Oneness is a 1st century dominant belief of early Christians.

Truther

Well-known member
Straw men like this should be ignored and/or condemned. Make a logical argument next time.

Sinlessness isn't in the context of Phil 2:6. You are simply reading this into the text to pretend the text doesn't teach what it teaches. The direct context for this equality was Jesus being
"in the form of God". Deal with what the text says as opposed to what you wish it said.

God Bless
What other qualities did Jesus have to be equal with God, other than sinlessness....Baptist?

Name one.
 

Caroljeen

Active member
Then why did they teach all the tenets of the Trinity throughout Scripture? Why did those who sat under their teachings do the same in their writings? Since these men taught it, they clearly understood the doctrine of the Trinity without ever knowing/using the term.



And? This is what's called a non sequitur. Oneness does not follow from any of this. Jesus did add to their knowledge, namely, that he and the Spirit were God too, a second and third person who are also the one God of the OT.



You mean those Trinitarians who were under massive persecution by Roman officials? Those Trinitarians who had no political clout until 325 only to lose that clout to the Arians for some 50 years? Perhaps the real reason why we don't have their writings were due to the fact they didn't write as much and they didn't have an ongoing community eager to maintain it?


God Bless
The doctrine of the Trinity is murky at best in the OT and never clearly declared in the NT.
God always spoke in the first person singuar
God told Israel that they were his witnesses to the world. Yet, they never assumed a pleurality of persons in one being. Isaiah 44.8, 43:10-15

No, those considered to teach heresy had their books were burned
 
The doctrine of the Trinity is murky at best in the OT and never clearly declared in the NT.

Assertions of opinion are not arguments. I said they taught all the tenets of the Trinity throughout the NT. I never said anything about declaring any doctrine directly. If you going to respond to me, at least respond to what I said.

God always spoke in the first person singuar

Wrong, "Let US make man in our image..." Don't forget what Jesus said "And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed." Did your Jesus even exist before his conception in Mary? And, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," And what Paul said "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."

God told Israel that they were his witnesses to the world. Yet, they never assumed a pleurality of persons in one being. Isaiah 44.8, 43:10-15

Again with the non sequiturs? What individual Israelites assumed about God has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the Trinity is valid. Besides, there is evidence that some Jews in the first century believed something akin to Trinitarianism with God, the Memra, and the Spirit.

No, those considered to teach heresy had their books were burned

Your evidence for this? What Trinitarian in the first 300 years of the Church had the authority to go into another community and burn their books? Perhaps you should learn your history from historians and not from your theological teacher.

God Bless
 

Truther

Well-known member
The question of one who refused to think before asking a question. Jesus isn't "God's qualities". Stop assuming silly things.



No, we don't make silly assumptions like Jesus is "God's qualities"


God Bless
You think Jesus’ qualities were similar to God’s qualities, but Jesus thought it not robbery to compare his divine qualities with His divine fellows. You better rethink Phil 2 real hard.
 
You think Jesus’ qualities were similar to God’s qualities, but Jesus thought it not robbery to compare his divine qualities with His divine fellows. You better rethink Phil 2 real hard.

Similar? No, I believe Jesus and the Father are the same God. When are you going to interact with what we actually believe?
Compare? No, Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with the Father. When are you going to interact with what Scripture actually says?
Rethink Phil 2? I'm not the one literally rewriting half of it and ignoring the other half as to pretend their theology is possible. You don't need to rethink Phil 2. You need to simply accept what it says.


God Bless
 

Truther

Well-known member
Similar? No, I believe Jesus and the Father are the same God. When are you going to interact with what we actually believe?
Compare? No, Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with the Father. When are you going to interact with what Scripture actually says?
Rethink Phil 2? I'm not the one literally rewriting half of it and ignoring the other half as to pretend their theology is possible. You don't need to rethink Phil 2. You need to simply accept what it says.


God Bless
2 divine persons are 1 divine person?

Absurd
 
2 divine persons are 1 divine person?

Absurd

Correct, your assessment of Trinitarianism is absurd. Think better. I believe Jesus and the Father are the same God. When are you going to interact with what we actually believe? Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with the Father. When are you going to interact with what Scripture actually says? I'm not the one literally rewriting half of Philippians 2:6-7 and ignoring the other half as to pretend my theology is possible. You don't need to rethink Phil 2; you need to simply accept what it says.

God Bless
 

Truther

Well-known member
Correct, your assessment of Trinitarianism is absurd. Think better. I believe Jesus and the Father are the same God. When are you going to interact with what we actually believe? Jesus thought it not robbery to be equal with the Father. When are you going to interact with what Scripture actually says? I'm not the one literally rewriting half of Philippians 2:6-7 and ignoring the other half as to pretend my theology is possible. You don't need to rethink Phil 2; you need to simply accept what it says.

God Bless
2 are the same exact one?

This idea makes zero sense.
 

Truther

Well-known member
We don't send any messages that are cultic such as Oneness.
Both oneness and trinity doctrines are cultic.

Both are scripturally crooked and both have a massive following.

Both are concoctions of the RCC. (oneness is a modification of the trin, HU doctrine).
 
Top