JudaicChristian
Member
I see that you did not read the thread at the other forum. Here is the link: Judaic Christian Forum - Trinitarianism: What Non-Trinitarians Believe
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Trinitarianism: What Non-Trinitarians Believe
- Thread starter JudaicChristian
- Start date
JudaicChristian
Member
Hebrew distinguishes grammatical number by endings in nouns, verbs and adjectives. A grammatical phenomenon traditionally known as pluralis excellentiae (plural of excellence) occurs with a small number of Hebrew nouns, such as elohim "great god" and behemoth "giant beast" where a grammatically redundant plural ending -im or -oth is attached to a noun, but the noun continues to take singular verbs and adjectives.
And in the Hebrew Bible (Tanach), in the verses Genesis 1:26, 3:22, and 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, God spoke in the majestic plural, using the first person plural instead of the first person singular.
JudaicChristian
Member
Hebrew distinguishes grammatical number by endings in nouns, verbs and adjectives. A grammatical phenomenon traditionally known as pluralis excellentiae (plural of excellence) occurs with a small number of Hebrew nouns, such as elohim "great god" and behemoth "giant beast" where a grammatically redundant plural ending -im or -oth is attached to a noun, but the noun continues to take singular verbs and adjectives.
And in the Hebrew Bible (Tanach), in the verses Genesis 1:26, 3:22, and 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8, God spoke in the majestic plural, using the first person plural instead of the first person singular.
A
Alabaster
Guest
I am well aware of the plural, as it denotes the second and third Persons of the Trinity were present.
1 John 5:7 NKJV
For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
John 1:1-3 NLT
Prologue: Christ, the Eternal Word
1 In the beginning the Word already existed.
The Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
2 He existed in the beginning with God.
3 God created everything through him,
and nothing was created except through him.
Colossians 1:16 NLT
for through him God created everything
in the heavenly realms and on earth.
He made the things we can see
and the things we can’t see—
such as thrones, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities in the unseen world.
Everything was created through him and for him.
Hebrews 1:2 NLT
And now in these final days, he has spoken to us through his Son. God promised everything to the Son as an inheritance, and through the Son he created the universe.
You were write i had not read that great wall of text, and now that i have, i wish i had not. That was a lot of words to say that you don't believe the bible as it is written. so you would rather trust in the words of others then believe in Gods ability to define himself and preserve his words.
1 john 2v
22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
Last edited by a moderator:
I really don't think the argument can be sustained "that Paul is there discussing with the Hebrews who their Hebrew brother Jesus was in the flesh." Paul is writing to the Gentile church of Philippi. The main theme is encouraging the believers there to live for Christ, to live out what it means to be Christians in community.
In the passage in question (chapter 2), Paul is clearly talking about humility and how believers treat others. As I stated previously in this thread, Paul is saying that because Jesus is God,there is no higher humility that can be shown than the eternal God becoming a mere creature. That is the mind we are to have.
JudaicChristian
Member
What makes you think that the verse your quoting has to do with Non-Trinitarian Christians? Did you know that the words in Italics in the KJV means that those words are added to scripture. In other words, not in actual scripture. You should learn how to study your bible before you make comments about what is in scriptures.
To eliminate the trinity, undermines the divinity of Jesus the christ. That biblicly classifies you as anti-christ.
4
4given
Guest
Come on.... Athanasius’ usage of Hebrews 1:1-4 was to prove the Deity of Jesus Christ and not the "ONE AND THE SAME BEING" of Father and the Son.
What we have in Hebrews 1:3 is hupostasis which has two concepts during Athanasius’s time, namely, “substance” and “person.” But the idea of “ONE AND THE SAME SUBSTANCE” is not hupostasis but homoousios (homo=one + ousia = substance).
If what we have in Heb. 1:3 is homoousios, then probably I would not think otherwise. But as it is, it was not referring to the contoversy against Arius over homoousios (one and the same substance) but on the controversy over hupostasis. That's the context of the statement about Athanasius against Arius.
Therefore, I would think that it was not referring to the controversy of “one and the same substance” which is homoousios but to the controversy of the hupostasis of Christ as God.
Last edited by a moderator:
A
Alabaster
Guest
Yep. Those who neglecvt the third person, Holy Spirit, I have concern about regarding their standing with God, for without Him no one can even begin to know God...or anything of scripture.
4
4given
Guest
Dear mamre,
Here's one of the many biblical proof text of the Deity of the Son of God. Unless of course, your religious views believe that YHWH is not God, then you have a basis for further argument.
In the Book of Isaiah 43, Our Lord YHWH, the Son of God, made the following declarations......
Isaiah 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD (YHWH) and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. v11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.
Two negative statements = positive... He is the only God physically formed for us to see and witness. To be witnessed is to be seen or experienced
If no man hath seen the invisible God at anytime then YHWH could not have been the invisible God Father - as others would like us to believe - but the Son of God himself, our saviour- the express image of the invisible God.
His Father is the invisible God of whom no man hath seen at anytime nor his name ' been revealed to anyone...
Rev. 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. v13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Ephesians 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, v15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, .....
Note: Insertion is mine for clarity of presentation.
Last edited by a moderator:
W
Who Says
Guest
Yes, you are right.
When I said "that Paul is there discussing with the Hebrews who their Hebrew brother Jesus was in the flesh", I had actually switched to speaking about Hebrews chapter one as another example of such getting away fronm the speaker's main point.
I don't know exactly how I did it but evidently in the course of editing I omitted that comment.
W
Who Says
Guest
I think that many people during the time Christ appeared upon earth mused about who he was. And that musing did not make them antichrists.
I hold a different view of the princpal Antichrist. Such is a person is one who had the true teaching of the Holy Spirit and formerly knew the true Christ (as Hebrews 6:4-6 speaks about) then has made a deliberate resolve to turn away from the true Christ and to orchastrate deception about him to others.
I do not believe that we should just jump to saying that one who does not correctly understand Christ is an antichrist just because they do not understand him and so speak incorrectly about Christ.
As I see it the true Antichrist is more about a false body of Christ, just as the true church of Christ is his body, (many members in one body).
It is such an organized body that has power in the world to be a force for or against Christ. My point is that I hope we always remember that and not make this personal to individuals. We men breath life into larger institutions that once they get started have a living presence of their own beyond our control. For Christ that was his body called the church (though he does have control of it).
I think the question is do we build on that body or do we build onto a conterfeit of that body?
That counterfeit body is what I see as the true Antichrist and not those that are confused by it.
Last edited by a moderator:
JudaicChristian
Member
I see Straw Man arguments popping everywhere. Perhaps it is time to lock or delete this thread. Such comments are used to derail and detract from any constructive conversation.
W
Who Says
Guest
I neglected to add that I see you make a good point in your second paragraph here. We could see it as Christ's demonstrating that we have no need to try to cling to being equal to others. And that is a common tendency of us in our pride not wanting anyone to show us up or make us feel inferior which then keeps us from humbling ourselves to serve others.
But does that not work opposite the thought that was expressed in that he thought it not robbery?
W
Who Says
Guest
I am fairly new to discussing the subject of the Trinity as it always seemed to me to be fruitless bickering that discouraged people from desiring to believe in God.
I have to be honest and say that if all I had ever heard of Christianity was the Trinity debate I would have wanted nothing to do with Christianity. I would have seen it as nothing but a group of mentally diseased men that love to argue and imagine they are better than each other.
So I have never understood that term "Straw Man" before.
Could you explain to me what that means? I have heard it before but hessitated to ask.
M
mamre
Guest
Hi 4given,
I have NEVER disputed the divinity or Godhood of Jesus Christ, the Son. You are reading that in it through your interpretation eyes. JESUS CHRIST IS GOD, THE SON.
What I have said is that there is not a an eternal blob of three divine persons that at times is one, at times is three.
Paul makes this extremely clear, just read the scripture without the eyes of interpretation and you will see:
1Cor.8:5-6
For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
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.
Breaking that down:
One God, the Father - We are commanded to worship One God, the Father.
of whom are all things - Everything comes and belongs to God the Father, including Jesus Christ the Son and the Holy Ghost.
One Lord, Jesus Christ - This God the Son, however, notice how Paul do use the word God for Jesus here on purpose.
by whom are all things - Jesus, was God before the earth was created. He had all the power given Him by the Father. Everything was created by Him with the power of the Father. He is the only name given by which we can go to the Father.
So we worship the only ONE TRUE GOD, THE FATHER, in the name of God the Son, and we do that in spirit, which means through God the Holy Ghost.
We cannot put God the Son above what He is. He is God the Son, God the Father is His father. Just read the scriptures.
You have a father here on earth don't you?. Can you be your own father? NO. But you can own and do everything your father does, albeit imperfectly. Can't you? Yes, because both of you are adult men.
Your father is a man and you are a man. Therefore you are coequal to your father, but you are not your father, you are another man who happens to be his son.
In the exact same way (because we are all in their likeness), the Father is God and the Son is God. Therefore they are coequal, but the Son is not the Father. Without the Father there wouldn't be anything, including Jesus and the Holy Ghost.
EVERYTHING COMES AND BELONGS TO THE FATHER, HE IS THE ONLY GOD WE SHOULD WORSHIP. 1Cor.8:5-6
All the other scriptures on this subject MUST agree with that one.
If you put Jesus and the Holy Ghost as the same as the Father you destroy what Paul explained. In other words you are being a polytheist, because you are worshiping three Gods even though you insist in saying they are one.
People invented trinity because they don't understand a simple father-son relationship between God the Father and God the Son.
Jesus has all that Father has, and He is perfect like His Father. Therefore, He can represent the Father PERFECTLY. He can even speak and act as if He was the Father, because He does strictly what the Father would do. They are in perfect harmony and Jesus comprehends the will of the father fully and perfectly so He can do what the Father would do. THUS, we humans, can worship Jesus, but in reality we are worshiping God the Father, because Jesus does ONLY what the Father has told Him to do. Read the scripture.
They are ONE. One in purpose, but the relationship among the Godhead is of Father and Son. That is what is in the scriptures. Read the scriptures. If are still in doubt, pray to God in the name of the Son, honestly, sincerely, with real intent. He will reveal this truth to you by the Holy Ghost.
Please don't take my word for it.
have a good day,
mamre
THe straw man argument is one were someone starts out there position by mistating the position of there apponents, and then moves on to disprove the mistated position throwing it into a negative light. That is not what is happening here, but that is what the OP is insinuating.
W
Who Says
Guest
Yes, thank you.
I also paused and looked it up at Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That is a good thing to be mindful of as the other person would be made feel unlistened to and some might perceive that as a subtle form of disrespect.
Knowing how scattered my brain is I would more often see it as having so many of my own thoughts bombing me to be able to consentrate clearly on anyone else's.
I am going to have to watch for that in me for a while and practice the mental discipline to keep myself from it.
It is natural that we all want to get our points at least heard. I suppose that sometimes we might force our own points at the expense of ignoring points that others are making.
For me, as I get older and physical disease takes its toll on my brain it makes it even more difficult.
But what do we do? Do we just give up trying?
It is good that love covers a multitude of sins (and imperfections).
Last edited by a moderator:
4
4given
Guest
I disagree with your religious assumption.
Either you tell us who the Father is... or declare that YHWH, is not God. Only then... you will have a basis of argument. You can NOT have it both ways.
The fact is, If you agree, that, it was the Son of God (YHWH) himself - not the invisible God Father - who physically made or formed man from the dust of the ground (Gen.2:7)... based on the Scripture... then, technically the Son is our Father in heaven... not the invisible God himself... the Father of YHWH.... whose name is not yet been revealed to anyone at this time.
Now, do you know the name of the invisible FATHER of whom you say he is your God?
I will be waiting for your answer. Thanks
John 8
54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.
Last edited by a moderator: