God would have to be given life when taking on another form even if he still keeps his divine nature in that form?

The Incarnation is not about God 'taking on another form' otherwise it would just be yet another theophany rather than an incarnation? Just like every other human creature, the Messiah, as a human creature, would also have to have received His life from His God.

I appreciate the comment, but next time you may want to think about what you say before making statements about people basing belief on one text.

See above.

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.

The bible doesn't say that it says God the Father is the only true God, not Jesus.

It doesn't say Jesus is a chicken either but he aint a chicken, It doesn't say that Jesus isn't a hog, butJesus isn't a hog, it doesn't say that JEsus isn't an american, but he isn't an american, etcetera etcetera etecetera. It does say he is a man right now.

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

we got scriptures sayin that God the Father is God and that YHWH is God, we don't got no scripture sayin God the Father is not a man so by your logic we gotta believe God the Father is a man cause no scripture says he aint. which isn't any logic but is illogic supremo.

Trinity isn't truth, it isn't even in the bible. and my take on your posts is that you refuse point blank to prove your doctrine from scripture. all you have are scriptures that you intepret to mean trinity, nothing else.
says you not history. history says trinity came about from the council of nicea. your facts are all screwed up.
ah what is a proof of t rinity without calling us heretics. heretic is a word invented to scare people into believeing the nonsensical doctrine of the tirnity cause it is so illogical, contradictory, and nonsensiocal that no one would believe it otherwise no bible proof of trinity

I have told you before, I refuse to play your heretical games.

When you show me just ONE SINGLE VERSE (?!) in the Bible that EXPLICITLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY states that ONLY the Father or ONLY the Son or ONLY the Holy Spirit is 'the only true God' then, and only then, will I stop treating you with the total contempt you so richly deserve for being utterly deceitful and dishonest in both what and how you post?!

Until then (or until you finally repent of your deceit and dishonesty and acknowledge the truth) I will continue to ignore your blatant dishonesty

Simonline.

 

[Kris10leigh]

Firstly, there are some who post on this site who are manifestly dishonest in the way that they discuss/debate (no names - no pack drill). Everyone it looking at the issue differently, that's true but not everyone is looking at the issue honestly. There cannot be 'proof' to establish both sides of a contradictory issue. Either God is Tri-Personal [Trinitarian] in Nature or He is Mono-Personal [Unitarian] in Nature but He absolutely CANNOT simultaneously be both so either the Trinitarians are wrong or the Unitarians are wrong but both parties CANNOT be right?![/COLOR]

I completely agree. They CANNOT both be right. Someone is right and someone is wrong. This IS a black and white issue, to me. Where you and I disagree is that I believe we can't know who is right and you believe you ARE right. I respect your position and admire your steadfast approach. I just really disagree with you on this issue of being right.

No. Orthodox Christian theology is based upon all that the Scriptures reveal about God and not just carefully selected 'proof-texts' dishonestly used to make the Bible appear to vindicate someone's theological and/or metaphysical presupposition(s). A text taken out of context is nothing more than a pretext to justify a false supposition that someone is not willing to test and reject if/when it is found to be false.

I agree with your logic. However, I don't think anyone here is knowingly using scripture to "justify a false supposition". Why would anyone do that except for twisted entertainment? It depends on how it is all interpretted.

With respect, the fact that people are passionate about their theological position does not make them right. The sole arbiter in all matters of faith and doctrine is the Bible itself, not our passions. This is why it is so important to correctly interpret the Scriptures (2Tim.2:15)

I agree. Someone is right here. Everyone is using the Bible to substantiate their argument. It's just being interpretted differently.

 

[2ducklow]

I have told you before, I refuse to play your heretical games.

When you show me just ONE SINGLE VERSE (?!) in the Bible that EXPLICITLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY states that ONLY the Father or ONLY the Son or ONLY the Holy Spirit is 'the only true God' then, and only then, will I stop treating you with the total contempt you so richly deserve for being utterly deceitful and dishonest in both what and how you post?!

Until then (or until you finally repent of your deceit and dishonesty and acknowledge the truth) I will continue to ignore your blatant dishonesty

Simonline.

was it something I said?

 

[Simonline]

Let's just look at the one bible verse 2duck provided. To me, this ONE verse points both ways.

If this scripture points both ways (i.e. that the one true God is simultaneously Trinitarian and Unitarian in Nature) then the Judeo-Christian Scriptures are absurdly contradicting themselves and should be wholesale rejected as false?!

The verse says that there is 'one God, the Father' and whilst that is true it is not all that the Scriptures say about God. Instead of just focusing on what the verse does say, notice what the verse doesn't say. It doesn't say 'one God, the Father alone'?! If it said that then 2ducklow would be absolutely right in what he argues and I would gladly acknowledge that I am the one who is a heretic and not he, but it doesn't say that the Father alone is God or that the Son alone is God or that the Holy Spirit alone is God (especially when the Bible does say that there is only one God and that the Father is God, that the Son is God (Rom.9:5; Heb.1:8-12; Rev.1:8; 21:6; 22:13) and that the Holy Spirit is God (Acts.5:3-4)). It is for this reason that I (along with the rest of the orthodox Christian Church) absolutely refuse to back down and declare that the only true God is Mono-Personal (Unitarian) in Nature because that would be to deny the Divine Revelation and advocate heresy (for which we could spend forever in Perdition)?!

Clearly this points to a unitarian God and rejects the trinity.

No! It doesn't! That's what the heretics want you to think, but it isn't true. You are very easily mislead.

Saying 'there is one God, the Father' is NOT the same as saying that 'only the Father is God'?! Whilst it is true that there is only one God and it is also true that the Father is that one God (and this is where the heretics want you to stop because this understanding of God makes Him no different to any finite human creature who is also Mono-Personal (Unitarian) in nature)...it is ALSO true that the Son is the only true God (Rom.9:5; Heb.1:8-12; Rev.1:8; 21:6; 22:13) and it is ALSO true that the Holy Spirit is the only true God (Acts.5:3-4). That's because the only true God doesn't just exist as Mono-Personal (Unitarian) like all His finite creatures. According to His Divine Revelation that is the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, He Eternally and Immutably exists as Tri-Personal (Trinitarian) - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In other words, the 'one and only true God' is ONE GOD simultaneously existing as THREE PERSONS

What do we do this? One Lord? How is the word Lord used in Hebrew? I equate it with God. Isn't this line saying Jesus is God?

No, because Jesus is NOT God. It is the Messiah who is both God and man (Divine and human). As Divine, the Messiah is YHWH (the one (and only) true God), whilst, as human, the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth.

The distinction that is being made here by the apostle Paul 'yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him' is the distinction between God existing as God (Jn.4:24) and God, by means of the Incarnation, existing as man (Col.1:13-17). The Messiah is YHWH Himself, incarnate as a man (which is why the Messiah is called Emmanuel - 'God with us')

The stumbling block is the word "and". Essentially, the verse is saying there is one God and also one Jesus, whom the scripture refers to as "Lord".

No, as I have said, the 'and' is being used to distinguish between God existing as God and God existing (by means of the Incarnation) as man.

Am I talking in circles?

No, but with '2ducklow's' help you are definitely thinking in them?!

Simonline.

 

[2ducklow]

You speak for yourself! Just because you are deceitful and dishonest to the core doesn't mean that everyone else is?!

Simonline.

Well I got Jesus in my heart. I love Jesus tremendously, much much much more today than I did 37 years ago, but I have always loved Him ever since I got born again. Do you love Jesus too? I talk to Jesus all the time, and he talks to me all the time, like right now he spoke to me. Do you know the Lord ? I've known Jesus for 37 years, and it has been wonderfull. In all those 37 years that i've know Jesus he never once told me that I was rotten to the core, so probably it isn't true. Otherwise He would have told me to correct me. But maybe you think you know more than the LOrd?!

 

[Kris10leigh]

Simon, your dialogue begs a question from me? You have been talking very nicely with me. I think you are largely misunderstood here.

What is your purpose in chatting here with us? Is it to bring us to your "truth"? Do you debate in the hope that people will see your position and therefore change theirs?

I for one do not expect to change my opinion, though often times I do. Mostly, I just like to dialogue. Sometimes just by voicing my thoughts, people come and tell me where I'm right and where I'm wrong. I can then choose to agree or disagree.

I never intend to change your view of your truth, or anyone else's for that matter, and especially not on this issue.

That's where I'm coming from. Where are you coming from? Are you ok with sharing just for the sake of sharing? Or for you, does someone eventually have to win?

 

[2ducklow]

If this scripture points both ways (i.e. that the one true God is simultaneously Trinitarian and Unitarian in Nature) then the Judeo-Christian Scriptures are absurdly contradicting themselves and should be wholesale rejected as false?!

The verse says that there is 'one God, the Father' and whilst that is true it is not all that the Scriptures say about God. Instead of just focusing on what the verse does say, notice what the verse doesn't say. It doesn't say 'one God, the Father alone'?!

John 17:1-3 These things spake Jesus; and lifting up his eyes to heaven, he said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that the son may glorify thee: even as thou gavest him authority over all flesh, that to all whom thou hast given him, he should give eternal life. And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ.



So it does say that God the Father is the only God. And 1 cor. 8.6 says the Father is the one God. puttingthe two scriptures together you get that God the Father is the one and only true God.
Only alone same thing, in fact the primary definition of the Greek word used here in John 17.3 <mono> is alone.

[SIZE=+1]movnoß [/SIZE]Monos (mon'-os);
Word Origin: Greek, Adjective, Strong #: 3441

1. alone (without a companion), forsaken, destitute of help, alone, only, merely

If it said that then 2ducklow would be absolutely right in what he argues and I would gladly acknowledge that I am the one who is a heretic and not he,

well John 17.3 does, so I am right and you are wrong, and you are duty bound to admit that you are a heretic.

but it doesn't say that the Father alone is God

john 17.3 does,

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only( this word also means alone monos) true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ.

 

[virtualgirl]

I've followed this thread for a while. I have been hesitant to post because, after reading the thread, I perceive this subject as being fraught with anger and emotion.

Anyway, I am not here to dissuade anyone from their interpretation of Scripture. I just have a sincere question.

Simonline, you said:

Actually, for the record, Jesus isn't Divine. He's only human. It is the Messiah who is both Divine and human. As Divine, the Messiah is YHWH, whilst as human, the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth.

No, because Jesus is NOT God. It is the Messiah who is both God and man (Divine and human). As Divine, the Messiah is YHWH (the one (and only) true God), whilst, as human, the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth.

The distinction that is being made here by the apostle Paul 'yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him' is the distinction between God existing as God (Jn.4:24) and God, by means of the Incarnation, existing as man (Col.1:13-17). The Messiah is YHWH Himself, incarnate as a man (which is why the Messiah is called Emmanuel - 'God with us')

This is very confusing to me. You said the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth, but you are talking about Jesus and the Messiah as if they are two separate persons.

Your other statements have left me with questions:

1. Jesus isn't Divine he's only human, but the Messiah is both Divine and human. (1st quote)
2. Jesus is not God, but the Messiah is both God and man. (2nd quote)

How can Jesus (the Messiah) be Divine, yet not Divine? Not God, yet both God and man?

I am not trying to start an argument, I sincerely want to understand your reasoning.