In the last days many will come in the name of Jesus and do miracles. They are false prophets. Read Mathew 24:23-26, 7:21-23. In the last days many will come in Jehovahs name. They are true prophets. Read Micah 4:5, 1-3, Isaiah 2:2-4. Even Jesus came in the name of Jehovah. Read John 5:41-44. Jesus prayed to Jehovah to safegaurd his disciples in Jehovahs name. Read John:17:11,12. So Jehovahs witnesses are true worshipers
Isaiah 53: a blow to trinity. Read the whole chapter. Verse 10 says Jehovah himself took delight in crushing him( Jesus). How can an almighty God crush another almighty God? Jesus did die. How can almighty God die? It will be contradictory to trinity.
@GeorgeRaymondMusic 1Timothy3:16 "God" was manifest in flesh. Before Jesus came, who is the incarnation of God, God was strictly Spirit. We are living in a different period then those that wrote Numbers 23:19 we are ahead of them now. This is the New Testament now where God has been revealed as a man named Jesus Christ that is the REVELATION now. Hence the book of REVELATION is all about the "REVELATION" of JESUS CHRIST. Man don't know this unless it's by Revelation from God.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday and today and forever.
He still is a man, he still is a prophet, still a servant, and he was glorified by GOD his Father, who he prayed to, and taught his disciples to pray to.
He called himself 'son of man' the same name as every other prophet.
@GeorgeRaymondMusic I AM NOT A TRINITARIAN U VIPER. THE LORD REBUKE U. I BELIEVE JESUS IS THE FATHER ALMIGHTY. Why did u delete ur post about Steven's prayer being only a vision? God have mercy on this man and come out of him u unclean spirit in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
@October31st1517 October, there is only 1 God, the Father. That is 1 Cor.8:6 to be God is to be the Father. Is 9:6 U need to receive Holy Spirit with stammering lips and the washing of the water with the word.
@October31st1517 Ps118:27 "God is the Lord, which hath shewed us light: bind the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar." 1 Ki18:39 " And when all the people saw it they fell on their faces; & they said, The LORD, he is the God; the LORD, he is the God." The prophets of baal were consumed in the next verse cuz they did not believe it. Do u not understand that God is the LORD? & the LORD, he is the God? Jesus is the LORD and the LORD, "HE" (singular) is the God.
@swenmanwwjd12 Jesus is God, but He is not God the Father. When you read John 17:5 do you see. "And now, O Jesus, glorify Jesus together with Jesus, with the glory which Jesus had with Jesus before the world was? Does that make sense to you?
@October31st1517 I've also heard it said, there is God the father, and God the mother. Because Adam and eve were made in the image of GOD,
It's just as rediculous as God being 3 persons, or Jesus being his own Father. Why don't you look at what God and Jesus say about themselves. God is not a man, Son is Born, a Father preexists a Son.
If it were not so, then Jesus would have said, "I am the Father of Myself", or, "I am the God almighty, the second in a three person GOD."
@October31st1517 If a person is God at all, then he is God the Father because there is no other God, that's 1 Cor8:6 (u clearly do not understand this verse, still!) It's no trouble for Jesus to be the mighty God & to be a man that's Rev22:16. It's no trouble for Him to be in heaven and on earth at the same time that's Jn3:13 and it's no trouble for Him to be His own Father, He is the one who told the pharisees that God was His own Father. Jn5:18. Literally God Fathered Himself
@October31st1517 U need to be real with me and answer my questions about who your "God the Father" is? Who is he october? And what is he like? (to you...) If you do not answer my question then I will take it as u can't answer it and you do not know God the Father.
@swenmanwwjd12 What do you mean be real? I am the one who holds to the biblical orthodox position. Your position on the other hand has been historically been Championed bu heretics such as Sabellius. The Father is the one who sent the Lord Jesus and who Jesus prayed to. (John 17:5) Jesus is NOT the Father. (John 14:10) Oneness Pentecostalism is a Johnny come lately group that was disfellowshipped by the assemblies of God. Would be willing to debate oneness on Pal-talk?
@October31st1517 The "Orthodox Church" is false. "History is written by those that have hanged heroes." A prime example is Michael Servetus & i read that the Lutheran church put up a memorial statue repenting of their sin of putting him to death cause he would not confess the trinitarian faith. The trinity has been murdering people in the name of "God" since it came out. I wanna know "who" ur "God the Father" is. "What" is he like as a person? Come on october dont u understand?
@October31st1517 It seems u cannot give an explanation of who the god u serve is? Or else u have deserted our dialogue? I'm not sure, but for those listening who have ears to hear, Gal 3:20 "Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one." The greek word here for the word "one" is "heis" which means "a primary numeral." This case has been closed long time ago.
@October31st1517 Not 2 lords October only 1 LORD. U don't know who the Father is. I say this to ur shame. If Jesus is not the Father and the Father is not Jesus, than who is the Father and what is he like? I know Jesus is the Father but I'm asking u who ur "Father" is. What is ur "Father" like? Please explain ur "God the Father."
@October31st1517 Yes i do know what the trinity teaches because i use to run with trinitarians but no longer do i run this race alongside them cuz they are eager to teach a lie. My allegiance is to the name of Jesus Christ now. I (like many), knew nothing else but the trinity, until I was baptized w the HSpirit w tongues. This experience made me distant from the trinities cuz they forbid tongues (most of them.) It didn't take me long to see that they were not approved of God.
Acts 7:55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; 56 and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Very simple, Jesus standing in honor at GODS right hand. Jesus NEXT TO GOD, revealed by the holy spirit, It was a vision, NOT a prayer. Same as Saul/Paul, and revelation of John.
Let us pray together 'Lord God Almighty, please throw away any knowledge I have that is contrary to your truth, please make me a pleasing creation to serve you, and to be counted worthy of your son Jesus, thankyou for your mercy, plz forgive my sins, plz keep me from trial, plzkeep me from the evil one, Lord God Almighty, Amen'
Plz know that the pharasies of Jesus day knew theyre scripture's, but were blind to the truth, humble yourself to GODS GRACE.
Jesus calls himself the serpent that Moses lifted up. The serpent that was lifted up was looked to for healing, not worshiped. For that would be Idolitory, would it not? Noone prays to Jesus in the bible. They see him in visions.
Are you your own father?
Jesus goes so far to say, "Why do you call me good? Noone is good but GOD"
Continually calling himself "son of man" which all the other prophets are called.
@GeorgeRaymondMusic Everyone in the bible who was and is saved from the beginning to the end prayed to Jesus. Like the trinitarians, all would come together for u if u would just piece together that Jesus Christ is the Father.
@swenmanwwjd12 Not once does anyone pray to JESUS, you sir are a liar. They always pray to GOD the FATHER. Jesus is not the FATHER, obviously. Jesus is the SON of the FATHER, He prayed to THE FATHER. GOD is the FATHER. ARE you your own FATHER? ARE you your own SON? This should be obvious... GOD is a FATHER.. JESUS is his SON. You are a deceived liar, JESUS submits to THE ONE TRUE GOD. Get out of the error of the ROMAN PAGAN CHURCH.
@GeorgeRaymondMusic U need to reconcile the fact that Jesus is called God and the Father in the bible read Isaiah 9:6 U r polytheistic just like trinitarians only they just add one more than u! To be the "Son" of the Father means to be the "image" of God u devil. The biblical definition of the "Son" is found in Hebrews 1:1-3 "...Who being the brightness of HIS!!! glory, AND the EXPRESS IMAGE OF HIS!!! PERSON!!!!" BEWARE THIS MAN IS JUST AS DEVILISH AS THE TRINITIES!
@GeorgeRaymondMusic Why did they worship Jesus in the bible?...So Jesus will accept worship but not prayer? I don't think so u serpent. What about ACTS 7:59 when Steven was stoned he "called upon God (prayed) and said LORD JESUS!! Receive my spirit!!"
Jn17:3 may not kill the trinity for some but it certainly does not confirm it.If the Son is the only true God in Jn17:3 is that not 1 person? How do you get 3 from that reasoning? Now if there are 2 distinct beings in Jn17:3 how do we get a trinity with 2? Do all trinitarians flunk math in high school? (1=1 adds up to 3?) (1+1=3?) (1Father + 1Son =3 persons?)
I'm sure if Jesus himself told trinitarians that he is not part of a trinity they would argue with him!What a spiritual perversion
@Scripturesinspired So we are supposed to simply look at John 17:3 and ignore the surrounding context? John 17:5 talks about the Glory that Jesus had with the Father from eternity. Also you are ASSUMING unitarianism. Can you show me from scripture that Monotheism is unitarianism? Also can you answer a math problem for me? 1x1x1=?
@October31st1517 no trinity formula from verse 5! it talks about the glory Jesus had along side his Father before the world was. Jesus simply talks about his pre-existence. Jesus is the first to receive life in heaven GN1:1 Jesus is the BEGINNING (#G746 Col 1:18) he was the first and only to leave heaven to be born human, he was the first-born from the dead to be resurrected back to heaven so that he is first in all things Col 1:18-20 He is not part of the theory of trinity!
@October31st1517 1x1x1 means that the 3rd number ONE here is the same exact number ONE as the FIRST number ONE and the second number one and the fourth and fifth and so on which means there was only one number to start with and that same one is at the end of the sequence. Now why would u stop at three here? Wow r u a little trinity bias? Like we can't tell? Jesus says He is the Alpha and Omega! The Beginning and the End.
@swenmanwwjd12 Exactly!! You just proved my point. The number 1 is speaking of God's BEING, not PERSONS. The reason I stop at 3 is because whatever it takes to be God, there are only 3 Persons in the bible who have it. The Father, The Son & the Holy Ghost. I cannot find a forth, so I stop at 3 being that the bible is my final authority.
@October31st1517 U r drastically polytheistic. God is a PERSON and a PERSON is a BEING. That's why we r called HUMAN BEINGS and u must confess that God became a human being or else u r antichrist 1Jn4:3/1Tim3:16 U r so deceived by thinking that 3 PEOPLE can be "ONE" GOD. The word "ONE" does not mean "UNITY" or else the scripture would say Hear O Israel the Lord our God is a UNIFIED God but it doesn't say that it says the Lord our God is "ONE" LORD. So there's only 1 case closed.
@October31st1517 I didn't prove none of ur false doctrine. Did u know that the bible says christians are "partakers of the divine nature...?" 2Pet1:4? Now would that make thousands of persons in the godhead? No! There r not 3 people in the bible that have "whatever it takes to be God" like u say. There is only 1 person who has "IT" and He has ALL of "IT" WITHOUT "MEASURE" Jn3:34/Col1:19 & 2:9
@October31st1517 Ur reasoning is like taking pictures of someones life and saying that the person in the picture taken in the middle of the persons life is a different person then the person in the picture taken at the beginning and end.of the persons life.
Just ask yourself this. If there is only one true God, and Jesus is not it, then is he a false God? Becasue that is the only alternative. If he is a "God in another context" from the Father, he must be a false god according to your view
Everytime I ask this question some wise guy decides to flag it as spam. Instead of doing so, why not attempt to provide an answer. Is Jesus the true God or a false God?
@BauerPower247@BauerPower247 But he did not. Neither Jesus nor Paul nor any other place in scriptures express the oneness of God in a Triun sense in their explicit statements. Rather every time, it is always expressed in the context of singularity of personhood.
"If there is only one true God, and Jesus is not it, then is he a false God?"
No so my friend. Jesus is called "God" from an expressive and qualitative context of the invisible Father's infinite qualities of deity.--continued
@BauerPower247 & not from the infinite quantitative context attributed to the Father alone. Saying the Father alone as the Only True God or the One God simple acknowledges the unique context in which the Father ALONE is said to be God Almighty. The Son is a derivation from this infinite substance of the one God who is the Father in a lesser form and it is with this understanding that the Father ALONE is accorded being the ONLY true God or the one God. From him are all things including the Son
@BauerPower247 This does not necessarily make Jesus a false God. It just simply means that he is seen as "God" in other contexts distinct from the unique context in which the Father is said to be God. Ask the Spirit to give u understanding friend rather than hold on to a mechanically contrived idea of a Triun one God.
"Is Jesus the true God or a false God?"
Again you need to pray that the the Lord gives you a true revelation of the mystery of the Father and his Son. Your question--contd
@BauerPower247 reflects a lack in discerning context and that is where your whole problem lies. Now let me bring it home with something we may better appreciate. If for example the President of a nation takes ill and he cannot dispense his duties and the vice president temporarily deputizes for him and acts in the office of "Temporary president", The simple fact is that we know the vice is not the True President but this does not make the vice president a false president either. Its that simple
@BauerPower247 And so the vice is just simply a "President" in a temporary capacity and this is why it could be said that he is not the true president & not because he must then necessarily be a false president according to you equation. The understanding from this analogy is no different from when Jesus excludes himself and calls the Father "the ONLY true God". This does not necessarily make Jesus a false God any more than the temporary president is a false president. Context my friend is key
The simple point which Trinitarians fail to see is that the explicit verses of Scriptures that define the context in which God is said to be one is clearly in terms of singularity of being/person vested in the Father. The argument that we have to infer the one God being three persons from the totality of scriptures is imposing, subjective, and subject to implicit verses of scriptures subject to much controversial interpretation. In the end, the explicit scriptures must settle the issue.
It is clear when Paul says that there are many so called gods, then goes on to "say but to us there is ONE GOD.." that he was distinguishing the many "gods" with the only god (our God) in an absolute sense. To be consistent then when Paul also says that there are many so called Lords and goes on to say that to us there is "ONE LORD..." he was also distinguishing between the many "lords" and the only Lord (Our Lord) in an absloute sense not a qualified sense. Cont'd...
The unitarian knows that there is a problem with using this verse as a proof text against the deity Christ. That is why they will often say that consistency does not matter. They apply two different standards to this verse - ONE GOD = the only God and Jesus is not God, but ONE LORD means that there are really two Lords (Father and Jesus), Paul is just refering to the ONE LORD in a different sense.
There is no justification for this inconsistency. Cont'd...
@BauerPower247 "The unitarian knows that there is a problem with using this verse as a proof text against the deity Christ." No it is not a text against the deity of Christ. It is one against Trinity conjecture that Jesus AS A DISTINCT PERSON is the one God in the same context and Capacity said of the Father in 1 cor 8:6. 1 cor 8:6 does not deny the deity of Jesus Christ in other contexts. It denies the deity in the context of being the one God in the unique context attributed to the Father.
Paul does not use any language that indicates that his use of the word "one" has different meanings when applied to God (Theos) and Lord (Kurios). It is your theology that forces you to this belief. All verbal and theological gymnastics aside, from a unitarian view, If you belive that The Father as the ONE GOD means Jesus is not God, then you must accept that Jesus as the ONE LORD means the Father is not Lord. Do you accept this?
@BauerPower247 "Paul does not use any language that indicates that his use of the word "one" has different meanings when applied to God (Theos) and Lord (Kurios)"
Again you are the one who has consistently failed to understand that the Father is beyond being our Lord in the context of 1 cor 8:6. He is our one God. The letter kills. It is the Spirit that gives understanding. So in this regard there are not two Lords. Paul is saying that we have one God who is the Father & one Master who is Jesus
@BauerPower247 "from a unitarian view, If you belive that The Father as the ONE GOD means Jesus is not God, then you must accept that Jesus as the ONE LORD means the Father is not Lord. Do you accept this?"
one with a mechanical understanding of the scriptures without the spirit give life to it can come to such conclusion. Again the premise of your statement is completely founded on an erroneous idea of what 'Kuros' translated as Lord mean in the context of 1 cor 8:6. --contd
@BauerPower247 An analogy that would closely address this reality will be one using Pharaoh and Joseph. We could say in context that Joseph was made the ONLY ONE Lord (master) over all in Egypt by Pharoah himself. So to the Egyptian, he had only one Lord from which he received his instructions and that was Joseph. Pharoah on the other hand who made Joshep Lord was beyond being the Lord (master) to the Egyptians. he would be their "god" in context. Not a perfect analogy but it shows the point.
@BauerPower247 Therefore the context in which Paul states that Jesus is our one Lord is also in the light of the analogy of Pharoah and Joseph. God the Father made ONLY Jesus Christ Lord over all in heaven and earth and it is this regard Paul speaks of him as our ONE Lord. God the Father on the other hand is beyond this context of Lordship. As LORD, it is in the context of his being our God that the Father is said to be LORD. It is the Spirit that gives understanding and not the letter.
@BauerPower247 Hence when David said "The LORD said unto My Lord" David was not just conflating the issues here. David spoke about them in two different contexts just as would be also discerned in 1 cor 8:6. David was not saying my LORD said unto My LORD or The LORD said unto The LORD in a manner to bring about some Trinitarian Jargon that equivocate the contexts. He said The LORD (God) said unto my Lord (my master). In other words "The Lord God said unto My master, sit on my right hand..."
@BauerPower247 And the simple point to be understood here is that even if the same expression may be used in reference to two people, the contexts of using the same Word could be different as we see in the case of Artaxerses being called king of kings. Therefore when Jesus is called "Theos" or "Kurios" it does not necessarily mean it is in the same context of being the one God as is uniquely said of the Father. It is that simple friend. No gymnastics here. Just simple understanding of context.
KYRIOS/Kuros (Translated as Lord) does not necessarily mean God as wold be clearly seen from the Greek applications: a) the possessor and disposer of a thing
1) the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
2) in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
b) is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet
@October31st1517 Jesus, the SON of God. To you, God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit! So...Jesus is the Son of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Oops! Epic fail!
@October31st1517 So Jesus is just the Son of the Father then? How can He be the Son of God? BTW, I used to be a Trinitarian until I learned how ridiculous it was. Feel free to ask me questions though in regards to certain topics that may seem confusing at times. Let's come to the truth on this matter.
@Danielezerable Coeect, Jesus is God, But He is NOT God the Fathe or God the Holy Ghost. If you are a fomer trinitarian you should be familiar with the creeds?
@October31st1517 Yes, I am. One God. Jesus is God, Father is God, Holy Spirit is God. All sharing one substance. I have looked up on the Council of Nicaea and they were actually reluctant to embrace homoousianism (same substance which explains Trinity) because it was condemned by the early church as Gnostic. I am sorry if I have called you a Hell-bound heretic but it is something important to know about the nature of God for salvation. I will send you a link on this subject.
@October31st1517 Romans 9:5 is not necessarily calling Jesus God in the same way the Father is. And remember, Arians do NOT deny the divinity OR Deity of Christ! You are a lying Hell-bound heretic!
Just a general comment to the person who consistently flags my comments as spam. Pease grow up! I've found a number of comments that were not spam at all and yet they were flaggd as such. I'm going to guess that this message will get flagged as spam also. Hopefully the "spam flagger" will at least read this first and get the message. Don't go around flagging messages as spam simply because you do not agree with the comments. Thank you!
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Mark 10:18. Why Did not Jesus answer this man as God Himself!!
By saying "men are mortal...." there is still a possibility for women to be mortal too. Therefore, to say women are not mortal (because they're not men), is potentially a logical fallacy. I say potential because the statement alone does not completely clarify who women are.
However, if I said, "Men are the ONLY mortals.. And, women are not men. Therefore, women are not mortals." That is not a logical fallacy. There is no potential for women to be mortal.
You could logically say that Jesus is not God if you add one more premise in there: The only true God is only one person. The word 'Only' modifies the phrase ''true God.' It does not modify 'Father.'
@Icepine "If I said the Father is God....and Jesus isn't the Father...therefore, Jesus isn't God. That would potentially be a logically fallacy.
However, if I said the Father is the ONLY true God, I can logically say, therefore, Jesus is not God because he is not the Father. "
Awesome. The guy who spoke in this video tried to use so many distracting gymnastics to evade this fact. But you have nicely hit the nail on the head by distinguishing between the fallacy of his argument and scriptures
@2222pauline You're violating a principal of bible study. If the context stopped in verse 9 you might have a point. However in Verse 10 our Lord goes on to say: "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" Notice, Jesus never said "I AM THE FATHER". If Jesus were truly God the Father why did He say that the FATHER IS IN ME rather than I AM THE FATHER? Context!
@October31st1517 Jesus=Arianism! Arians NEVER deny the Deity of Christ! That is a LIE from the PIT OF HELL! Newton NEVER denied the Deity OR divinity of Christ! Jehovah's Witnesses, who believe Jesus to be archangel Michael (which I personally think is ridiculous myself even though I have come to the truth that Arius was right and that Trinitarians are lost sheep) don't even deny the divinity of Christ! You are a LIAR who MISREPRESENTS ARIANISM! Hell-bound heretic!
@October31st1517 Eternal life is given through the Son. Jesus is an excellent teacher. If He wanted to people to know He was God He would have said: "I am God, worship me!" Trinity=FALSE! Newton and Arius are correct. Trinity is abomination of desolation!
@October31st1517 To understand, to perceive! Lol, good one. I bet you can't even understand your Trinity doctrine so therefore, you have no eternal life. Hell-bound heretic.
@October31st1517 John 17:1-3 Let's see who Jesus is praying to! :) Remember, this determines if you are going to Hell or going to heaven!
After saying all these things, Jesus looked up to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son so he can give glory back to you. For you have given him authority over everyone. He gives eternal life to each one you have given him.
@October31st1517 '' Excellent point. So you can see the logical fallicy that unitarians are faced with when they use John 17:3 to say that Jesus is not God.''
I think you have completely missed icepine's point. Icepine's comments show that the Unitarian argument is valid and that the Trinitarian rebuttal is invalid-because the fact that the Father is said to be the ONLY true God excludes Jesus from being that same ONLY true God IF HE IS NOT THE FATHER in any way or context.
You missed the point of the video. Does the word ONLY modify "Father" or does it modify "True God?" If "only" modifies Father, then the unitarian argument would be valid. Consider the following example - (1) John is only German. (2) Only John is German
Placing the word "only" before John (and thus modifying John) gives you a different meaning than placing the word only after John (modifying his nationality).
@BauerPower247 The Analogy you gave using 1) John is only German does not reflect the fact of John 17:3. In your analogy you left out a very crucial word which is the definite article "the". Hence there's a difference in saying "John is only German" & "John is THE only German". The latter excludes anyone else who is not John from being German in the context of the statement. Likewise "YOU (the Father), THE ONLY true God excludes anyone else who is not the Father from being the True God-contd
The problem here is the unitarian assumption that THE ONLY TRUE GOD is only one person. If there is a premise in the bible that states explicitly or alludes to this implicitly (and there is none), then calling the Father the ONLY true God would exclude Jesus. I should have stated that Any analogy used of mankind will fall short because the infinite God is intricate in his nature and cannot be likened to finite man. Cont'd...
@BauerPower247 "If there is a premise in the bible that states explicitly or alludes to this implicitly (and there is none), then calling the Father the ONLY true God would exclude Jesus."
Yes the mystery of this which was beyond grasp to those at the Nicea Council is that even though Jesus is called God, there is a unique context of Godhood which the scriptures attribute to the Father alone. And in this regard, Jesus is not that one God. Now u objectively consider this for a moment--contd
@BauerPower247 If the Trinity doctrine were true, we ought to have seen direct explicit statements in the bible ascertaining this fact. Eg, Jesus could have easily said: "This is eternal life, that they may know US and the Holy Spirit, the only True God". Jesus had presence of mind and understood this unique context of Godhood attributed to the Father hence he said "That they may know YOU (Singular), the ONLY (exclusive) true God AND (excluding himself in this context) Jesus.." contd
"If the Trinity doctrine were true, we ought to have seen direct explicit statements in the bible ascertaining this fact."
I completely disagree. First, God reveals himself to us how he chooses, not how we expect or want him to. Second, when you take all of scripture in its entirety, it is clear that the the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all identified as God. Each of them poses attributes that belong ONLY TO THE ONE TRUE GOD. Cont'd...
@BauerPower247 RE: "If the Trinity doctrine were true, we ought to have seen direct explicit statements in the bible ascertaining this fact."
"I completely disagree. First, God reveals himself to us how he chooses"
True but what God reveals does not also contradict the explicit declarations of the scriptures. The Trinity does. That is why it's "revelation" MUST be rejected.
Secondly, as I told you, implicit inferences are subject to controversial interpretations so we need the explicits.
@BauerPower247 For example, it is futile for a Trinitarian to begin to use verses such as Gen 1:26 "Let us make man" to prove the Trinity because even the JWs also believe in Gen 1:26 and cannot see a Trinity there. Neither should a verse that simply mentions Father, Son, and Holy Spirit be sufficient to prove a Trinity doctrine as virtually every professing Christian believes in Father, Son, And Holy Spirit. However, it is when these are identified and the relationships are properly defined-con
@BauerPower247 ..that we can ascertain the true scriptural revelation
"it is clear that the the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all identified as God."
Yes but this does not prove "Three coequal persons being one God". Someone can be the president of a country while another can also be the president of a committee. Of course they are both presidents in different contexts. This does not necessarily make them jointly one president in the same capacity and context. So this argument is moot.
@BauerPower247 Therefore John 17:3 is not a Unitarian assumption. It is a very clear and direct explicit statement that attributes Godhood to the Father ALONE in a particular context that does not apply to Jesus or any other. The reason Why Trinitarians and some oneness grapple with such plain scriptures as John 17:3 is that they have failed to discern that the term "God" is a translation which has so many contextual meanings other than God Almighty when understood from the Original texts.
"That they may know YOU (Singular), the ONLY (exclusive) true God AND (excluding himself in this context) Jesus.."
Again, does the phrase "THE ONLY" modify "father" or "True God" Because if it modifies Father, then an argument can be made that Jesus was excluding himself. To reitarate the point I made before, it is not sufficient to identify one person (the Father) as the only true God. You have to demonstrate that the only True God is limited to only one person.
@BauerPower247 "Again, does the phrase "THE ONLY" modify "father" or "True God" Because if it modifies Father, then an argument can be made that Jesus was excluding himself."
What do you mean by "modify father"? please explain. And then answer this and objectively interpret this statement.
If James James says to John:
"John, freedom means voting for you, the only true president & I who would assist you"
Would James be excluding himself from being true president from this statement?
"you are the one who has consistently failed to understand that the Father is beyond being our Lord in the context of 1 cor 8:6."
Tell me how the Father can be beyond being our Lord in the context of Cor 8:6 when he is mentioned in the very same verse that contrasts the many socalled lords with Our One Lord. To be consistent then, Jesus must be beyond being our God in the context of the very same verse. I fail to see how the context suddenly switches right... Cont'd
@BauerPower247@BauerPower247 "Tell me how the Father can be beyond being our Lord in the context of Cor 8:6 when he is mentioned in the very same verse that contrasts the many socalled lords with Our One Lord."
I have clearly explained this even using the analogy with Joseph and Pharaoh which you reject .Therefore there is no other kind of explanation that would satisfy you. The essence of the analogy with Pharaoh and Joseph clearly explains the point. Simple common sense would clearly-contd
@BauerPower247 Show that your interpretation of 1 cor 8:6 is nonsensical and false because Paul could not have just been repeating himself regarding "theos" and ""kuros" by interpreting them to both mean "God". Paul could not have been saying "...To us we have one Theos (God), the Father and one God (kuros), Jesus Christ. That is your interpretation which makes no sense at all. What I have tried to help you see is that Paul wanted us to understand the distinction between God and Lord--contd
@BauerPower247 And that was why he distinguished the Father as One God and the Son as one Lord. They do not mean the same thing. We have one God, the Father, and one master, Jesus Christ-not one God, the Father and one God, the Lord Jesus Christ which is your nonsensical interpretation of the text. Paul could have easily said: We have one God, the Father, & one God Jesus Christ if he wanted to vindicated your Trinitarian interpretation of 1 cor 8:6. However he deliberately made a distinction-ctd
@BauerPower247 When I say the Father is beyond being our one Lord, I simply point to the fact that the Father is beyond being a master to us which is the specific context of Jesus being called our one Lord (kuros) in that verse. The Father is our one God and more than a master to us. If you choose to free yourself from the Trinitarian impositions and just consider the simplicity of scriptures, you would grasp the essence of what I am saying. Now consider this with a very objective answer--contd
@BauerPower247 "to be consistent then, Jesus must be beyond being our God in the context of the very same verse. I fail to see how the context suddenly switches right.."
The context does no switch. You just do not understand the essence of the distinction between "God" and "Lord" in 1 cor 8:6. It is very simple. in a state and country, a person has a governor and then an overall president. The fact that both the gov and president are both leaders of the people doesn't make the gov President
@BauerPower247 So in the reign of Bush for example, a Californian could have said: "But to us we have one governor, Arnold & one President, Bush. Of course Bush could be seen in another context as the "governor" of the entire country but we know that he is not the one governor of the state in the specific context in which the person speaks. Just as is the case with the Father, George bush is beyond being governor-he is also PRESIDENT. But Arnold is simply the one governor & not President at all
Your example of James and John regarding James being the the only true president is not analogous to the triune God. Again, you are taking limited finite beings and trying to compare them to an infinite almighty God. To whom can you compare God (Isa 40:18)?
If "ONLY" modified "Father", it would apply specifically and be exclusive to the Father thus exclude everyone who is not the Father. As stated in the video, Jesus does not say ONLY THE FATHER is the TRUE GOD, Rather he says the Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD. Eliminate the unitarian assumption that ONLY TRUE GOD is one person and you will see that Jesus was not excluding himself.
@BauerPower247 "As stated in the video, Jesus does not say ONLY THE FATHER is the TRUE GOD,"
LOL. I have heard this argument before which is simply just meaningless gymnastics that avoid the reality that a sentence could be rephrased in so many ways and still mean the same thing. So for example the statement: "John, the ONLY green man in the world" and "ONLY John is the green man in the world" mean exactly the same thing in the sense that there's no other black man in the room apart from John
@BauerPower247 Therefore it does not matter whether the only appears before John or before green man. The simple fact is that ONLY speaks or exclusivity and in this respect singles out only ONE PERSON. Likewise. "The Father is the ONLY true God' and "ONLY the Father is the true God" mean exactly the same thing.
So according to you they mean different things. Please explain clearly the difference between the two statements--contd
1) Being the only one; single and isolated from others
"an only child"
2) Exclusive of anyone or anything else
"I'll have this car and this car only"
So when Jesus says of the Father "..YOU, the ONLY true God", no amount of Trinitarian gymnastics will ever change the fact that the Father ALONE is the true God in the same unique context Paul spoke of the Father as being the 1 God. Jesus could have easily said "know US and the Holy Spirit, the only true God"
A point I made in a previous post in this video: Personal Pronouns with reference to God such as MY God or OUR God are only used of the One true God. Can you find any examples in scripture where believers refer to anyone other than the One True God as MY GOD or OUR GOD. If you believe in other gods, but only have one true God, you can only call that one true God MY GOD. To refer to another god as MY GOD would be polytheism.
@BauerPower247 "Personal Pronouns with reference to God such as MY God or OUR God are only used of the One true God. Can you find any examples in scripture where believers refer to anyone other than the One True God as MY GOD or OUR GOD"
Now if a modalist or a oneness made this argument, he would be 100% justified. But a Trinitarian cannot make this argument by any stretch of imagination as there are so many problems that bedevil this point from a Trinitarian perspective.--continued
@BauerPower247 The verse which I think you are basing this argument on is John 20:28
And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
However, this was an exclamatory remark from Thomas having come to terms with the reality of the risen Jesus. An exclamation from one of the disciples of Christ should never be used as doctrinal teachings of the scriptures. And besides this even if we agree to the other side of the argument that Thomas called Jesus my Lord and my God, --contd
@BauerPower247 This will still be a very big problem for Trinitarians. Why? Now If Thomas called Jesus Lord and God, it would then mean that Jesus is both the Father and the Son because the scriptures are explicitly lucid that we have one God, the Father and one Lord, Jesus Christ. Like I stated before, this will go well with a modalist argument but never with a Trinitarian argument because the Trinitarian argument is that Jesus Christ even as a distinct person from the Father is God almighty
@BauerPower247 So many troubling questions arise for the Trinitarian. eg when Thomas called Jesus "my God" did he mean Jesus was God, the Father? of course the Trinitarian will say no. But Alas Jesus clearly told Thomas that he was ascending to his (Jesus) God and Thomas' God (The Father). This would then also mean that Jesus is his own God and his own Father because Jesus was ascending to Thomas' God who also happened to be Jesus' God. How do you address this my friend?--contd
@BauerPower247 So we know by comparing scriptures that the Trinitarian interpretation of John 20:28 is in error as it would mean that Thomas had two Gods of which one (the Father) is the God to the other God (the son) .Saying that they're "one God" neither resolves the problem orn addresses the reality of the Trinitarian confusion bcos Jesus said the Father was his God and not that they were jointly one God. :) So even if we were to go by the other argument that Thomas called Jesus "my God"-con
@BauerPower247 Such an argument can only be justifiably and meaningfully made ONLY in the light of the oneness view and NEVER in the light of the Trinitarian view. Except of course the Trinitarian is ready to admit that since Jesus is God and he is a distinct person from the Father who is also God, then they are two God who unite as one God. And that Thomas had two distinct Gods of which one was the one in John 20:28 and the other God was the God of his first God in John 20.28.
I reject the analogy with Pharaoh and Joseph because it does not reflect at all what Paul is talking about in 1 Cor 1:8. It is only used as a means of justifying a gross inconsistency that requires unitarians to apply double standards to the same verse. No where does Paul even hint at this kind of structure. You have to read a lot into this verse to make it compatible with the Joseph/Pharaoh analogy. Cont'd
@BauerPower247 "I reject the analogy with Pharaoh and Joseph because it does not reflect at all what Paul is talking about in 1 Cor 1:8. It is only used as a means of justifying a gross inconsistency that requires unitarians to apply double standards to the same verse."
We can just agree to disagree on this one since u reject the Pharoah/Joseph analogy.There is no Unitarian inconsistency.The problem is that you fail to discern the contextual distinction between "Theos" and "kuros" in 1cor 8:6
@BauerPower247 and you somewhat think that Paul was just repeating himself which ultimately translates your position to mean "We have one God the Father and one God Jesus Christ". This is meaningless. If your view was correct, Paul could have easily said it like that or said "to us there is but one God and Lord, the Father from whom are all things, and one God and Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things." Rather Paul deliberately distinguished them as "God (theos)" and "Lord (kuros-master)"
Consider what you are suggesting Paul is actually saying in 1 Cor 1:8 - But to us there is One God [and supreme Lord] the Father... and One [delegated] Lord Jesus Christ. Now read 1 Cor 1:8 and tell me if these two statements come anywhere close to resembling each other.
There is nothing non sensicle about the trinitarian interpretation of 1 Cor 8:6. It is only non-sensicle when one assumes unitarianism.
@BauerPower247 "Consider what you are suggesting Paul is actually saying in 1 Cor 1:8 - But to us there is One God [and supreme Lord] the Father... and One [delegated] Lord Jesus Christ."
No, you are misconstruing the main essence of what I am saying. Paul did not call the Father "Lord" in that verse at all. The simple essence is to declare that we have one God (who is the Father) and one master, (who is Jesus Christ) There is not a single verse of scriptures that jointly place or declare-cont
@BauerPower247 Jesus and the Father as jointly being one God-none whatsoever, In fact your Trinitarian interpretation of 1 cor 8:6 is glaringly flawed on two clear accounts. 1) The Holy Spirit is not even mentioned at all in that verse where Paul clearly declared the one God. 2) Eph 4:6 clearly gives credence to my interpretation of 1 cor 8:6 (which defines One God in context of 1 person) & invalidates yours. Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Paul was not repeating himself, he was including both the Father and the Son as the One God using both terms of Deity (Lord and God). Again, these two terms are used interchangeably throughout scripture. You bring up a very interesting point about why Paul distinguishes between the Two. First, keep in mind that the ONE GOD is not just our Lord, but our ONE LORD. So it makes no sense to say that Jesus is our ONE LORD in a differnt sense or context than the Father.
One point that is so often overlooked in 1 Cor 8:6 is what Paul says about the Father and the Son and how all things came about. ..."God the Father FROM whom all things came...Lord Jesus Christ THROUGH whom all things came..." Now consider Romans 11:36 where it clearly states about God that "FROM him and THROUGH him and to him are all things.
GOD - All things are FROM him and THROUGH him
Now let's look at this while distinguishing between the Father and Son as 1 God cont'd
Now let's look at this while distinguishing between the Father and Son as 1 God cont'd
GOD - All things are FROM (the Father) and THROUGH (Jesus)
Romans 11:36 is only one example of the verses that differentiate between the role of the Father and Son in creation. You see there is a distinction between the two not becasue they are two separate gods, but because they are 2 different persons as the ONE GOD.
@BauerPower247 The issue you brought up about all things being FROM the Father and all things THROUGH the Son is not relevant to the argument and not that it is being overlooked. We require explicit verses from the scriptures that clearly reveal God being one in the context of three persons-not inferences superimposed by Trinitarians. A Jehovah's witness for example will tell you that God first created Jesus and then used Jesus to create every other thing when he interprets those verses.--contd
@BauerPower247 It is for this kind of reason we need direct and clear scriptures that reflect our positions. We cannot continue to make arguments based on imposed assumptions or else we can never proceed meaningfully. The bone of contention here is: When the scriptures declare that God is one, does it clearly declare this in a context of one unique person or in the context of three coequal persons. I argue (and have shown clearly from explicit verses) that the former is the case.
@BauerPower247 It is for this kind of reason we need direct and clear scriptures that reflect our positions. We cannot continue to make arguments based on imposed assumptions or else we can never proceed meaningfully. The bone of contention here is: When the scriptures declare that God is one, does it clearly declare this in a context of one unique person or in the context of three coequal persons. I argue (and have shown clearly from explicit verses) that the former is the case.
First, let me just re-explain what the trinitarian teaching is. Within the one being that is God, there simultaneously exists three coequal and co-eternal persons, Father, Son and Spirit. Your critiques are only relevant to the oneness position (i.e. modalism) and have no relevance to the Trinitarian position since trinitarianism doe not profess that all three are the same person. Jesus is not the Father and vice versa. You are still assuming unitarianism.
@BauerPower247 "First, let me just re-explain what the trinitarian teaching is. Within the one being that is God, there simultaneously exists three coequal and co-eternal persons, Father, Son and Spirit."
& I am saying that not only are there no scriptural texts at all for this declaration (besides imposed inferences from Trinitarians), 1 cor 8;6 and Eph 4:6 clearly contradict & therefore invalidates this conjecture. This argument is relevant to both the Trinitarian and some Oneness positions
Your arguments about Jesus beig called Lord and God in a different "context" than the Father actually has nothing to do with context, but theology. Your argument simply goes like this: "The Father is God, therefore Jesus cannot be God in the same sense." Such argumentation is circular and relies on a unitarian view of the One Triune God. Whether you accept trinitarianism or not, assuming it were true, this argument would fall flat on its face.
And Yes Jesus was "made" Lord. But your interpretation of that is problematic. First, the text says that Jesus was made Lord and Christ after his resurection, but he was clearly both of these prior to his resurection. Both John the Babtist and Peter affirmed this (that he is Lord and Christ) while he was alive. Second, Jesus was always Lord. As per Phil 2:6, Jesus voluntarily took on the nature of a servant ... cont'd
@BauerPower247 "And Yes Jesus was "made" Lord. But your interpretation of that is problematic. First, the text says that Jesus was made Lord and Christ after his resurection, but he was clearly both of these prior to his resurection."
Interestingly it is your position that this poses problems for. Please explain how Jesus was made Lord and Christ. Since you interpret "lord" in 1 cor 8:6 to mean "God". So does this mean that Jesus was made God and Christ? I want you to address this question.
giving up the divine perogatives he had by humbling himself and becoming made in the likeness of man. He put himself in the position where he was subject to the Father would have to be exalted and glofified. Remember, Jesus had two natures, human and divine. Those that Deny Christ's deity quote a lot of scriptures that deal with his Humanity (e.g. John 14:28) but often sidestep, ignore or attempt to explain away scripture dealing with his deity (e.g. John 5:18).
@BauerPower247 "Those that Deny Christ's deity quote a lot of scriptures that deal with his Humanity (e.g. John 14:28) but often sidestep, ignore or attempt to explain away scripture dealing with his deity (e.g. John 5:18)."
I do not deny the deity of Jesus Christ in it's proper context. It is simply denied in the context which relates to the Father alone as the infinite ONE GOD. Jesus acknowledged this context when he called the Father "the ONLY true God" but u grapple with this simple fact
@BauerPower247 (con) because of your Trinitarian impositions. Regarding John 14:28, Jesus never said "My Father is greater than my human nature but I am coequal in divine nature". He simply said "My Father is greater than I". "I" represents all that a person is and not some selective part or nature of the person. In other words, Jesus was saying "All that the Father is is greater than All that the Son is" Trinitarians impose a partial inferiority doctrine in order to avoid this reality.--contd
@ojaymon So because Jesus said the Father was greater than He, that makes Him a lower form of life? "for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues" Does this mean that he who speaks in tongues is a lower form of life than he who prophesies? Of course not. In OFFICE the Father is greater, in NATURE they are equal.
@BauerPower247 I see a lot of Trinitarian gymnastics with this human and divine nature thing. When it suits them, they interpret Jesus statement using "I" as his human nature and at other times, they say, it is his divine nature. I have addressed John 5:18 before. So tell me this verse your brought up-Jesus saying God was his Father (making himself equal with God). Was it his human nature speaking or his divine nature? Then now that Jesus has ascended, why does he still call the Father his God?
@BauerPower247 I see a lot of Trinitarian gymnastics with this human and divine nature thing. When it suits them, they interpret Jesus statement using "I" as his human nature and at other times, they say, it is his divine nature. I have addressed John 5:18 before. So tell me this verse your brought up-Jesus saying God was his Fat
In the last days many will come in the name of Jesus and do miracles. They are false prophets. Read Mathew 24:23-26, 7:21-23. In the last days many will come in Jehovahs name. They are true prophets. Read Micah 4:5, 1-3, Isaiah 2:2-4. Even Jesus came in the name of Jehovah. Read John 5:41-44. Jesus prayed to Jehovah to safegaurd his disciples in Jehovahs name. Read John:17:11,12. So Jehovahs witnesses are true worshipers
jwindian23 18 hours ago
Isaiah 53: a blow to trinity. Read the whole chapter. Verse 10 says Jehovah himself took delight in crushing him( Jesus). How can an almighty God crush another almighty God? Jesus did die. How can almighty God die? It will be contradictory to trinity.
jwindian23 18 hours ago
Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man
GeorgeRaymondMusic 2 weeks ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic However God Became a man. (John 1:1-14)
October31st1517 1 week ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic 1Timothy3:16 "God" was manifest in flesh. Before Jesus came, who is the incarnation of God, God was strictly Spirit. We are living in a different period then those that wrote Numbers 23:19 we are ahead of them now. This is the New Testament now where God has been revealed as a man named Jesus Christ that is the REVELATION now. Hence the book of REVELATION is all about the "REVELATION" of JESUS CHRIST. Man don't know this unless it's by Revelation from God.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday and today and forever.
He still is a man, he still is a prophet, still a servant, and he was glorified by GOD his Father, who he prayed to, and taught his disciples to pray to.
He called himself 'son of man' the same name as every other prophet.
Time and again GOD puts to death the trinity.
Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man
Time to leave the ROMAN PAGAN CHURCH
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic I AM NOT A TRINITARIAN U VIPER. THE LORD REBUKE U. I BELIEVE JESUS IS THE FATHER ALMIGHTY. Why did u delete ur post about Steven's prayer being only a vision? God have mercy on this man and come out of him u unclean spirit in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 You need to repent. Where in the bible does it call Jesus the Father. Make sure you answer this question carefully.
October31st1517 1 week ago
@October31st1517 October, there is only 1 God, the Father. That is 1 Cor.8:6 to be God is to be the Father. Is 9:6 U need to receive Holy Spirit with stammering lips and the washing of the water with the word.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 1 Cor 8:6 also says there is 1 Lord Jesus Christ, are you going to say Jehovah is not the 1 lord? Context my friend.
October31st1517 1 week ago
@October31st1517 Ps118:27 "God is the Lord, which hath shewed us light: bind the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar." 1 Ki18:39 " And when all the people saw it they fell on their faces; & they said, The LORD, he is the God; the LORD, he is the God." The prophets of baal were consumed in the next verse cuz they did not believe it. Do u not understand that God is the LORD? & the LORD, he is the God? Jesus is the LORD and the LORD, "HE" (singular) is the God.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 So the Father can be called Lord just like the Son. So the Son can be called God just like the Father. Got it.
October31st1517 1 week ago
@October31st1517 Yeah, I got it. The Son can be called God just like the Father because He is the Father.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 Jesus is God, but He is not God the Father. When you read John 17:5 do you see. "And now, O Jesus, glorify Jesus together with Jesus, with the glory which Jesus had with Jesus before the world was? Does that make sense to you?
October31st1517 1 week ago
@October31st1517 I've also heard it said, there is God the father, and God the mother. Because Adam and eve were made in the image of GOD,
It's just as rediculous as God being 3 persons, or Jesus being his own Father. Why don't you look at what God and Jesus say about themselves. God is not a man, Son is Born, a Father preexists a Son.
If it were not so, then Jesus would have said, "I am the Father of Myself", or, "I am the God almighty, the second in a three person GOD."
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic Answer my question
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 i did answer, look down, Acts 7:55-56
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic that was intended for october
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic sorry that reply was for october the host.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@October31st1517 If a person is God at all, then he is God the Father because there is no other God, that's 1 Cor8:6 (u clearly do not understand this verse, still!) It's no trouble for Jesus to be the mighty God & to be a man that's Rev22:16. It's no trouble for Him to be in heaven and on earth at the same time that's Jn3:13 and it's no trouble for Him to be His own Father, He is the one who told the pharisees that God was His own Father. Jn5:18. Literally God Fathered Himself
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@October31st1517 Answer my question October and don't side step. What is ur "Father" like then?
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@October31st1517 U need to be real with me and answer my questions about who your "God the Father" is? Who is he october? And what is he like? (to you...) If you do not answer my question then I will take it as u can't answer it and you do not know God the Father.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 What do you mean be real? I am the one who holds to the biblical orthodox position. Your position on the other hand has been historically been Championed bu heretics such as Sabellius. The Father is the one who sent the Lord Jesus and who Jesus prayed to. (John 17:5) Jesus is NOT the Father. (John 14:10) Oneness Pentecostalism is a Johnny come lately group that was disfellowshipped by the assemblies of God. Would be willing to debate oneness on Pal-talk?
October31st1517 6 days ago
@October31st1517 The "Orthodox Church" is false. "History is written by those that have hanged heroes." A prime example is Michael Servetus & i read that the Lutheran church put up a memorial statue repenting of their sin of putting him to death cause he would not confess the trinitarian faith. The trinity has been murdering people in the name of "God" since it came out. I wanna know "who" ur "God the Father" is. "What" is he like as a person? Come on october dont u understand?
swenmanwwjd12 6 days ago
@October31st1517 I wanna know what is the "character" of ur "God the Father?" WHAT IS HE LIKE OCTOBER?
swenmanwwjd12 6 days ago
@October31st1517 It seems u cannot give an explanation of who the god u serve is? Or else u have deserted our dialogue? I'm not sure, but for those listening who have ears to hear, Gal 3:20 "Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one." The greek word here for the word "one" is "heis" which means "a primary numeral." This case has been closed long time ago.
swenmanwwjd12 1 day ago
@October31st1517 Not 2 lords October only 1 LORD. U don't know who the Father is. I say this to ur shame. If Jesus is not the Father and the Father is not Jesus, than who is the Father and what is he like? I know Jesus is the Father but I'm asking u who ur "Father" is. What is ur "Father" like? Please explain ur "God the Father."
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 When did I ever say there were 2 Lords? Do you even know what the doctrine of the trinity teaches?
October31st1517 1 week ago
@October31st1517 Yes i do know what the trinity teaches because i use to run with trinitarians but no longer do i run this race alongside them cuz they are eager to teach a lie. My allegiance is to the name of Jesus Christ now. I (like many), knew nothing else but the trinity, until I was baptized w the HSpirit w tongues. This experience made me distant from the trinities cuz they forbid tongues (most of them.) It didn't take me long to see that they were not approved of God.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12 I think the host deleated my messages. I'll answer you again, Its basic.
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swenmanwwjd12 It is very self explanatory....
Acts 7:55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; 56 and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”
Very simple, Jesus standing in honor at GODS right hand. Jesus NEXT TO GOD, revealed by the holy spirit, It was a vision, NOT a prayer. Same as Saul/Paul, and revelation of John.
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
@swenmanwwjd12
Let us pray together 'Lord God Almighty, please throw away any knowledge I have that is contrary to your truth, please make me a pleasing creation to serve you, and to be counted worthy of your son Jesus, thankyou for your mercy, plz forgive my sins, plz keep me from trial, plzkeep me from the evil one, Lord God Almighty, Amen'
Plz know that the pharasies of Jesus day knew theyre scripture's, but were blind to the truth, humble yourself to GODS GRACE.
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic U HAVE A DEVIL LIVING IN U.
swenmanwwjd12 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swenmanwwjd12 JESUS, man, prophet, glorified by GOD.
Revelation 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him
Acts 7:22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a MAN attested to you by God with miracles ......
Acts 3:26 For you first, God raised up His Servant and sent Him to bless you ......
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
1 GOD, and 1 mediator, the man JESUS.
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
Jesus calls himself the serpent that Moses lifted up. The serpent that was lifted up was looked to for healing, not worshiped. For that would be Idolitory, would it not? Noone prays to Jesus in the bible. They see him in visions.
Are you your own father?
Jesus goes so far to say, "Why do you call me good? Noone is good but GOD"
Continually calling himself "son of man" which all the other prophets are called.
Stop calling Jesus a liar.
GeorgeRaymondMusic 3 weeks ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic Everyone in the bible who was and is saved from the beginning to the end prayed to Jesus. Like the trinitarians, all would come together for u if u would just piece together that Jesus Christ is the Father.
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
GeorgeRaymondMusic 2 weeks ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic U need to reconcile the fact that Jesus is called God and the Father in the bible read Isaiah 9:6 U r polytheistic just like trinitarians only they just add one more than u! To be the "Son" of the Father means to be the "image" of God u devil. The biblical definition of the "Son" is found in Hebrews 1:1-3 "...Who being the brightness of HIS!!! glory, AND the EXPRESS IMAGE OF HIS!!! PERSON!!!!" BEWARE THIS MAN IS JUST AS DEVILISH AS THE TRINITIES!
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic Why did they worship Jesus in the bible?...So Jesus will accept worship but not prayer? I don't think so u serpent. What about ACTS 7:59 when Steven was stoned he "called upon God (prayed) and said LORD JESUS!! Receive my spirit!!"
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
@GeorgeRaymondMusic New International Version (©1984)
While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit."
What does it say George?
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
Comment removed
GeorgeRaymondMusic 1 week ago
There's two problems the trinitarian can't get over in this verse
1. Jesus says someone other then himself is the true god
2. Jesus and the holy spirit is never called the true god
3. Moses is called god
teflonfanatic 3 weeks ago
Jn17:3 may not kill the trinity for some but it certainly does not confirm it.If the Son is the only true God in Jn17:3 is that not 1 person? How do you get 3 from that reasoning? Now if there are 2 distinct beings in Jn17:3 how do we get a trinity with 2? Do all trinitarians flunk math in high school? (1=1 adds up to 3?) (1+1=3?) (1Father + 1Son =3 persons?)
I'm sure if Jesus himself told trinitarians that he is not part of a trinity they would argue with him!What a spiritual perversion
Scripturesinspired 2 months ago
@Scripturesinspired So we are supposed to simply look at John 17:3 and ignore the surrounding context? John 17:5 talks about the Glory that Jesus had with the Father from eternity. Also you are ASSUMING unitarianism. Can you show me from scripture that Monotheism is unitarianism? Also can you answer a math problem for me? 1x1x1=?
October31st1517 2 months ago
@October31st1517 no trinity formula from verse 5! it talks about the glory Jesus had along side his Father before the world was. Jesus simply talks about his pre-existence. Jesus is the first to receive life in heaven GN1:1 Jesus is the BEGINNING (#G746 Col 1:18) he was the first and only to leave heaven to be born human, he was the first-born from the dead to be resurrected back to heaven so that he is first in all things Col 1:18-20 He is not part of the theory of trinity!
Scripturesinspired 2 months ago
@October31st1517 1x1x1 means that the 3rd number ONE here is the same exact number ONE as the FIRST number ONE and the second number one and the fourth and fifth and so on which means there was only one number to start with and that same one is at the end of the sequence. Now why would u stop at three here? Wow r u a little trinity bias? Like we can't tell? Jesus says He is the Alpha and Omega! The Beginning and the End.
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
@swenmanwwjd12 Exactly!! You just proved my point. The number 1 is speaking of God's BEING, not PERSONS. The reason I stop at 3 is because whatever it takes to be God, there are only 3 Persons in the bible who have it. The Father, The Son & the Holy Ghost. I cannot find a forth, so I stop at 3 being that the bible is my final authority.
October31st1517 2 weeks ago
@October31st1517 U r drastically polytheistic. God is a PERSON and a PERSON is a BEING. That's why we r called HUMAN BEINGS and u must confess that God became a human being or else u r antichrist 1Jn4:3/1Tim3:16 U r so deceived by thinking that 3 PEOPLE can be "ONE" GOD. The word "ONE" does not mean "UNITY" or else the scripture would say Hear O Israel the Lord our God is a UNIFIED God but it doesn't say that it says the Lord our God is "ONE" LORD. So there's only 1 case closed.
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
@October31st1517 I didn't prove none of ur false doctrine. Did u know that the bible says christians are "partakers of the divine nature...?" 2Pet1:4? Now would that make thousands of persons in the godhead? No! There r not 3 people in the bible that have "whatever it takes to be God" like u say. There is only 1 person who has "IT" and He has ALL of "IT" WITHOUT "MEASURE" Jn3:34/Col1:19 & 2:9
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
@October31st1517 Ur reasoning is like taking pictures of someones life and saying that the person in the picture taken in the middle of the persons life is a different person then the person in the picture taken at the beginning and end.of the persons life.
swenmanwwjd12 2 weeks ago
@swenmanwwjd12 How so?
October31st1517 2 weeks ago
Will you approve my video response?
SopaterTheBerean 3 months ago
Just ask yourself this. If there is only one true God, and Jesus is not it, then is he a false God? Becasue that is the only alternative. If he is a "God in another context" from the Father, he must be a false god according to your view
Everytime I ask this question some wise guy decides to flag it as spam. Instead of doing so, why not attempt to provide an answer. Is Jesus the true God or a false God?
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 @BauerPower247 But he did not. Neither Jesus nor Paul nor any other place in scriptures express the oneness of God in a Triun sense in their explicit statements. Rather every time, it is always expressed in the context of singularity of personhood.
"If there is only one true God, and Jesus is not it, then is he a false God?"
No so my friend. Jesus is called "God" from an expressive and qualitative context of the invisible Father's infinite qualities of deity.--continued
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 & not from the infinite quantitative context attributed to the Father alone. Saying the Father alone as the Only True God or the One God simple acknowledges the unique context in which the Father ALONE is said to be God Almighty. The Son is a derivation from this infinite substance of the one God who is the Father in a lesser form and it is with this understanding that the Father ALONE is accorded being the ONLY true God or the one God. From him are all things including the Son
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 This does not necessarily make Jesus a false God. It just simply means that he is seen as "God" in other contexts distinct from the unique context in which the Father is said to be God. Ask the Spirit to give u understanding friend rather than hold on to a mechanically contrived idea of a Triun one God.
"Is Jesus the true God or a false God?"
Again you need to pray that the the Lord gives you a true revelation of the mystery of the Father and his Son. Your question--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 reflects a lack in discerning context and that is where your whole problem lies. Now let me bring it home with something we may better appreciate. If for example the President of a nation takes ill and he cannot dispense his duties and the vice president temporarily deputizes for him and acts in the office of "Temporary president", The simple fact is that we know the vice is not the True President but this does not make the vice president a false president either. Its that simple
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 And so the vice is just simply a "President" in a temporary capacity and this is why it could be said that he is not the true president & not because he must then necessarily be a false president according to you equation. The understanding from this analogy is no different from when Jesus excludes himself and calls the Father "the ONLY true God". This does not necessarily make Jesus a false God any more than the temporary president is a false president. Context my friend is key
ojaymon 6 months ago
The simple point which Trinitarians fail to see is that the explicit verses of Scriptures that define the context in which God is said to be one is clearly in terms of singularity of being/person vested in the Father. The argument that we have to infer the one God being three persons from the totality of scriptures is imposing, subjective, and subject to implicit verses of scriptures subject to much controversial interpretation. In the end, the explicit scriptures must settle the issue.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
It is clear when Paul says that there are many so called gods, then goes on to "say but to us there is ONE GOD.." that he was distinguishing the many "gods" with the only god (our God) in an absolute sense. To be consistent then when Paul also says that there are many so called Lords and goes on to say that to us there is "ONE LORD..." he was also distinguishing between the many "lords" and the only Lord (Our Lord) in an absloute sense not a qualified sense. Cont'd...
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@ojaymon
The unitarian knows that there is a problem with using this verse as a proof text against the deity Christ. That is why they will often say that consistency does not matter. They apply two different standards to this verse - ONE GOD = the only God and Jesus is not God, but ONE LORD means that there are really two Lords (Father and Jesus), Paul is just refering to the ONE LORD in a different sense.
There is no justification for this inconsistency. Cont'd...
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "The unitarian knows that there is a problem with using this verse as a proof text against the deity Christ." No it is not a text against the deity of Christ. It is one against Trinity conjecture that Jesus AS A DISTINCT PERSON is the one God in the same context and Capacity said of the Father in 1 cor 8:6. 1 cor 8:6 does not deny the deity of Jesus Christ in other contexts. It denies the deity in the context of being the one God in the unique context attributed to the Father.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
Paul does not use any language that indicates that his use of the word "one" has different meanings when applied to God (Theos) and Lord (Kurios). It is your theology that forces you to this belief. All verbal and theological gymnastics aside, from a unitarian view, If you belive that The Father as the ONE GOD means Jesus is not God, then you must accept that Jesus as the ONE LORD means the Father is not Lord. Do you accept this?
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "Paul does not use any language that indicates that his use of the word "one" has different meanings when applied to God (Theos) and Lord (Kurios)"
Again you are the one who has consistently failed to understand that the Father is beyond being our Lord in the context of 1 cor 8:6. He is our one God. The letter kills. It is the Spirit that gives understanding. So in this regard there are not two Lords. Paul is saying that we have one God who is the Father & one Master who is Jesus
ojaymon 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BauerPower247 "from a unitarian view, If you belive that The Father as the ONE GOD means Jesus is not God, then you must accept that Jesus as the ONE LORD means the Father is not Lord. Do you accept this?"
one with a mechanical understanding of the scriptures without the spirit give life to it can come to such conclusion. Again the premise of your statement is completely founded on an erroneous idea of what 'Kuros' translated as Lord mean in the context of 1 cor 8:6. --contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 An analogy that would closely address this reality will be one using Pharaoh and Joseph. We could say in context that Joseph was made the ONLY ONE Lord (master) over all in Egypt by Pharoah himself. So to the Egyptian, he had only one Lord from which he received his instructions and that was Joseph. Pharoah on the other hand who made Joshep Lord was beyond being the Lord (master) to the Egyptians. he would be their "god" in context. Not a perfect analogy but it shows the point.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 Therefore the context in which Paul states that Jesus is our one Lord is also in the light of the analogy of Pharoah and Joseph. God the Father made ONLY Jesus Christ Lord over all in heaven and earth and it is this regard Paul speaks of him as our ONE Lord. God the Father on the other hand is beyond this context of Lordship. As LORD, it is in the context of his being our God that the Father is said to be LORD. It is the Spirit that gives understanding and not the letter.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 Hence when David said "The LORD said unto My Lord" David was not just conflating the issues here. David spoke about them in two different contexts just as would be also discerned in 1 cor 8:6. David was not saying my LORD said unto My LORD or The LORD said unto The LORD in a manner to bring about some Trinitarian Jargon that equivocate the contexts. He said The LORD (God) said unto my Lord (my master). In other words "The Lord God said unto My master, sit on my right hand..."
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 And the simple point to be understood here is that even if the same expression may be used in reference to two people, the contexts of using the same Word could be different as we see in the case of Artaxerses being called king of kings. Therefore when Jesus is called "Theos" or "Kurios" it does not necessarily mean it is in the same context of being the one God as is uniquely said of the Father. It is that simple friend. No gymnastics here. Just simple understanding of context.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247
KYRIOS/Kuros (Translated as Lord) does not necessarily mean God as wold be clearly seen from the Greek applications: a) the possessor and disposer of a thing
1) the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
2) in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
b) is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet
their master
c) this title is given to: God, the Messiah
The context of 1 cor 8:6 calls Jesus our master
ojaymon 6 months ago
@October31st1517 Jesus, the SON of God. To you, God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit! So...Jesus is the Son of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Oops! Epic fail!
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@Danielezerable Trinitarianism teaches the Jesus is NOT the Father. The 3 Co-eternal Persons are the one true etrna; God.
October31st1517 6 months ago
@October31st1517 So Jesus is just the Son of the Father then? How can He be the Son of God? BTW, I used to be a Trinitarian until I learned how ridiculous it was. Feel free to ask me questions though in regards to certain topics that may seem confusing at times. Let's come to the truth on this matter.
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@Danielezerable Coeect, Jesus is God, But He is NOT God the Fathe or God the Holy Ghost. If you are a fomer trinitarian you should be familiar with the creeds?
October31st1517 6 months ago
@October31st1517 Yes, I am. One God. Jesus is God, Father is God, Holy Spirit is God. All sharing one substance. I have looked up on the Council of Nicaea and they were actually reluctant to embrace homoousianism (same substance which explains Trinity) because it was condemned by the early church as Gnostic. I am sorry if I have called you a Hell-bound heretic but it is something important to know about the nature of God for salvation. I will send you a link on this subject.
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@October31st1517 Romans 9:5 is not necessarily calling Jesus God in the same way the Father is. And remember, Arians do NOT deny the divinity OR Deity of Christ! You are a lying Hell-bound heretic!
Danielezerable 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Harold Camping was RIGHT about May 21, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 6 months ago
Just a general comment to the person who consistently flags my comments as spam. Pease grow up! I've found a number of comments that were not spam at all and yet they were flaggd as such. I'm going to guess that this message will get flagged as spam also. Hopefully the "spam flagger" will at least read this first and get the message. Don't go around flagging messages as spam simply because you do not agree with the comments. Thank you!
BauerPower247 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Mark 10:18. Why Did not Jesus answer this man as God Himself!!
crunk62 11 months ago
By saying "men are mortal...." there is still a possibility for women to be mortal too. Therefore, to say women are not mortal (because they're not men), is potentially a logical fallacy. I say potential because the statement alone does not completely clarify who women are.
However, if I said, "Men are the ONLY mortals.. And, women are not men. Therefore, women are not mortals." That is not a logical fallacy. There is no potential for women to be mortal.
Icepine 11 months ago
@Icepine Excellent point. So you can see the logical fallicy that unitarians are faced with when they use John 17:3 to say that Jesus is not God.
October31st1517 11 months ago
Comment removed
Icepine 11 months ago
Comment removed
Icepine 11 months ago
@October31st1517 I believe you misunderstood me. I was discussing what is or what is not a logical fallacy.
I talked about two different flows of logic.."men are mortals" with "men are the ONLY mortals"...
Meaning...
If I said the Father is God....and Jesus isn't the Father...therefore, Jesus isn't God. That would potentially be a logically fallacy.
However, if I said the Father is the ONLY true God, I can logically say, therefore, Jesus is not God because he is not the Father.
Icepine 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Icepine
You could logically say that Jesus is not God if you add one more premise in there: The only true God is only one person. The word 'Only' modifies the phrase ''true God.' It does not modify 'Father.'
BauerPower247 11 months ago
@Icepine "If I said the Father is God....and Jesus isn't the Father...therefore, Jesus isn't God. That would potentially be a logically fallacy.
However, if I said the Father is the ONLY true God, I can logically say, therefore, Jesus is not God because he is not the Father. "
Awesome. The guy who spoke in this video tried to use so many distracting gymnastics to evade this fact. But you have nicely hit the nail on the head by distinguishing between the fallacy of his argument and scriptures
ojaymon 7 months ago
@October31st1517
CLOSE - but - JESUS IS THE FATHER - JN14-8;9
LEFT click ON 2222PAULINE FOR MY PAGE
2222pauline 8 months ago
@2222pauline You're violating a principal of bible study. If the context stopped in verse 9 you might have a point. However in Verse 10 our Lord goes on to say: "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" Notice, Jesus never said "I AM THE FATHER". If Jesus were truly God the Father why did He say that the FATHER IS IN ME rather than I AM THE FATHER? Context!
October31st1517 8 months ago
@October31st1517 Jesus=Arianism! Arians NEVER deny the Deity of Christ! That is a LIE from the PIT OF HELL! Newton NEVER denied the Deity OR divinity of Christ! Jehovah's Witnesses, who believe Jesus to be archangel Michael (which I personally think is ridiculous myself even though I have come to the truth that Arius was right and that Trinitarians are lost sheep) don't even deny the divinity of Christ! You are a LIAR who MISREPRESENTS ARIANISM! Hell-bound heretic!
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@October31st1517 Eternal life is given through the Son. Jesus is an excellent teacher. If He wanted to people to know He was God He would have said: "I am God, worship me!" Trinity=FALSE! Newton and Arius are correct. Trinity is abomination of desolation!
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@October31st1517 To understand, to perceive! Lol, good one. I bet you can't even understand your Trinity doctrine so therefore, you have no eternal life. Hell-bound heretic.
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@October31st1517 If we want to listen to Jesus, we can feel free to. If you don't want to listen to Jesus, you can feel free to go to Hell.
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@October31st1517 John 17:1-3 Let's see who Jesus is praying to! :) Remember, this determines if you are going to Hell or going to heaven!
After saying all these things, Jesus looked up to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son so he can give glory back to you. For you have given him authority over everyone. He gives eternal life to each one you have given him.
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@October31st1517 And this is the way to have eternal life—to know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, the one you sent to earth.
Oh, oops! Logic FAIL! Jesus already made CERTAIN whom He was praying to! The FATHER!
Hell-bound heretic!
Danielezerable 6 months ago
@October31st1517 '' Excellent point. So you can see the logical fallicy that unitarians are faced with when they use John 17:3 to say that Jesus is not God.''
I think you have completely missed icepine's point. Icepine's comments show that the Unitarian argument is valid and that the Trinitarian rebuttal is invalid-because the fact that the Father is said to be the ONLY true God excludes Jesus from being that same ONLY true God IF HE IS NOT THE FATHER in any way or context.
ojaymon 7 months ago
@ojaymon
You missed the point of the video. Does the word ONLY modify "Father" or does it modify "True God?" If "only" modifies Father, then the unitarian argument would be valid. Consider the following example - (1) John is only German. (2) Only John is German
Placing the word "only" before John (and thus modifying John) gives you a different meaning than placing the word only after John (modifying his nationality).
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 The Analogy you gave using 1) John is only German does not reflect the fact of John 17:3. In your analogy you left out a very crucial word which is the definite article "the". Hence there's a difference in saying "John is only German" & "John is THE only German". The latter excludes anyone else who is not John from being German in the context of the statement. Likewise "YOU (the Father), THE ONLY true God excludes anyone else who is not the Father from being the True God-contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
The problem here is the unitarian assumption that THE ONLY TRUE GOD is only one person. If there is a premise in the bible that states explicitly or alludes to this implicitly (and there is none), then calling the Father the ONLY true God would exclude Jesus. I should have stated that Any analogy used of mankind will fall short because the infinite God is intricate in his nature and cannot be likened to finite man. Cont'd...
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "If there is a premise in the bible that states explicitly or alludes to this implicitly (and there is none), then calling the Father the ONLY true God would exclude Jesus."
Yes the mystery of this which was beyond grasp to those at the Nicea Council is that even though Jesus is called God, there is a unique context of Godhood which the scriptures attribute to the Father alone. And in this regard, Jesus is not that one God. Now u objectively consider this for a moment--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 If the Trinity doctrine were true, we ought to have seen direct explicit statements in the bible ascertaining this fact. Eg, Jesus could have easily said: "This is eternal life, that they may know US and the Holy Spirit, the only True God". Jesus had presence of mind and understood this unique context of Godhood attributed to the Father hence he said "That they may know YOU (Singular), the ONLY (exclusive) true God AND (excluding himself in this context) Jesus.." contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
"If the Trinity doctrine were true, we ought to have seen direct explicit statements in the bible ascertaining this fact."
I completely disagree. First, God reveals himself to us how he chooses, not how we expect or want him to. Second, when you take all of scripture in its entirety, it is clear that the the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all identified as God. Each of them poses attributes that belong ONLY TO THE ONE TRUE GOD. Cont'd...
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 RE: "If the Trinity doctrine were true, we ought to have seen direct explicit statements in the bible ascertaining this fact."
"I completely disagree. First, God reveals himself to us how he chooses"
True but what God reveals does not also contradict the explicit declarations of the scriptures. The Trinity does. That is why it's "revelation" MUST be rejected.
Secondly, as I told you, implicit inferences are subject to controversial interpretations so we need the explicits.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 For example, it is futile for a Trinitarian to begin to use verses such as Gen 1:26 "Let us make man" to prove the Trinity because even the JWs also believe in Gen 1:26 and cannot see a Trinity there. Neither should a verse that simply mentions Father, Son, and Holy Spirit be sufficient to prove a Trinity doctrine as virtually every professing Christian believes in Father, Son, And Holy Spirit. However, it is when these are identified and the relationships are properly defined-con
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 ..that we can ascertain the true scriptural revelation
"it is clear that the the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all identified as God."
Yes but this does not prove "Three coequal persons being one God". Someone can be the president of a country while another can also be the president of a committee. Of course they are both presidents in different contexts. This does not necessarily make them jointly one president in the same capacity and context. So this argument is moot.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 Therefore John 17:3 is not a Unitarian assumption. It is a very clear and direct explicit statement that attributes Godhood to the Father ALONE in a particular context that does not apply to Jesus or any other. The reason Why Trinitarians and some oneness grapple with such plain scriptures as John 17:3 is that they have failed to discern that the term "God" is a translation which has so many contextual meanings other than God Almighty when understood from the Original texts.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
"That they may know YOU (Singular), the ONLY (exclusive) true God AND (excluding himself in this context) Jesus.."
Again, does the phrase "THE ONLY" modify "father" or "True God" Because if it modifies Father, then an argument can be made that Jesus was excluding himself. To reitarate the point I made before, it is not sufficient to identify one person (the Father) as the only true God. You have to demonstrate that the only True God is limited to only one person.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "Again, does the phrase "THE ONLY" modify "father" or "True God" Because if it modifies Father, then an argument can be made that Jesus was excluding himself."
What do you mean by "modify father"? please explain. And then answer this and objectively interpret this statement.
If James James says to John:
"John, freedom means voting for you, the only true president & I who would assist you"
Would James be excluding himself from being true president from this statement?
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
"you are the one who has consistently failed to understand that the Father is beyond being our Lord in the context of 1 cor 8:6."
Tell me how the Father can be beyond being our Lord in the context of Cor 8:6 when he is mentioned in the very same verse that contrasts the many socalled lords with Our One Lord. To be consistent then, Jesus must be beyond being our God in the context of the very same verse. I fail to see how the context suddenly switches right... Cont'd
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 @BauerPower247 "Tell me how the Father can be beyond being our Lord in the context of Cor 8:6 when he is mentioned in the very same verse that contrasts the many socalled lords with Our One Lord."
I have clearly explained this even using the analogy with Joseph and Pharaoh which you reject .Therefore there is no other kind of explanation that would satisfy you. The essence of the analogy with Pharaoh and Joseph clearly explains the point. Simple common sense would clearly-contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 Show that your interpretation of 1 cor 8:6 is nonsensical and false because Paul could not have just been repeating himself regarding "theos" and ""kuros" by interpreting them to both mean "God". Paul could not have been saying "...To us we have one Theos (God), the Father and one God (kuros), Jesus Christ. That is your interpretation which makes no sense at all. What I have tried to help you see is that Paul wanted us to understand the distinction between God and Lord--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 And that was why he distinguished the Father as One God and the Son as one Lord. They do not mean the same thing. We have one God, the Father, and one master, Jesus Christ-not one God, the Father and one God, the Lord Jesus Christ which is your nonsensical interpretation of the text. Paul could have easily said: We have one God, the Father, & one God Jesus Christ if he wanted to vindicated your Trinitarian interpretation of 1 cor 8:6. However he deliberately made a distinction-ctd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 When I say the Father is beyond being our one Lord, I simply point to the fact that the Father is beyond being a master to us which is the specific context of Jesus being called our one Lord (kuros) in that verse. The Father is our one God and more than a master to us. If you choose to free yourself from the Trinitarian impositions and just consider the simplicity of scriptures, you would grasp the essence of what I am saying. Now consider this with a very objective answer--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "to be consistent then, Jesus must be beyond being our God in the context of the very same verse. I fail to see how the context suddenly switches right.."
The context does no switch. You just do not understand the essence of the distinction between "God" and "Lord" in 1 cor 8:6. It is very simple. in a state and country, a person has a governor and then an overall president. The fact that both the gov and president are both leaders of the people doesn't make the gov President
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 So in the reign of Bush for example, a Californian could have said: "But to us we have one governor, Arnold & one President, Bush. Of course Bush could be seen in another context as the "governor" of the entire country but we know that he is not the one governor of the state in the specific context in which the person speaks. Just as is the case with the Father, George bush is beyond being governor-he is also PRESIDENT. But Arnold is simply the one governor & not President at all
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
Your example of James and John regarding James being the the only true president is not analogous to the triune God. Again, you are taking limited finite beings and trying to compare them to an infinite almighty God. To whom can you compare God (Isa 40:18)?
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@ojaymon
If "ONLY" modified "Father", it would apply specifically and be exclusive to the Father thus exclude everyone who is not the Father. As stated in the video, Jesus does not say ONLY THE FATHER is the TRUE GOD, Rather he says the Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD. Eliminate the unitarian assumption that ONLY TRUE GOD is one person and you will see that Jesus was not excluding himself.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "As stated in the video, Jesus does not say ONLY THE FATHER is the TRUE GOD,"
LOL. I have heard this argument before which is simply just meaningless gymnastics that avoid the reality that a sentence could be rephrased in so many ways and still mean the same thing. So for example the statement: "John, the ONLY green man in the world" and "ONLY John is the green man in the world" mean exactly the same thing in the sense that there's no other black man in the room apart from John
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 Therefore it does not matter whether the only appears before John or before green man. The simple fact is that ONLY speaks or exclusivity and in this respect singles out only ONE PERSON. Likewise. "The Father is the ONLY true God' and "ONLY the Father is the true God" mean exactly the same thing.
So according to you they mean different things. Please explain clearly the difference between the two statements--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247
Adjective: only ownlee
1) Being the only one; single and isolated from others
"an only child"
2) Exclusive of anyone or anything else
"I'll have this car and this car only"
So when Jesus says of the Father "..YOU, the ONLY true God", no amount of Trinitarian gymnastics will ever change the fact that the Father ALONE is the true God in the same unique context Paul spoke of the Father as being the 1 God. Jesus could have easily said "know US and the Holy Spirit, the only true God"
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
A point I made in a previous post in this video: Personal Pronouns with reference to God such as MY God or OUR God are only used of the One true God. Can you find any examples in scripture where believers refer to anyone other than the One True God as MY GOD or OUR GOD. If you believe in other gods, but only have one true God, you can only call that one true God MY GOD. To refer to another god as MY GOD would be polytheism.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BauerPower247 "Personal Pronouns with reference to God such as MY God or OUR God are only used of the One true God. Can you find any examples in scripture where believers refer to anyone other than the One True God as MY GOD or OUR GOD"
Now if a modalist or a oneness made this argument, he would be 100% justified. But a Trinitarian cannot make this argument by any stretch of imagination as there are so many problems that bedevil this point from a Trinitarian perspective.--continued
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 The verse which I think you are basing this argument on is John 20:28
And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
However, this was an exclamatory remark from Thomas having come to terms with the reality of the risen Jesus. An exclamation from one of the disciples of Christ should never be used as doctrinal teachings of the scriptures. And besides this even if we agree to the other side of the argument that Thomas called Jesus my Lord and my God, --contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 This will still be a very big problem for Trinitarians. Why? Now If Thomas called Jesus Lord and God, it would then mean that Jesus is both the Father and the Son because the scriptures are explicitly lucid that we have one God, the Father and one Lord, Jesus Christ. Like I stated before, this will go well with a modalist argument but never with a Trinitarian argument because the Trinitarian argument is that Jesus Christ even as a distinct person from the Father is God almighty
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 So many troubling questions arise for the Trinitarian. eg when Thomas called Jesus "my God" did he mean Jesus was God, the Father? of course the Trinitarian will say no. But Alas Jesus clearly told Thomas that he was ascending to his (Jesus) God and Thomas' God (The Father). This would then also mean that Jesus is his own God and his own Father because Jesus was ascending to Thomas' God who also happened to be Jesus' God. How do you address this my friend?--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 So we know by comparing scriptures that the Trinitarian interpretation of John 20:28 is in error as it would mean that Thomas had two Gods of which one (the Father) is the God to the other God (the son) .Saying that they're "one God" neither resolves the problem orn addresses the reality of the Trinitarian confusion bcos Jesus said the Father was his God and not that they were jointly one God. :) So even if we were to go by the other argument that Thomas called Jesus "my God"-con
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 Such an argument can only be justifiably and meaningfully made ONLY in the light of the oneness view and NEVER in the light of the Trinitarian view. Except of course the Trinitarian is ready to admit that since Jesus is God and he is a distinct person from the Father who is also God, then they are two God who unite as one God. And that Thomas had two distinct Gods of which one was the one in John 20:28 and the other God was the God of his first God in John 20.28.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
I reject the analogy with Pharaoh and Joseph because it does not reflect at all what Paul is talking about in 1 Cor 1:8. It is only used as a means of justifying a gross inconsistency that requires unitarians to apply double standards to the same verse. No where does Paul even hint at this kind of structure. You have to read a lot into this verse to make it compatible with the Joseph/Pharaoh analogy. Cont'd
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "I reject the analogy with Pharaoh and Joseph because it does not reflect at all what Paul is talking about in 1 Cor 1:8. It is only used as a means of justifying a gross inconsistency that requires unitarians to apply double standards to the same verse."
We can just agree to disagree on this one since u reject the Pharoah/Joseph analogy.There is no Unitarian inconsistency.The problem is that you fail to discern the contextual distinction between "Theos" and "kuros" in 1cor 8:6
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 and you somewhat think that Paul was just repeating himself which ultimately translates your position to mean "We have one God the Father and one God Jesus Christ". This is meaningless. If your view was correct, Paul could have easily said it like that or said "to us there is but one God and Lord, the Father from whom are all things, and one God and Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things." Rather Paul deliberately distinguished them as "God (theos)" and "Lord (kuros-master)"
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
Consider what you are suggesting Paul is actually saying in 1 Cor 1:8 - But to us there is One God [and supreme Lord] the Father... and One [delegated] Lord Jesus Christ. Now read 1 Cor 1:8 and tell me if these two statements come anywhere close to resembling each other.
There is nothing non sensicle about the trinitarian interpretation of 1 Cor 8:6. It is only non-sensicle when one assumes unitarianism.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "Consider what you are suggesting Paul is actually saying in 1 Cor 1:8 - But to us there is One God [and supreme Lord] the Father... and One [delegated] Lord Jesus Christ."
No, you are misconstruing the main essence of what I am saying. Paul did not call the Father "Lord" in that verse at all. The simple essence is to declare that we have one God (who is the Father) and one master, (who is Jesus Christ) There is not a single verse of scriptures that jointly place or declare-cont
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 Jesus and the Father as jointly being one God-none whatsoever, In fact your Trinitarian interpretation of 1 cor 8:6 is glaringly flawed on two clear accounts. 1) The Holy Spirit is not even mentioned at all in that verse where Paul clearly declared the one God. 2) Eph 4:6 clearly gives credence to my interpretation of 1 cor 8:6 (which defines One God in context of 1 person) & invalidates yours. Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
Paul was not repeating himself, he was including both the Father and the Son as the One God using both terms of Deity (Lord and God). Again, these two terms are used interchangeably throughout scripture. You bring up a very interesting point about why Paul distinguishes between the Two. First, keep in mind that the ONE GOD is not just our Lord, but our ONE LORD. So it makes no sense to say that Jesus is our ONE LORD in a differnt sense or context than the Father.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@ojaymon
One point that is so often overlooked in 1 Cor 8:6 is what Paul says about the Father and the Son and how all things came about. ..."God the Father FROM whom all things came...Lord Jesus Christ THROUGH whom all things came..." Now consider Romans 11:36 where it clearly states about God that "FROM him and THROUGH him and to him are all things.
GOD - All things are FROM him and THROUGH him
Now let's look at this while distinguishing between the Father and Son as 1 God cont'd
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@ojaymon
GOD - All things are FROM him and THROUGH him
Now let's look at this while distinguishing between the Father and Son as 1 God cont'd
GOD - All things are FROM (the Father) and THROUGH (Jesus)
Romans 11:36 is only one example of the verses that differentiate between the role of the Father and Son in creation. You see there is a distinction between the two not becasue they are two separate gods, but because they are 2 different persons as the ONE GOD.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 The issue you brought up about all things being FROM the Father and all things THROUGH the Son is not relevant to the argument and not that it is being overlooked. We require explicit verses from the scriptures that clearly reveal God being one in the context of three persons-not inferences superimposed by Trinitarians. A Jehovah's witness for example will tell you that God first created Jesus and then used Jesus to create every other thing when he interprets those verses.--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 It is for this kind of reason we need direct and clear scriptures that reflect our positions. We cannot continue to make arguments based on imposed assumptions or else we can never proceed meaningfully. The bone of contention here is: When the scriptures declare that God is one, does it clearly declare this in a context of one unique person or in the context of three coequal persons. I argue (and have shown clearly from explicit verses) that the former is the case.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 It is for this kind of reason we need direct and clear scriptures that reflect our positions. We cannot continue to make arguments based on imposed assumptions or else we can never proceed meaningfully. The bone of contention here is: When the scriptures declare that God is one, does it clearly declare this in a context of one unique person or in the context of three coequal persons. I argue (and have shown clearly from explicit verses) that the former is the case.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
First, let me just re-explain what the trinitarian teaching is. Within the one being that is God, there simultaneously exists three coequal and co-eternal persons, Father, Son and Spirit. Your critiques are only relevant to the oneness position (i.e. modalism) and have no relevance to the Trinitarian position since trinitarianism doe not profess that all three are the same person. Jesus is not the Father and vice versa. You are still assuming unitarianism.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BauerPower247 "First, let me just re-explain what the trinitarian teaching is. Within the one being that is God, there simultaneously exists three coequal and co-eternal persons, Father, Son and Spirit."
& I am saying that not only are there no scriptural texts at all for this declaration (besides imposed inferences from Trinitarians), 1 cor 8;6 and Eph 4:6 clearly contradict & therefore invalidates this conjecture. This argument is relevant to both the Trinitarian and some Oneness positions
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
Your arguments about Jesus beig called Lord and God in a different "context" than the Father actually has nothing to do with context, but theology. Your argument simply goes like this: "The Father is God, therefore Jesus cannot be God in the same sense." Such argumentation is circular and relies on a unitarian view of the One Triune God. Whether you accept trinitarianism or not, assuming it were true, this argument would fall flat on its face.
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@ojaymon
And Yes Jesus was "made" Lord. But your interpretation of that is problematic. First, the text says that Jesus was made Lord and Christ after his resurection, but he was clearly both of these prior to his resurection. Both John the Babtist and Peter affirmed this (that he is Lord and Christ) while he was alive. Second, Jesus was always Lord. As per Phil 2:6, Jesus voluntarily took on the nature of a servant ... cont'd
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "And Yes Jesus was "made" Lord. But your interpretation of that is problematic. First, the text says that Jesus was made Lord and Christ after his resurection, but he was clearly both of these prior to his resurection."
Interestingly it is your position that this poses problems for. Please explain how Jesus was made Lord and Christ. Since you interpret "lord" in 1 cor 8:6 to mean "God". So does this mean that Jesus was made God and Christ? I want you to address this question.
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon
giving up the divine perogatives he had by humbling himself and becoming made in the likeness of man. He put himself in the position where he was subject to the Father would have to be exalted and glofified. Remember, Jesus had two natures, human and divine. Those that Deny Christ's deity quote a lot of scriptures that deal with his Humanity (e.g. John 14:28) but often sidestep, ignore or attempt to explain away scripture dealing with his deity (e.g. John 5:18).
BauerPower247 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 "Those that Deny Christ's deity quote a lot of scriptures that deal with his Humanity (e.g. John 14:28) but often sidestep, ignore or attempt to explain away scripture dealing with his deity (e.g. John 5:18)."
I do not deny the deity of Jesus Christ in it's proper context. It is simply denied in the context which relates to the Father alone as the infinite ONE GOD. Jesus acknowledged this context when he called the Father "the ONLY true God" but u grapple with this simple fact
ojaymon 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 (con) because of your Trinitarian impositions. Regarding John 14:28, Jesus never said "My Father is greater than my human nature but I am coequal in divine nature". He simply said "My Father is greater than I". "I" represents all that a person is and not some selective part or nature of the person. In other words, Jesus was saying "All that the Father is is greater than All that the Son is" Trinitarians impose a partial inferiority doctrine in order to avoid this reality.--contd
ojaymon 6 months ago
@ojaymon So because Jesus said the Father was greater than He, that makes Him a lower form of life? "for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues" Does this mean that he who speaks in tongues is a lower form of life than he who prophesies? Of course not. In OFFICE the Father is greater, in NATURE they are equal.
October31st1517 6 months ago
@BauerPower247 I see a lot of Trinitarian gymnastics with this human and divine nature thing. When it suits them, they interpret Jesus statement using "I" as his human nature and at other times, they say, it is his divine nature. I have addressed John 5:18 before. So tell me this verse your brought up-Jesus saying God was his Father (making himself equal with God). Was it his human nature speaking or his divine nature? Then now that Jesus has ascended, why does he still call the Father his God?
ojaymon 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BauerPower247 I see a lot of Trinitarian gymnastics with this human and divine nature thing. When it suits them, they interpret Jesus statement using "I" as his human nature and at other times, they say, it is his divine nature. I have addressed John 5:18 before. So tell me this verse your brought up-Jesus saying God was his Fat