A Curious Question For Non-Trinitarians

[Hidden In Him]

I have a question I was hoping to maybe get some answers on from non-Trinitarians. Here goes: Using scriptural proofs, what would you say is the difference between serving the man Jesus Christ and serving God? I ask because this question presents itself in the following passage of scripture:

22 Bondservants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, not with eye-service as men-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing God. 23 And whatever you do, do it heartily, as unto the Lord and not to men, 24 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance. Serve Christ the Lord. 25 But he who does wrong will be repaid for what he has done, and there is no partiality. (Colossians 3:22-25)

The Trinitarian interprets "the Lord" here to be one and the same in every verse, referring to the Lord Jesus Christ, whom Paul's readers were being encouraged to serve with sincerity of heart, in fearing God. The non-Trinitarian, however, interprets verses 22-24 to be references to serving God, whereas the phrase in v.24 "Serve Christ the Lord" is a sudden transition to talking about serving the man Jesus Christ.

So how from scripture is serving the man Jesus Christ different from serving God?

Blessings in Christ to all who respond.
Hidden In Him

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I have a question I was hoping to maybe get some answers on from non-Trinitarians. Here goes: Using scriptural proofs, what would you say is the difference between serving the man Jesus Christ and serving God? I ask because this question presents itself in the following passage of scripture:

22 Bondservants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, not with eye-service as men-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing God. 23 And whatever you do, do it heartily, as unto the Lord and not to men, 24 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance. Serve Christ the Lord. 25 But he who does wrong will be repaid for what he has done, and there is no partiality. (Colossians 3:22-25)

The Trinitarian interprets "the Lord" here to be one and the same in every verse, referring to the Lord Jesus Christ, whom Paul's readers were being encouraged to serve with sincerity of heart, in fearing God. The non-Trinitarian, however, interprets verses 22-24 to be references to serving God, whereas the phrase in v.24 "Serve Christ the Lord" is a sudden transition to talking about serving the man Jesus Christ.

So how from scripture is serving the man Jesus Christ different from serving God?

Blessings in Christ to all who respond.
Hidden In Him

There's no difference between man serving Jesus Christ and man serving God- Jesus is God.

The reason I'm not a trinitarian is that I believe that the Father/Son/Spirit are 1 God via unity rather than via a shared substance as stated in the Trinitarian Creeds (most notably the Athanasian Creed).

 

[Hidden In Him]

There's no difference between man serving Jesus Christ and man serving God- Jesus is God.

The reason I'm not a trinitarian is that I believe that the Father/Son/Spirit are 1 God via unity rather than via a shared substance as stated in the Trinitarian Creeds (most notably the Athanasian Creed).

Alright. Are you sure your position isn't still Trinitarian, however? Most non-Trinitarians do not acknowledge that Jesus is God, at least not with a capital G anyway.

 

[Rudometkin]

There's no difference between man serving Jesus Christ and man serving God- Jesus is God.

The reason I'm not a trinitarian is that I believe that the Father/Son/Spirit are 1 God via unity rather than via a shared substance as stated in the Trinitarian Creeds (most notably the Athanasian Creed).

Would I confuse the subject if I said 'there is only one God - the Trinity'?

 

[Wrangler]

Would I confuse the subject if I said 'there is only one God - the Trinity'?

Only in the same way as saying 1 is the same as 3.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Would I confuse the subject if I said 'there is only one God - the Trinity'?

Greetings, Rudometkin. If you can, please limit this thread to a discussion of the passage at hand. There have been dozens upon dozens upon DOZENS of threads lately debating the Trinity. My focus on this one is to try and keep to maintaining the discussion on the passage cited in the OP.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Only in the same way as saying 1 is the same as 3.

The OP, Wrangler. This thread is tailored specifically around the question posed in the OP. What would your response be?

 

[Wrangler]

I have a question I was hoping to maybe get some answers on from non-Trinitarians. Here goes: Using scriptural proofs, what would you say is the difference between serving the man Jesus Christ and serving God? I ask because this question presents itself in the following passage of scripture:

I’ll bite.

1st, it’s sad that trinitarians cannot help themselves to hijack the thread. The childishness is akin to attempting to yell over someone as a means to prevent them from saying what you don’t them to say.

2nd, let me use my preferred translation to answer your question.
Colossians 3:22-25
Contemporary English Version

22 Slaves, you must always obey your earthly masters. Try to please them at all times, and not just when you think they are watching. Honor the Lord and serve your masters with your whole heart. 23 Do your work willingly, as though you were serving the Lord himself, and not just your earthly master. 24 In fact, the Lord Christ is the one you are really serving, and you know that he will reward you. 25 But Christ has no favorites! He will punish evil people, just as they deserve.

3rd, I trust this will be an exchange over several posts, knowing in advance to answer non-trinitarians give will ultimately be satisfactory.

4th, my preliminary response is the Scriptural reference is about serving the man Jesus and not God. However, the Bible is filled of Person A doing things through Person B. Jesus is our direct Master. This is akin to one owing loyalty directly to the Governor of Judah, who in turn owes loyalty to the sovereign Roman Emperor.

Hope this helps.

 

[Hidden In Him]

1st, it’s sad that trinitarians cannot help themselves to hijack the thread.

I don't mind who responds (though it's the non-Trinitarians I am specifically soliciting answers from). I'm just making sure the focus stays directed to the OP.

22 Slaves, you must always obey your earthly masters. Try to please them at all times, and not just when you think they are watching. Honor the Lord and serve your masters with your whole heart. 23 Do your work willingly, as though you were serving the Lord himself, and not just your earthly master. 24 In fact, the Lord Christ is the one you are really serving, and you know that he will reward you. 25 But Christ has no favorites! He will punish evil people, just as they deserve.

Hmm... for starters, what translation is this? "Christ has no favorites" sounds like a paraphrase.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Alright. Are you sure your position isn't still Trinitarian, however? Most non-Trinitarians do not acknowledge that Jesus is God, at least not with a capital G anyway.

The following are two different things:
1) the "lay man's" Trinity where you just acknowledge Christ as God
2) a fully fledged academic theological study of the Trinity examining historical statements like the Athanasian Creed.

I do not subscribe to #2 and have some problems with it. I shy away from #1 because of the association with #2.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Hmm... for starters, what translation is this? "Christ has no favorites" sounds like a paraphrase.

Bahahaha!! Just noticed it was provided for me in BOLD BLACK print! (Facepalm in the Highest).

Ok, give me a sec then. I need to analyze it more.

 

[Hidden In Him]

The following are two different things:
1) the "lay man's" Trinity where you just acknowledge Christ as God
2) a fully fledged academic theological study of the Trinity examining historical statements like the Athanasian Creed.

I do not subscribe to #2, and shy away from #1 because of the association with #2.

Ok, thanks. Since the thread has taken off, let me stick to discussing the passage at hand, but I appreciate your response.

 

[Hidden In Him]

22 Slaves, you must always obey your earthly masters. Try to please them at all times, and not just when you think they are watching. Honor the Lord and serve your masters with your whole heart. 23 Do your work willingly, as though you were serving the Lord himself, and not just your earthly master. 24 In fact, the Lord Christ is the one you are really serving, and you know that he will reward you. 25 But Christ has no favorites! He will punish evil people, just as they deserve.

Ok, this translation plays with the tenses too much for my comfort personally, but supposing we were to use it, are you interpreting v.22-23 to be referring to God and v.24 to be referring to Christ, or do you interpret the whole passage as referring to Christ alone?

 

[Wrangler]

Ok, this translation plays with the tenses too much for my comfort personally, but supposing we were to use it, are you interpreting v.22-23 to be referring to God and v.24 to be referring to Christ, or do you interpret the whole passage as referring to Christ alone?

It’s not my interpretation. It is explicitly what the translation I prefer states.

 

[Hidden In Him]

It is explicitly what the translation I prefer states

Ok, then clarify for me. What are you saying it explicitly states? (i.e. in light of what I asked in Post #13).

 

[Wrangler]

Ok, then clarify for me. What are you saying it explicitly states? (i.e. in light of what I asked in Post #13).

The passage refers to Christ alone.

 

[Hidden In Him]

The passage refers to Christ alone.

Ok, interesting. This interpretation would differ from the JW interpretation, which renders 22-23 as referring to God and 24 to Christ...

But now let me ask you: Doesn't this put judgment into the hands of Christ rather than God? As the translation states, "the Lord Christ is the one you are really serving, and you know that he will reward you.... He will punish evil people, just as they deserve." I suppose that could be explained through passages like those in Matthew 25, but maybe the bigger question is, how can we be "serving" Jesus if He is not God?

God bless, and thanks for the responses. I find your interp more credible than that of the Watchtower.

 

[Wrangler]

But now let me ask you: Doesn't this put judgment into the hands of Christ rather than God? As the translation states, "the Lord Christ is the one you are really serving,

God bless, and thanks for the responses. I find your interp more credible than that of the Watchtower.

Thank you. FYI, anticipating your question, I already answered it.

4th, my preliminary response is the Scriptural reference is about serving the man Jesus and not God. However, the Bible is filled of Person A doing things through Person B. Jesus is our direct Master. This is akin to one owing loyalty directly to the Governor of Judah, who in turn owes loyalty to the sovereign Roman Emperor.

IMO, this common theme in Scripture, for Person A to do things through Person B trips up trinitarians. This is because they impose their doctrine unto unitarian text.

Let me provide a basis of comparison; who spoke to Moses in the burning bush; an angel or the LORD God? Scripture says both.

Another example is by whose hand was Pharaoh punished; Aaron or the LORD God? Scripture says both.

A 3rd example is Isaiah in 44:6 saying “I am the alpha and the omega.” Is he God also, since Jesus also said it? No. Both prophets are doing what prophets do, speak on behalf of God.

 

[Enoch111]

Let me provide a basis of comparison; who spoke to Moses in the burning bush; an angel or the LORD God? Scripture says both.

But you cannot get your head around this. The Angel of the LORD was none other than the pre-incarnate Christ. He said in this passage that His name was " I AM". But Jesus of Nazareth also told the Jews that He was "I AM" (long before Abraham). So instead of believing that Jesus is God, you wish to play games with Scripture. A very dangerous activity.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Thank you. FYI, anticipating your question, I already answered it.

Yeah, for some reason it hadn't printed out yet when I first clicked on the post. But without assenting to Unitarianism, your position is a sound one on this passage. I think the JW position is weaker, as the context makes it a rather unnatural reading, IMO.

I might have commented on some of your other references as Enoch just did, but that would be to diverge on the subject matter of this thread which I up till now have not wanted to do, so I'll save it for another time. If I don't get any JW responses, I suppose I will leave it free to go wherever it will.

Thanks again for the replies.
- H