Mary, the mother of the Lord

[KV-44-v1]

The Son of God is the same person as the Son of Man. Yes or no?

yes.
100% GOD and 100% Human nature - with none of the sin we inherited in Adam. why do you think Jesus is the LAST adam? if He wasnt God He couldnt pull that off.

The KJV assigns red lettering to this which is an error.

okay, so now you know more than the KJV. Got it.

5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth.

Hmm. Firstborn from the dead.
How can a human with NO DIVINITY be firstborn from the dead? More unitarianism being illogical.
"ruler over the kings of the earth." Again, a random human cant do this. only Jesus could.

 

[KV-44-v1]

You’re close but it isn’t “the substance in them,” it’s the substance that is them. They are all God because they share the same substance.


You are conflating monotheism with the nature of God. Monotheism says nothing about whether God is one person or three.

id use "essence" not substance.

 

[KV-44-v1]

You are conflating monotheism with the nature of God. Monotheism says nothing about whether God is one person or three.

Agreed; he is. Free
Try not to strawman the Trinity challenge (0% of unitarian pass!!)
Wait a min - is this post a prickly post ?? i just reread it....

 

[Paul E. Michael]

it’s the substance that is them.

I know, I know: three thumbs-up for a comment is unrealistic, since, who has three hands? But then, I thought: Why not? -- since only two thumbs-up doesn't seem quite adequate for extolling the truth of your comment, and since having three hands is scarcely more unrealistic than having two left hands!

You're exactly right: "the substance that IS Them"!

If you've glanced at my posts, you may have noticed that I like the standard Trinity diagram pretty well:

As I imagine you already know, these twelve truths are nicely presented by that simple -- and I say, beautiful -- work of art:

1. God is the Father.
2. God is the Son.
3. God is the Holy Spirit.
4. The Father is God.
5. The Son is God.
6. The Holy Spirit is God.
7. The Father is not the Son.
8. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
9. The Son is not the Father.
10. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
11. The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
12. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

It's so easy to see that no contradiction is involved between any of those twelve propositions. You could replace the label 'God' in the center of the triangle with, say, the label 'Water'; and replace the 'The Father', 'The Son', and 'The Holy Spirit' labels on the vertices with, say, the labels 'The Atlantic Ocean', 'The Pacific Ocean', and 'The Indian Ocean'; and thereby a nice Trinity analogy is presented in twelve obvious truths about water and three of its bodies. (And, the fact that God is three Persons, whereas water is far more than three bodies, is irrelevant to, and of no militance against the fact of the analogy.)

1. Water is the Atlantic Ocean.
2. Water is the Pacific Ocean.
3. Water is the Indian Ocean.
4. The Atlantic Ocean is water.
5. The Pacific Ocean is water.
6. The Indian Ocean is water.
7. The Atlantic Ocean is not the Pacific Ocean.
8. The Atlantic Ocean is not the Indian Ocean.
9. The Pacific Ocean is not the Atlantic Ocean.
10. The Pacific Ocean is not the Indian Ocean.
11. The Indian Ocean is not the Atlantic Ocean.
12. The Indian Ocean is not the Pacific Ocean.

 

[Free]

id use "essence" not substance.

He used substance, so I used substance. Similarly, though, I wouldn't use "100% man and 100% God," as numbers confuse things, and 100% suggests absoluteness, which is to say, that is all Jesus is. So, how can he be 100% man and 100% God? I think it is better to say that he is truly man and truly God or fully man and fully God. That is, Jesus is man in every sense a man is and God in every sense God is.

 

[Runningman]

yes.
100% GOD and 100% Human nature - with none of the sin we inherited in Adam. why do you think Jesus is the LAST adam? if He wasnt God He couldnt pull that off.

You're going to need to provide Biblical support for this. Jesus is called a man many times. Where did Jesus ever claim to be God? Could anything Jesus said be understood to be a denial of being God?

okay, so now you know more than the KJV. Got it.

Please read Revelation 1:4-8 and honestly tell me if you think Jesus is still the one talking in verse 8.

Hmm. Firstborn from the dead.
How can a human with NO DIVINITY be firstborn from the dead? More unitarianism being illogical.
"ruler over the kings of the earth." Again, a random human cant do this. only Jesus could.

God raised him from the dead and made him both Lord and Christ as Scripture states. Do you agree with that?

 

[Runningman]

id use "essence" not substance.

I would say both. If Jesus is fully man and fully God then both the material and immaterial aspects need to taken into account. Jesus didn't lose his body post-resurrection did he?

 

[Runningman]

I know, I know: three thumbs-up for a comment is unrealistic, since, who has three hands? But then, I thought: Why not? -- since only two thumbs-up doesn't seem quite adequate for extolling the truth of your comment, and since having three hands is scarcely more unrealistic than having two left hands!

You're exactly right: "the substance that IS Them"!

If you've glanced at my posts, you may have noticed that I like the standard Trinity diagram pretty well:

As I imagine you already know, these twelve truths are nicely presented by that simple -- and I say, beautiful -- work of art:

1. God is the Father.
2. God is the Son.
3. God is the Holy Spirit.
4. The Father is God.
5. The Son is God.
6. The Holy Spirit is God.
7. The Father is not the Son.
8. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
9. The Son is not the Father.
10. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
11. The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
12. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

It's so easy to see that no contradiction is involved between any of those twelve propositions. You could replace the label 'God' in the center of the triangle with, say, the label 'Water'; and replace the 'The Father', 'The Son', and 'The Holy Spirit' labels on the vertices with, say, the labels 'The Atlantic Ocean', 'The Pacific Ocean', and 'The Indian Ocean'; and thereby a nice Trinity analogy is presented in twelve obvious truths about water and three of its bodies. (And, the fact that God is three Persons, whereas water is far more than three bodies, is irrelevant to, and of no militance against the fact of the analogy.)

1. Water is the Atlantic Ocean.
2. Water is the Pacific Ocean.
3. Water is the Indian Ocean.
4. The Atlantic Ocean is water.
5. The Pacific Ocean is water.
6. The Indian Ocean is water.
7. The Atlantic Ocean is not the Pacific Ocean.
8. The Atlantic Ocean is not the Indian Ocean.
9. The Pacific Ocean is not the Atlantic Ocean.
10. The Pacific Ocean is not the Indian Ocean.
11. The Indian Ocean is not the Atlantic Ocean.
12. The Indian Ocean is not the Pacific Ocean.

And yet what you said contradicts itself and Orthodox Trinitarianism.

You at no point said the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons of one Godhead, but instead listed them each individually with their own number. Therefore, you are saying that each person is God individually while simultaneously saying they are not each other; this is polytheism and it isn't Trinitarianism the way you described it.

If you want to talk about the Trinity, you need to learn what it actually is.

 

[Paul E. Michael]

each person is God individually

By your word, "God", when you say "each person is God individually", are you referring to the Father? Yes or No?

• If No, then to whom are you referring by your word, "God"?
• If Yes, then this is what you've just said: "each person is [the Father] individually".

 

[Runningman]

By your word, "God", when you say "each person is God individually", are you referring to the Father? Yes or No?

• If No, then to whom are you referring by your word, "God"?
• If Yes, then this is what you've just said: "each person is [the Father] individually".

1. God is the Father.
2. God is the Son.
3. God is the Holy Spirit.
4. The Father is God.
5. The Son is God.
6. The Holy Spirit is God.
7. The Father is not the Son.
8. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
9. The Son is not the Father.
10. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
11. The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
12. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

This is a massive contradiction to Trinitarianism for it not only represents them each individually rather than as members of the Godhead who are one God. Even I, a strict monotheist and Unitarian, will accept that Trinitarianism just barely gets by as monotheism on the skin of its teeth under the Unity of the Godhead theory.

Furthermore, I would even go so far as to say that the Holy Spirit is another name for the Father. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit is correct.

 

[Paul E. Michael]

You wrote:

each person is God individually

So, I asked you:

By your word, "God", when you say "each person is God individually", are you referring to the Father? Yes or No?

You: <NO ANSWER>

I would even go so far as to say that the Holy Spirit is another name for the Father.

The Holy Spirit is a Person, not the name of a Person. The Holy Spirit is not the phrase, "the Holy Spirit". No person is the name of a person. You are confused if you imagine that a person is/could be a name. I'm Paul, a person. I am not the name -- the phrase -- "Paul". "Paul" is my name; "Paul" is the name of a person -- me -- and is not, itself, a person.

Did you mean you would say that the phrase, "the Holy Spirit", is not only the name of the Holy Spirit, but also the name of the Father?

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

It is a place of power. Where most verses say Jesus is at the right hand of God and many verses say that God is on a throne, Mark 14 provides a different angle. We can rightly say the throne of God is the source of power while the right hand of God is also a place of power, but not the source.

Yes, God is on a throne, which Ezekiel and John saw in their visions, and Ezekiel saw him in appearance of a man. I've told you before that I'm not arguing with you about Jesus, but theophany. You deny God's prerogative to appearance in any shape or form he sees fit and erroneously label it as modalism, even though it's a solid biblical fact, which is even evidenced in your own quote of Ex. 6:2-3.

Definitely a vision. Pretty sure if Ezekiel was just saw some blinding light he would have no idea what it's about. Visions can be of something real, but they also need to be formatted in a way we can make sense of. God's true form is invisible in impenetrable light.

Who are you to speak on behalf of God's prophet? And call him blind? God put his words in Ezekiel, not you. He knew exactly what he saw, otherwise he wouldn't have described it in this prophecy book.

I agree about the code language but clay also can contain sodium, calcium, iron, and zinc. Depends on the type of clay it is.

All kinds of clay contains silicon dioxide, one of the most abundant compound in earth, but it doesn't exist naturally in any organic matters. "We are made of clay" is absolutely false, a futile and laughable gaslighting attempt. Jesus compared the kingdom of heaven with a wheat field and a drag net, that is just an analogy for illustration, so is this pottery lesson for Jeremiah.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

And yet what you said contradicts itself and Orthodox Trinitarianism.

You at no point said the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons of one Godhead, but instead listed them each individually with their own number. Therefore, you are saying that each person is God individually while simultaneously saying they are not each other; this is polytheism and it isn't Trinitarianism the way you described it.

If you want to talk about the Trinity, you need to learn what it actually is.

I've told you before, man, I'm not your enemy, I don't arrogantly lecture on you, I don't repeatedly shove that dumb triangle in your face like the other guy does. My view is that Jesus the Son and God the Father are the two sides of the same coin, Jesus is the material side we see, God is the immaterial side we don't see, and the coin is of the same essence which is the Holy Spirit. These two sides are distinct, as the engravings on the two sides are usually different, maybe an emblem on the back and its monetary value on the front, but this is still one coin, not two different ones.

 

[Runningman]

You wrote:

So, I asked you:

You: <NO ANSWER>

The Holy Spirit is a Person, not the name of a Person. The Holy Spirit is not the phrase, "the Holy Spirit". No person is the name of a person. You are confused if you imagine that a person is/could be a name. I'm Paul, a person. I am not the name -- the phrase -- "Paul". "Paul" is my name; "Paul" is the name of a person -- me -- and is not, itself, a person.

Did you mean you would say that the phrase, "the Holy Spirit", is not only the name of the Holy Spirit, but also the name of the Father?

You're getting tangled up in your own logic. Let's just go with what the Bible says.

God is (a) Spirit, yes? Well, God is the Father. The Father is holy, yes? Then the Father is the Holy Spirit.

Why do you think there is no mention of the Father in Matthew 12:31-32? Jesus is talking about God there.

Why do you think that Jesus said no one knows the Son except the Father and vice versa in Matthew 11:27? No mention of the Holy Spirit? It would be redundant to mention the Father and Holy Spirit together. By your own theology, you must accept that the Holy Spirit doesn't know the Father and Son according Matthew 11:27.

No one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God in 1 Corinthians 2:11. So to say that the Father and Son don't know their own thoughts?

There is a way to resolve these irreconcilable differences, but Trinitarianism can't account for them. The resolution is that Jesus isn't an omniscient God and the Father is the Holy Spirit.

The holy spirit (I intentionally lower-cased this to show distinction) can also be an anointing an empowerment. See Acts 10:37,38

 

[Paul E. Michael]

You're getting tangled up in your own logic.

You saying I'm "getting tangled up" is you lashing out at me in your chagrin, because I've levelled questions and criticism against your heretical ravings, to which even you know you are unable and have failed to respond rationally. But, you are right in your admission that I am on the side of logic; you telling me logic is mine is you telling me logic is not yours -- you are repudiating logic and admitting you want nothing to do with logic.

Why do you think that Jesus said no one knows the Son except the Father and vice versa in Matthew 11:27?

So, since Jesus says no one knows the Son except the Father, you think the Son does not know the Son? You think the Son does not know Himself?

So, since Jesus said that no one knows the Father except the Son, and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal the Father, you think the Father does not know the Father -- the Father does not know Himself -- unless the Son reveals the Father to the Father? And, you think the Holy Spirit does not know the Father unless the Son reveals the Father to the Holy Spirit?

 

[Paul E. Michael]

By your own theology, you must accept that the Holy Spirit doesn't know the Father and Son according Matthew 11:27.

Jesus says no one except the Father knows the Son. So, does the Son know the Son? Yes or No?

Jesus says no one except the Son, and those to whom the Son reveals the Father, knows the Father. So, does the Father know the Father unless the Son reveals the Father to the Father? Yes or No? And, does the Holy Spirit know the Father unless the Son reveals the Father to the Holy Spirit? Yes or No?

 

[Paul E. Michael]

Jesus isn't an omniscient God

By your phrase, "an omniscient God", are you referring to the Father? Yes or No?

• If No, then to whom are you referring by your phrase, "an omniscient God"?
• If Yes, then this is what you've just handed us: "Jesus isn't [the Father]".

That Jesus, the Son, isn't the Father, is an essential tenet of Trinitarianism, so, whenever you say that Jesus isn't the Father, you're merely preaching to the Trinitarian choir.

 

[Runningman]

You saying I'm "getting tangled up" is you lashing out at me in your chagrin, because I've levelled questions and criticism against your heretical ravings, to which even you know you are unable and have failed to respond rationally. But, you are right in your admission that I am on the side of logic; you telling me logic is mine is you telling me logic is not yours -- you are repudiating logic and admitting you want nothing to do with logic.

No chagrin, just directly telling you what I hope will help you.

So, since Jesus says no one knows the Son except the Father, you think the Son does not know the Son? You think the Son does not know Himself?

No mention of the Holy Spirit there as someone who knows the Father and Son. Why would something as important as who God is exclude a member of your Trinity if your doctrine is the truth?

So, since Jesus said that no one knows the Father except the Son, and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal the Father, you think the Father does not know the Father -- the Father does not know Himself -- unless the Son reveals the Father to the Father? And, you think the Holy Spirit does not know the Father unless the Son reveals the Father to the Holy Spirit?

How do you account for omissions of your Trinity members where it should matter?

 

[Runningman]

Jesus says no one except the Father knows the Son. So, does the Son know the Son? Yes or No?

"...and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him." So yes I do. The Father and Son have been revealed unto me. How about you?

Jesus says no one except the Son, and those to whom the Son reveals the Father, knows the Father. So, does the Father know the Father unless the Son reveals the Father to the Father? Yes or No? And, does the Holy Spirit know the Father unless the Son reveals the Father to the Holy Spirit? Yes or No?

Yes they know themselves, but the point is there is no mention of the Trinitarian Godhead there nor are there any contradictions to God's omniscience, but there is a contradiction to the unity of the Trinity. The Father is the Holy Spirit.

p.s. - discussion is required. There are not just yes or not answers when something needs to be explained. I hope you don't proverbially stomp your feet and ask the same questions again until I answer you the with a simple yes or no.

 

[Runningman]

By your phrase, "an omniscient God", are you referring to the Father? Yes or No?

• If No, then to whom are you referring by your phrase, "an omniscient God"?
• If Yes, then this is what you've just handed us: "Jesus isn't [the Father]".

That Jesus, the Son, isn't the Father, is an essential tenet of Trinitarianism, so, whenever you say that Jesus isn't the Father, you're merely preaching to the Trinitarian choir.

Self-referencing the Trinity doctrine to confirm the Trinity doctrine isn't what we need to do to confirm the Trinity. What does the Bible say in response to your question?