There is an alternative to trinitarianism/ non-trinitarianism.

[Consecrated Life]

I would ask you how you missed this. Jesus was in fact created.

Let's begin with the fact that God is Himself eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God.

1 Timothy 1​

17Now to the King eternal, immortal, and invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.​

Yet of Jesus, he is the image of the only God and is himself created, i.e., the firstborn over all creation. Firstborn refers to both rank and birth. In other words, Jesus isn't an eternal being.

Colossians 1​

15The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.​

Revelation 3:14 also says Jesus was created:

Revelation 3​

14“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation.​

By the above facts alone, Jesus isn't God. You may also see Matthew 11:25 where Jesus called the Father the Lord of heaven and earth while scripture never refers to Jesus as the Lord of heaven and earth. Acts 17:24,25 says the Lord of heaven and earth is God who created all things and is not served by human hands. Jesus had human hands.

Acts 4:24-27 says the Sovereign Lord and Creator of heaven and earth is God while Jesus is His servant.

The Old Testament is rich in information about YHWH being the creator and there is abundant proof YHWH and Jesus are not the same person.

None of the above answered the question I asked you ?
If you are afraid to answer just say so and I will refrain from asking the same question again.
How do you rationalize in your mind the fact that God specifically identifies the individual moment He created the heavens , angels, earth, plants, man , animals , etc,etc,etc,,,,, and yet the moment you say God's greatest creattion was created God neglects to mention ?
As though God were ashamed to talk about the creation of Jesus .
There is nothing you can name that God has not specifically mentioned in His word the creation of .
Nothing
I dare you to try naming anything ABOVE & BELOW that God has not taken credit for creating in His Word ?
You can't do it .
Yet you assert that the greatest feat of creation God ever accomplished , that of the Humanity's one & only Savior, God fails to mention one syllable of .
Nothing!
Zilch !
How do you explain that?

Gen 1:16

............ he made the stars also.

 

[LeviR]

“Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
‭‭John‬ ‭17‬:‭3‬ ‭LEB‬‬

John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. | Lexham English Bible (LEB) | Download The Bible App Now

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

bible.com

First ‘God’ is with definite article and hence reference object, second one is without an article and hence reference attributes of an object. So I believe it should be translated like:

The Word was with God and the Word was God by nature

How could you explain that this nuance in meaning caused by presence or absence of definite article before ‘God’ hasn’t been reflected in English translation?

What does God send? He sends His Word. “the Word was God”
Therefore, the Father’s Word is the Father being sent by His Word.
One of the names of Jesus is “Everlasting Father” because the Word Jesus is, is the Father.
Jesus can be recognized as the Father because the Word is made flesh. Which means the Father is made flesh by the Word who Jesus is called.

 

[Dmytro]

What does God send? He sends His Word. “the Word was God”
Therefore, the Father’s Word is the Father being sent by His Word.
One of the names of Jesus is “Everlasting Father” because the Word Jesus is, is the Father.
Jesus can be recognized as the Father because the Word is made flesh. Which means the Father is made flesh by the Word who Jesus is called.

I believe the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct one from another. Their unity is that of purpose, love, faithfulness not the unity of person or being.

 

[LeviR]

I believe the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are distinct one from another. Their unity is that of purpose, love, faithfulness not the unity of person or being.

I f we say the Father, by His Word, created all things. We can say as John, “the Word was God.”
Therefore, the Word God spoke to create all things is called God.
If Jesus is the same Word God spoke, then Jesus also can be said to create all things.

 

[LeviR]

When things are said of Jesus that refer to the Father who is the only true God, it is because Jesus is called the Word. Jesus was a human man person who is called the Word.
If the Word IS God, then Jesus can be referred to as God, the Father, and the Spirit.
God IS the Word, the Father, and the Spirit.
The Word encompasses the Father and His Spirit.

 

[Consecrated Life]

When things are said of Jesus that refer to the Father who is the only true God, it is because Jesus is called the Word. Jesus was a human man person who is called the Word.

For me , I will defer to things Jesus says of Jesus.
It is better to believe the Word of Jesus than the word of men.

John 14:9
..... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

 

[Free]

What does God send? He sends His Word. “the Word was God”
Therefore, the Father’s Word is the Father being sent by His Word.

Can you provide just one example where a son is his own father or a father is his own son? The Father cannot be the Word and certainly cannot be the Son. First, that makes God's revelation of the Father Son relationship nonsense to us; it communicates nothing. Second, the Greek doesn't allow it:

"Was the Word." "Was" is the Greek, en, which speaks of absolute preexistence before any creation. What that statement means is that when the beginning began, the Word was already in existence, and hence, there was never a time when he did not exist. The very same applies to the Father, who has absolute preexistence.

"And the Word was with God." "With" is the Greek word pros, and being in the accusative case, it denotes motion towards. It isn't merely being with but is intimate union and communion; it is interpersonal relationship inseparable from God, yet distinct from him. "God" contains the article in the Greek--"the God"--and is therefore a reference to the Father (at a minimum). Only a person can be in intimate relationship with another person; a person can never be said to in an interpersonal relationship with their own words.

"The Word was God." It is significant that "God" doesn't have the article in the Greek. As such, it is a qualitative statement that refers to the nature of the Word. It is saying that the Word was divine or deity.

John's whole point is who the Word is. To sum then, the Word had eternal preexistence, the same as the Father, in intimate relationship with God, and was in nature deity himself. Yet, we know there was only one God. The best explanation is that there is a plurality of persons within the one God. Therefore, the historical doctrine of the Trinity best takes this evidence into account.

All of what John says in his prologue is supported by John saying that "God is love" in 1 John 4:8, 16. To say God is love, is to make a statement about his essence, his nature, and not merely the idea that he is loving; He cannot not love.

What then is love? At its fullest, it is both a healthy love of self and an outward expression towards others. We should fully expect then, that if God is love, that his love must have the fullest expression and necessarily includes love of others from before creation of all time and space, from eternity past. However, if God is a monad (unitarian), then to say that “God is love” means 1) that the one-person God loved only himself, and 2) that the fullest and proper expression of his love is dependent on creation. This contradicts the statement that “God is love,” as it leaves His love incomplete and deficient. A unitarian god simply cannot be the God of the Bible.

When we consider the Trinity, however, it all works. There are three persons each being truly and fully God, equally possessing the full and undivided essence (one being that is God), having been in an intimate, loving relationship and communion for eternity past. Only now we can truly say that God is love. Diversity within the unity.

One of the names of Jesus is “Everlasting Father” because the Word Jesus is, is the Father.

"Everlasting Father" in Isa 9:6 has nothing to do with the Father. The Word "Father" has several uses and meanings in the OT. It would be worth your while to do some study on that.

Jesus can be recognized as the Father because the Word is made flesh. Which means the Father is made flesh by the Word who Jesus is called.

The entire NT is against the idea that the Father is the Son and vice versa. It is to make the NT say a lot of nonsense.

1Jn 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—
1Jn 1:2 the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—
1Jn 1:3 that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.

In addition to the clear distinction between the Father and the Son, note the echoes of John 1:1-2,14.

1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
...
1Jn 2:23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.

Of most importance here is that Jesus is our "advocate [parakletos] with the Father." An advocate, according to the relevant definition from Merriam-Webster, is "one who pleads the cause of another." Of course, that is done on behalf of another before another or others (such as a judge or a court). Logically then, the Son cannot be an advocate with the Father if he is the Father. It would be nonsense to make such a claim. It's worth noting that the "Helper" in John 14:16 is also the Greek word parakletos, but another parakletos.

And further evidence that the Father cannot be the Son:

Joh 14:10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.
Joh 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.
Joh 14:12 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.
Joh 14:13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
...
Joh 14:23 Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
Joh 14:24 Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me.

Joh 15:23 Whoever hates me hates my Father also.
Joh 15:24 If I had not done among them the works that no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin, but now they have seen and hated both me and my Father.

Joh 16:27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.
Joh 16:28 I came from the Father and have come into the world, and now I am leaving the world and going to the Father.”
Joh 16:29 His disciples said, “Ah, now you are speaking plainly and not using figurative speech!
Joh 16:30 Now we know that you know all things and do not need anyone to question you; this is why we believe that you came from God.”
Joh 16:31 Jesus answered them, “Do you now believe?
Joh 16:32 Behold, the hour is coming, indeed it has come, when you will be scattered, each to his own home, and will leave me alone. Yet I am not alone, for the Father is with me.

Joh 17:3 And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.
Joh 17:4 I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do.
Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.


And on and on it goes, with the Father always being kept distinct from the Son, which would be pointless and meaningless if they were one and the same.

(All ESV.)

 

[LeviR]

For me , I will defer to things Jesus says of Jesus.
It is better to believe the Word of Jesus than the word of men.

John 14:9
..... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Consider the context:

Jhn 14:6 - Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Jhn 14:7 - If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

Jhn 14:8 - Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

Jhn 14:9 - Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayeth thou then, Shew us the Father?

Jhn 14:10 - Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Jhn 14:11 - Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

Jesus is identifying himself as the Father. Not because he is the Father but because the words he speaks and the works he does are the Father’s words and works.
Therefore, Jesus can be recognized as the Father, even though he was a man person.

 

[Consecrated Life]

Consider the context:

Jesus is identifying himself as the Father. Not because he is the Father but because the words he speaks and the works he does are the Father’s words and works.
Therefore, Jesus can be recognized as the Father, even though he was a man person.

So Jesus is not being Literal when He calls Himself the Father to your understanding ?

 

[LeviR]

So Jesus is not being Literal when He calls Himself the Father to your understanding ?

He is the son of the Father. A son and a father are not the same person.

 

[Dmytro]

Consider the context:

Jhn 14:6 - Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Jhn 14:7 - If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

Jhn 14:8 - Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

Jhn 14:9 - Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayeth thou then, Shew us the Father?

Jhn 14:10 - Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Jhn 14:11 - Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

Jesus is identifying himself as the Father. Not because he is the Father but because the words he speaks and the works he does are the Father’s words and works.

This I agree with. Each of those having the Holy Spirit can speak words God reveals to him or do works he wants him to do. The difference between humans lead by the Holy Spirit and Jesus is that the Father shows to Jesus everything he does and Jesus does that. He wouldn’t be capable of that if he weren’t divine and equal to the Father.

Therefore, Jesus can be recognized as the Father, even though he was a man person.

The Word who became flesh this is what he was. Divine being in a flesh.

 

[Dmytro]

So Jesus is not being Literal when He calls Himself the Father to your understanding ?

He didn’t directly call himself the Father or God. I’m just clarifying.

 

[Consecrated Life]

He is the son of the Father. A son and a father are not the same person.

Would I be correct then in assuming that you share the same belief as Runningman that the Father created the Son ?

 

[Consecrated Life]

He never directly called himself the Father or God.

He certainly does :

John 14:9
..... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father.

 

[LeviR]

Would I be correct then in assuming that you share the same belief as Runningman that the Father created the Son ?

Certainly. All humans are created. Someone who is said to be man and is not created is not man.

 

[Dmytro]

He certainly does :

John 14:9
..... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father.

Not exactly. Being put into the context it means what LeviR said a bit earlier that Jesus was speaking the Father's words and doing his works and in general representing him so perfectly that he was as the Father himself among us. If he’d been the Father or God he’d have said so. There were plenty of opportunities, but he didn’t do that even once. What he actually said, also indirectly and not without figures of speech, was that he was equal to the Father.

 

[LeviR]

This I agree with. Each of those having the Holy Spirit can speak words God reveals to him or do works he wants him to do. The difference between humans lead by the Holy Spirit and Jesus is that the Father shows to Jesus everything he does and Jesus does that. He wouldn’t be capable of that if he weren’t divine and equal to the Father.

The Word who became flesh this is what he was. Divine being in a flesh.

The Word that became flesh is what John says “was God”. God is the Father, the only true God. God’s Word is called the Father.
That is why Jesus identified himself as the Father.

 

[Mustard Seed]

“Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
‭‭John‬ ‭17‬:‭3‬ ‭LEB‬‬

John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. | Lexham English Bible (LEB) | Download The Bible App Now

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

bible.com

First ‘God’ is with definite article and hence reference object, second one is without an article and hence reference attributes of an object. So I believe it should be translated like:

The Word was with God and the Word was God by nature

How could you explain that this nuance in meaning caused by presence or absence of definite article before ‘God’ hasn’t been reflected in English translation?

I don't have to explain it. Colossians 1:13-20 does so, just fine.

Colossians 1:13 For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Colossians 1:15

He is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn over all creation.[i]

John 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been among you all this time without your knowing Me, Philip? The one who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?​

​

First Born per biblical Concordance: 4416 prōtótokos (from 4413 /prṓtos, "first, pre-eminent" and 5088 /tíktō, "bring forth") – properly, first in time (Mt 1:25; Lk 2:7); hence, pre-eminent (Col 1:15; Rev 1:5).​

16 For everything was created by Him,

Okay... so Jesus, who is the very "image", "Presence" of God. Jesus whom is God the Son... is the Creator. Does scripture agree?

Romans 11:36 For from Him and through Him​

and to Him are all things.​

To Him be the glory forever. Amen.​

​

But... Jesus is the creator? Philippians 2:9​

​

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.​

in heaven and on earth,
the visible and the invisible,
whether thrones or dominions
or rulers or authorities—
all things have been created through Him and for Him.

There's that Creator thing, again. So the word All, refers to ALL that exists that our TriUne God has Created. That's everything. No exceptions.

17 He is before all things,
and by Him all things hold together.

This is God, our Lord God.

18 He is also the head of the body, the church;

Trinity verbiage. The Father is the "Head" of the Son, aka Jesus Christ has His Father as His Head. We the Body have The Son, as our Head

He is the beginning,
the firstborn from the dead,

He is the first to show that death has zero captivity over the Body of Christ.

so that He might come to have
first place in everything.

This is God we are talking about, after all

19 For God was pleased to have
all His fullness dwell in Him,

John 14:7 “If you know Me, you will also know[d] My Father. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.”​

​

8 “Lord,” said Philip, “show us the Father, and that’s enough for us.”​

​

9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been among you all this time without your knowing Me, Philip? The one who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words I speak to you I do not speak on My own. The Father who lives in Me does His works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me. Otherwise, believe[e] because of the works themselves.​

20 and through Him to reconcile
everything to Himself
by making peace
through the blood of His cross[j]—
whether things on earth or things in heaven.

Now, we finally se that the very things that God created are "all" (The Greek word is pas ) reconciled through Jesus Christ's blood.

Why is this a big deal?

2nd Corinthians 15:18-21​

​

15 And He died for all so that those who live should no longer live for themselves, but for the One who died for them and was raised.​

16 From now on, then, we do not know[a] anyone in a purely human way.[b] Even if we have known[c] Christ in a purely human way,[d] yet now we no longer know[e] Him in this way. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away, and look, new things[f] have come. 18 Everything is from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation:​

​

Well, that sounds all well and grand, but some say that He didn't die with Salvic Love towards all. Okay, lets see why Colossians 1 is iron clad. Let's truncate it, now that we have evaluated it.

16 For everything was created by Him,
in heaven and on earth,
the visible and the invisible,
whether thrones or dominions
or rulers or authorities—
all things have been created through Him and for Him.
20 and through Him to reconcile
everything to Himself
by making peace
through the blood of His cross[j]—
whether things on earth or things in heaven.

What we see here are 3 red words. The Greek is Pas The word Pas is used to say the entirety of or a part of, by Greek lingual intention. This is why Pas theologians disagree with pas theologians over this matter to then say... Jesus didn't die Lovingly for all that have or ever will exist.

Here comes the magic of Colossians 1. We have the first PAS attached to the authority, sovereignty and creation of all things that Jesus is given authority over.

The second Pas denotes All of Creation, which as seen above, is literally ON EARTH, IN HEAVEN and just incase someone missed it... ALL THINGS VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE. This isn't a standoff. Only one Being is left. God.​

The last PAS specifies that those very PAS things are Re-established to Jesus Christ's authority through the Shedding of His BLOOD.

We now have an ironclad theological equation!

Christ's authority was Reconciled, Rectified, Re-Established, through the Shedding of His blood. This Places PAS directly in line in all 3 places with the Things that Christ has Authority over. This is to say that if one single piece of creation were to be declared not intended for that BLOOD, it wouldn't be under Christ's authority.

 

[Mustard Seed]

Not exactly. Being put into the context it means what LeviR said a bit earlier that Jesus was speaking the Father's words and doing his works and in general representing him so perfectly that he was as the Father himself among us. If he’d been the Father or God he’d have said so. There were plenty of opportunities, but he didn’t do that even once. What he actually said, also indirectly and not without figures of speech, was that he was equal to the Father.

Allow me to simplify my post number 258.

In Colossians 1, it specifies that The Son of God Created ALL things in Heaven and Earth, Seen and Unseen.

Now, if God the Father is "Unseen", which I'm safely assuming that you believe... How did the Son create the Father? He obviously didn't. The Father and Son have never not existed.

One more time.... BECAUSE Colossians 1 says... THE SON OF GOD, created Everything in Earth and Heaven, Seen and Unseen... what is left? Who does this distinguish the Son to be?

 

[LeviR]

Would I be correct then in assuming that you share the same belief as Runningman that the Father created the Son ?

One of the reasons the Jews wanted to kill Jesus was because Jesus was identifying himself as God, the Father. Although that was true, Jesus explained that he was the son of God.
They still wanted to kill him for that.
Jesus explained that even other men by whom the Word of God came could be called God.
They still couldn’t hear.