Jesus pierced, YHWH pierced.

[Andreas]

Highlighted, below is what I answered from your post. Following the establish format, it should be your material. I mixed nothing up. You were sloppy.





You just aren't getting it. When God became man, he perceived God as other men do.
He was an authentic man. He wasn't God in a man-suit.
You are thinking of the deity of Christ totally wrong. Do you care to learn, or is it your way or the Trinitarian way of looking at things? There is a third and Biblical way if you are willing to leave the Colossians 2:8 group.

"The few alleged proofs/evidences of Jesus being God are based on one-off translations, circumstantial evidence, skewing the semantics of the grammar being used, and interpretation. The Bible doesn't just come out and say "Jesus is God"
at all or in the same way it calls the Father the One true God.
So these isolated incidents of alleged proofs/evidences of Jesus being God are tiny islands in a sea of opposing data."

That is not correct.

There are plenty of scriptures that clearly teach Jesus is God. What you are confused about is that the Bible also teaches he is a man and it is important to do so because of its necessity for our Salvation. That he was a man had to differentiated from his deity, to make no mistake as to what God did for us by dying on the cross and shedding his blood. God, as Spirit can't shed blood and that is why the Bible must and does speak of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ or God and the Lamb. To minimize his humanity by only emphasizing his deity, would leave people confused about their salvation and the true nature of his sacrifice.

I could go down a very long list of scriptures that speak to the deity of Christ, but you don't accept it. Even beyond scriptures that say "Jesus is God", I gave you Revelation 1:17 where he has the title of "the first and the last". You totally convoluted the meaning of Jesus' parable about the first being last and the last being first and you ascribed to Pharisees and hostile religious leaders the title of "the first and the last" as if that title could apply to anyone.

THIS PART is not my words:
"The few alleged proofs/evidences of Jesus being God are based on one-off translations, circumstantial evidence, skewing the semantics of the grammar being used, and interpretation. The Bible doesn't just come out and say "Jesus is God"
at all or in the same way it calls the Father the One true God"

 

[Andreas]

The Holy Spirit is omnipresent.

Yes, I agree 100%. This said, why would you think that the Holy Spirit communicates (to/from each individual) from one physical location, like a speaker on the wall? Since the Holy Spirit is not a force field or irrational energy radiating from a central throne but the rational presence of the omnipresent God Himself, it seems you are not fully thinking this through. You are conceiving of the "center of consciousness" of the Holy Spirit being spatially located at a center point (center of consciousness) rather than distributed. The examples in scripture show that God is not limited to act or speak in a sequential manner like we are. This is why I think you are in the Colossians 2:8 group think. It is an observation based on what you said, and not a rhetorical put down. If the police show up at your house and tell you that you've been robbed, would you get mad at them, or at the people that stole from you?

 

[Fred]

You still aren't getting what I am saying.

1 Timothy 6:1 shows that Christians can possibly have more than one master.

Yes, I get what you are saying.

You aren't getting what I am saying.

This is it:
There is only one who is the despotēs of every Christian.


The same Greek word for "only" used in John 17:3 is used in Jude 4.

One Person of the Trinity can affirm the Deity of another Person of the Trinity. That is what is taking place in John 17:3 and what the Holy Spirit affirmed in Jude 4.

 

[Towerwatchman]

Yes, I agree 100%. This said, why would you think that the Holy Spirit communicates (to/from each individual) from one physical location, like a speaker on the wall? Since the Holy Spirit is not a force field or irrational energy radiating from a central throne but the rational presence of the omnipresent God Himself, it seems you are not fully thinking this through. You are conceiving of the "center of consciousness" of the Holy Spirit being spatially located at a center point (center of consciousness) rather than distributed. The examples in scripture show that God is not limited to act or speak in a sequential manner like we are.

Seems you’re the one who is limiting God. The Holy Spirit is God, and is a center of self consciousness that is omnipresent.

This is why I think you are in the Colossians 2:8 group think. It is an observation based on what you said, and not a rhetorical put down. If the police show up at your house and tell you that you've been robbed, would you get mad at them, or at the people that stole from you?

Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining ..You’ve been told by others that this is not property decor. Suggest you get off your high horse and stop posting this insult.

 

[Andreas]

Seems you’re the one who is limiting God. The Holy Spirit is God, and is a center of self consciousness that is omnipresent.

Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining ..You’ve been told by others that this is not property decor. Suggest you get off your high horse and stop posting this insult.

You're getting mad at the messenger who reminds you that framing the fundamental being of God into three distinct centers of consciousness is putting God into human-like categories - "persons".

But that doesn't work, because three centers of consciousness in the eternal Godhead is not God as simply "I AM" and "none besides me", but three "I AM's". Three distinct persons deserve their own distinct pronoun as "I AM" and together are "WE ARE", not "I AM". Get it? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

You are misunderstanding how God works and communicates. While you accept the terms that He is omnipresent and omnipotent, I think you are not thinking through what that actually means in practical terms in how God works in people's lives. God doesn't need to be three eternal persons to communicate simultaneously to different people. He doesn't need to be three persons to speak at Jesus' baptism as the Father, and also be manifested in the flesh, and also to manifest as a visible dove. Because he is truly omnipotent and omnipresent, three God persons each doing their thing is not needed. The Spirit speaking through 120 believers on the day of Pentecost doesn't mean that there are 120 Holy Spirit persons. I know you don't think that there are 120 Holy Spirit persons, right?

 

[Towerwatchman]

You're getting mad at the messenger who reminds you that framing the fundamental being of God into three distinct centers of consciousness is putting God into human-like categories - "persons".

Now you are gods messenger? Talk about an inflated ego

But that doesn't work, because three centers of consciousness in the eternal Godhead is not God as simply "I AM" and "none besides me", but three "I AM's". Three distinct persons deserve their own distinct pronoun as "I AM" and together are "WE ARE", not "I AM". Get it? You can't have your cake and eat it too

Read it again I am who I am has nothing with an amount, has to do with eternal existence.

You are misunderstanding how God works and communicates. While you accept the terms that He is omnipresent and omnipotent, I think you are not thinking through what that actually means in practical terms in how God works in people's lives. God doesn't need to be three eternal persons to communicate simultaneously to different people.

The doctrine of the trinity was not contrived in order to explain how God works, it is the conclusion based on scripture of who God is

He doesn't need to be three persons to speak at Jesus' baptism as the Father, and also be manifested in the flesh, and also to manifest as a visible dove. Because he is truly omnipotent and omnipresent, three God persons each doing their thing is not needed. The Spirit speaking through 120 believers on the day of Pentecost doesn't mean that there are 120 Holy Spirit persons. I know you don't think that there are 120 Holy Spirit persons, right?

Nonsense, and the fallacy of pleading

 

[Andreas]

Now you are gods messenger? Talk about an inflated ego

Read it again I am who I am has nothing with an amount, has to do with eternal existence.

The doctrine of the trinity was not contrived in order to explain how God works, it is the conclusion based on scripture of who God is

Nonsense, and the fallacy of pleading

Anyone that shares the truth from God's word is a messenger.

I agree that the doctrine of the Trinity was contrived for other purposes. While it based on taking a few NT scriptures and interpreting them in light of European Gentile philosophy and then reading that narrative back into the OT and contradictory NT scriptures.

The Bible doesn't say God is "three persons" or multiple "centers of consciousness", this is something that is inferred from the mention of the titles of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Rather than understanding these terms in light of the OT foundational teaching of monotheism, the anti-Jewish philosophers of the 3rd -4th centuries contrived a complex and vague conception of "persons" to suit their pagan culture. It does make sense from at a superficial level if one doesn't have a firm grasp on the God of Abraham, Moses, and Isaiah.

I don't know why you are opposed to the Oneness doctrine since it is a much more accurate and biblical description of God. There is one Holy God, who is Father and creator, and as a omnipresent Spirit is able to be in all, and this one God was manifested in the flesh as the Son of God for our Salvation. Is this so hard? What is Biblically wrong with it? Be specific.

 

[Towerwatchman]

Anyone that shares the truth from God's word is a messenger.

In your dreams.

I agree that the doctrine of the Trinity was contrived for other purposes. While it based on taking a few NT scriptures and interpreting them in light of European Gentile philosophy and then reading that narrative back into the OT and contradictory NT scriptures

If I recall, we had a long discussion on this. And I bought up over a dozen arguments for the Trinity, which you could not counter, and we had to park it on the shelf. All of them are based off of scripture, of the original language. Nothing was based on philosophy. On the contrary, oneness incorporates, a tremendous amount of philosophy.

The Bible doesn't say God is "three persons" or multiple "centers of consciousness", this is something that is inferred from the mention of the titles of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Rather than understanding these terms in light of the OT foundational teaching of monotheism, the anti-Jewish philosophers of the 3rd -4th centuries contrived a complex and vague conception of "persons" to suit their pagan culture. It does make sense from at a superficial level if one doesn't have a firm grasp on the God of Abraham, Moses, and Isaiah.

I don't know why you are opposed to the Oneness doctrine since it is a much more accurate and biblical description of God. There is one Holy God, who is Father and creator, and as a omnipresent Spirit is able to be in all, and this one God was manifested in the flesh as the Son of God for our Salvation. Is this so hard? What is Biblically wrong with it? Be specific.

If God wanted us to know that he is a singularity, then that’s all we should find in Scripture.
If God wanted us to know that he was a plurality, then that’s what we should find in Scripture.
If they wanted us to know that he was a plurality in singularity and that’s what we should find in Scripture.
And that’s what we find in scripture.
The oneness idea works when you toss out all the verses that speak of God as a singularity and plurality , or speak of God as a plurality, or toss out all the verses that identify Jesus as a separate center of consciousness from the father.
The Trinity is based off of scripture in its entirety.

 

[Andreas]

In your dreams.

If I recall, we had a long discussion on this. And I bought up over a dozen arguments for the Trinity, which you could not counter, and we had to park it on the shelf. All of them are based off of scripture, of the original language. Nothing was based on philosophy. On the contrary, oneness incorporates, a tremendous amount of philosophy.

If God wanted us to know that he is a singularity, then that’s all we should find in Scripture.
If God wanted us to know that he was a plurality, then that’s what we should find in Scripture.
If they wanted us to know that he was a plurality in singularity and that’s what we should find in Scripture.
And that’s what we find in scripture.
The oneness idea works when you toss out all the verses that speak of God as a singularity and plurality , or speak of God as a plurality, or toss out all the verses that identify Jesus as a separate center of consciousness from the father.
The Trinity is based off of scripture in its entirety.

What we find in scripture is God as a singular I AM and "none beside me" and 7500+ singular pronoun references referring to God.
What we also find is the Son communicating to the Father.

The problem is that you take the Son communicating to the Father to mean evidence for multiple persons in the eternal Godhead. In doing this you have to redefine the word "one" to mean "one in unity" and minimize all those thousands of singular pronouns, especially where God says "none beside me".

If you take the communication of Son to Father as due to multiple persons in the Godhead, then you are left with problems like one co-equal person praying to another for help, one co-equal God person not knowing when the end of the world is, one co-equal God person growing in knowledge, one co-equal God person with the other co-equal God person in them doing all the miracles, and one co-equal God person praying "not my will, but thine be done".

It is much better to see the Son praying, and depending on the Father due to his genuine humanity. You toss out Christ's humanity, including his human mind.

Your doctrine of the Holy Spirit is even worse because you don't have anything in the Trinitarian toolkit of ideas to even touch an explanation as to how all three persons abide in a believer.

Your explanations are just like taking a square peg and trying to put it in a round hole. It goes in partially and gives promise of going in but is ultimately not a good fit and frustrating. But, you pound harder to make it fit and then point out how great it all is.

 

[Runningman]

Yes, I get what you are saying.

You aren't getting what I am saying.

This is it:
There is only one who is the despotēs of every Christian.


The same Greek word for "only" used in John 17:3 is used in Jude 4.

One Person of the Trinity can affirm the Deity of another Person of the Trinity. That is what is taking place in John 17:3 and what the Holy Spirit affirmed in Jude 4.

Oh I get it, but I disagree how you were framing the question and I'm not going to take the bait. It wouldn't have mattered how I answered your question. If I would have said yes you would have happily paraded around thinking you had proved Jesus is God. If I had said no you would have probably told me I am not a Christian or something. That's why I didn't play your game.

So, Fred, the crux of your question is flawed as it pivots upon the word "only,"

If there were no other possible despotés aside from God then you may have something, but it isn't exclusive to deity. It cannot be used as the sole definer of who God is. (1 Timothy 6:1)

 

[Fred]

Oh I get it, but I disagree how you were framing the question and I'm not going to take the bait.

Because your heresy would be refuted.

If there were no other possible despotés aside from God then you may have something, but it isn't exclusive to deity. It cannot be used as the sole definer of who God is. (1 Timothy 6:1)

Is only God holy (Revelation 15:4)?

 

[Towerwatchman]

What we find in scripture is God as a singular I AM and "none beside me" and 7500+ singular pronoun references referring to God.
What we also find is the Son communicating to the Father.

Numbers mean nothing. Everything has to agree. And again look up I am who I am. It has nothing to do with singularity. It has to do with eternal existence, you can’t even get that straight.

The problem is that you take the Son communicating to the Father to mean evidence for multiple persons in the eternal Godhead. In doing this you have to redefine the word "one" to mean "one in unity" and minimize all those thousands of singular pronouns, especially where God says "none beside me".

If you take the communication of Son to Father as due to multiple persons in the Godhead, then you are left with problems like one co-equal person praying to another for help, one co-equal God person not knowing when the end of the world is, one co-equal God person growing in knowledge, one co-equal God person with the other co-equal God person in them doing all the miracles, and one co-equal God person praying "not my will, but thine be done".

It is much better to see the Son praying, and depending on the Father due to his genuine humanity. You toss out Christ's humanity, including his human mind.

You weave a tapestry of confusion. The father is God, who became a man, and somehow, Jesus consciousness also appears, and then within the body there is two centers of consciousness, the father and the son. When convenient, it is the son who does a, b and c when convenient it’s the father, who does AB and C. And all the times when the son prays to the father, in reality, he’s talking to himself. Your version of the father and the son co inhabiting one physical body borders on multiple personality disorder.

Your doctrine of the Holy Spirit is even worse because you don't have anything in the Trinitarian toolkit of ideas to even touch an explanation as to how all three persons abide in a believer.

Is there a problem with that? my God is perfectly powerful enough to do it. Maybe yours is limited.

Your explanations are just like taking a square peg and trying to put it in a round hole. It goes in partially and gives promise of going in but is ultimately not a good fit and frustrating. But, you pound harder to make it fit and then point out how great it all is.

If I recall our conversations last time, the one who was frustrated was you. If you wanna go down that route again, go ahead and post something.

 

[Photine]

It's sad that every person is wrong about some things and right about others but never fully agreeing on what is true.

 

[Andreas]

Numbers mean nothing. Everything has to agree. And again look up I am who I am. It has nothing to do with singularity. It has to do with eternal existence, you can’t even get that straight.

You weave a tapestry of confusion. The father is God, who became a man, and somehow, Jesus consciousness also appears, and then within the body there is two centers of consciousness, the father and the son. When convenient, it is the son who does a, b and c when convenient it’s the father, who does AB and C. And all the times when the son prays to the father, in reality, he’s talking to himself. Your version of the father and the son co inhabiting one physical body borders on multiple personality disorder.

Is there a problem with that? my God is perfectly powerful enough to do it. Maybe yours is limited.

If I recall our conversations last time, the one who was frustrated was you. If you wanna go down that route again, go ahead and post something.

YHWH is SINGULAR in Hebrew. That is just a fact.

The tapestry you describe is confusing, however, that is not what I'm saying and it is not what I mean.

Didn't you already agree that the Father is omnipresent? Why do you have him completely contained within the body of the Son?

God is more than a "center of consciousness". God is more than just mind. God is Spirit. God has spiritual presence, omnipresence.

You abandon what you've already agreed to and construct a strawman to argue against. First things first.

When God was manifested in the flesh, God remained omnipresent and not contained just within the human body of Christ. Agree?

 

[Towerwatchman]

YHWH is SINGULAR in Hebrew. That is just a fact.

The tapestry you describe is confusing, however, that is not what I'm saying and it is not what I mean.

Didn't you already agree that the Father is omnipresent? Why do you have him completely contained within the body of the Son?

God is more than a "center of consciousness". God is more than just mind. God is Spirit. God has spiritual presence, omnipresence.

You abandon what you've already agreed to and construct a strawman to argue against. First things first.

When God was manifested in the flesh, God remained omnipresent and not contained just within the human body of Christ. Agree?

Agree to what? Your opinion? Start posting some spiritual support.

 

[Andreas]

Agree to what? Your opinion? Start posting some spiritual support.

Agree with the sentence before the word agree!

God is omnipresent, I thought you held that view too.

If you are to see Oneness Christology, we need to agree to the basics. In your "tapestry" that you described you didn't hold to these basics and so you misstated the Oneness position.

Once we have the Biblical basics, understand that at the incarnation, God's nature didn't change or transform. There was an addition to how God existed as a genuine man, but NOT a taking away or transforming of the nature of God.

Here to summarize:

God is...

Everywhere Present – Jeremiah 23:24; Acts 17:27-28

Invisible – 1 Timothy 6:16

Eternal past and future – 1 Timothy 1:17

Immutable (unchanging) – Malachi 3:6

All knowing (omniscient) – Psalm 139:1-6

Trinitarians have and should agree with this because it is simply the nature of God as described in the Bible. It is important that when we talk about Christology, these fundamental truths of the Bible don't change. That's not so hard. This is not a trick. My point is that Oneness theology has it's foundation in these very basic Biblical principles of God's nature. There shouldn't be anything controversial about anything I've said above.

 

[johnny guitar]

I keep answering your question. There’s a hierarchy. The head of the church is Christ and the head of Christ is God. Jesus is called Lord for that reason, but the Father is Jesus’ Lord and God and the Father is also our Lord and God.

Mark 12
29Jesus replied, “This is the most important: ‘Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.

John 20
17“Do not cling to Me,” Jesus said, “for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go and tell My brothers, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, to My God and your God.’ ”

What you have is called a false dichotomy because it severely limits the available options, hence the premise is false.


Also, language is more complicated than that. This isn’t a game of connect the dots.

The despotés word you seem so happy about applies to human masters in 1 Timothy 6:1. Oops, so much for that idea huh Fred? Better luck next time.

The Father is NEVER called Jesus' Lord. The ONE Lord has NO Lord.

 

[johnny guitar]

You still aren't getting what I am saying.

1 Timothy 6:1 shows that Christians can possibly have more than one master.

Jude 4 shows that Jude's talking about at least two (2), or more, people hence why he said "our only master." Jude is referring to a plurality of people, but not saying there is no other master aside from Jesus.

If Jude's group had more than one master, or were owned by someone, or perhaps were prisoners, then they couldn't honestly call Jesus their "only master." Understand? That's why I showed you 1 Timothy 6:1.

What you're wanting Jude 4 to say is "the only master," but it doesn't. Now this has been clearly exegesized. Thanks for sharing, but you aren't reading it correctly as I said. I hoped I could just nudge you and give you hints and you'll figure it out, but you aren't. The point is that Jude 4 isn't proof of Jesus being God, which I guess that's what you were hoping for.

Christians have ONE Master, ONE Lord ONLY: Jesus Christ.
Jude 4 concerns ONE Person, our ONLY Lord and Master Jesus Christ.

 

[Runningman]

Christians have ONE Master, ONE Lord ONLY: Jesus Christ.
Jude 4 concerns ONE Person, our ONLY Lord and Master Jesus Christ.

Who is the head of Christ?

 

[Runningman]

The Father is NEVER called Jesus' Lord. The ONE Lord has NO Lord.

Jesus praised his Father called his Father Lord.

Matthew 11
25At that time Jesus declared, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because You have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.