No one has seen God at any time, John?

[Matthias]

Yes, and I understand how you worded that too.

But just as it would be a mistake to think that your own picture is actually another person instead of the "image" you are as revealed and stated from the beginning, the same is true of Jesus.

Jesus isn’t a photograph of Yahweh. Jesus is one person, Yahweh is another - and different - person in Jewish monotheism.

Yahweh and Jesus. Two persons who are one in will and purpose.

So, yes, the most special picture in the Father's wallet is of Jesus, but He also has one of you and I...and in the end we too are One as they are One.

Yahweh and many persons. Many persons who are one in will and purpose.

 

[ScottA]

Jesus isn’t a photograph of Yahweh. Jesus is one person, Yahweh is another - and different - person in Jewish monotheism.

Yahweh and Jesus. Two persons who are one in will and purpose.



Yahweh and many persons. Many persons who are one in will and purpose.

I was not debating, but stating what is actually true.

Your authority would appear to be the Jewish monotheism belief, as you stated. But then again, they were wrong about Jesus.

My authority is God, and confirmed in the scriptures from the beginning.

But it's not a contest. God wins.

 

[Matthias]

I was not debating …

I appreciate that. Neither was I.

… but stating what is actually true.

I simply don’t believe what you are stating is true.

Your authority would appear to be the Jewish monotheism belief, as you stated. But then again, they were wrong about Jesus.

Not all Jewish monotheists were wrong about Jesus.

Jesus himself is a Jewish monotheist. The apostles are all Jewish monotheists. The first Christians were all Jewish monotheists.

My authority is God, and confirmed in the scriptures from the beginning.

I’m certain you think so. Doesn’t every theist make that claim for himself or herself? I do.

I know you’re not a trinitarian but this trinitarian theologian makes the concession to my position, acknowledging the constraint of history.

But it's not a contest. God wins.

 

[ScottA]

I’m certain you think so. Doesn’t every theist make that claim for himself or herself? I do.

I wasn't making any claim, nor speaking. Or does your belief not allow for that?

 

[soberxp]

I wasn't making any claim, nor speaking. Or does your belief not allow for that?

Have you ever considered that people misunderstand the doctrine of the Trinity?

God made man in his own image.
Jesus Christ is the image of God.

Nothing more than the words.

The world made me far away from the image of God,but though Jesus Christ that I made new in him.

 

[Matthias]

I wasn't making any claim, nor speaking.

“My authority is God, and confirmed in the scriptures from the beginning” (post #22) isn’t a claim, nor speaking? What is it then?

 

[ScottA]

“My authority is God, and confirmed in the scriptures from the beginning” (post #22) isn’t a claim, nor speaking? What is it then?

A bridge, Light through the prism of Christ. For you.

 

[Matthias]

A bridge, Light through the prism of Christ. For you.

A bridge that isn’t a claim that God is your authority, and confirmed in the scripture? A bridge that isn’t you speaking?

 

[ScottA]

A bridge that isn’t a claim that God is your authority, and confirmed in the scripture? A bridge that isn’t you speaking?

If I claim nothing that is mine, I make no claim. This too is written.

 

[Matthias]

If I claim nothing that is mine, I make no claim. This too is written.

I claim God as my authority. I‘m willing to accept your denial that you claim God as your authority.

As for the bridge you offered me: It isn’t from, nor does it lead to, the God of Jewish monotheism.

 

[Behold]

John is not talking about the risen Jesus in the verse.

 

[ScottA]

I claim God as my authority. I‘m willing to accept your denial that you claim God as your authority.

As for the bridge you offered me: It isn’t from, nor does it lead to, the God of Jewish monotheism.

I will not and do not deny God. But you have forgotten that He is One as you deny that He is Christ.

 

[dak]

Hmmm....... this is getting interesting.

 

[Matthias]

I will not and do not deny God.

You denied that you claimed God is your authority. I accepted that.

You deny the God of Jewish monotheism. I accept that.

But you have forgotten that He is One ….

Certainly not. I’m a Jewish monotheist. The Shema is my creed.

… as you deny that He is Christ.

I assert that God is in Messiah.

Everyone should offer the bridge they believe in to others. You offered me the bridge you believe in. Thank you.

I offered you the bridge I believe in.

The trinitarians offer both of us the bridge they believe in. I thank them.

 

[Matthias]

Hmmm....... this is getting interesting.

I didn’t know where this thread was going to go when I started it. Now that it has progressed I’m left wondering if it went where @RLT63 thought it would go. He knows I’m not interested in discussing the Trinity. Did he envision it becoming a discussion about the non-trinitarian “bridge” offered by @ScottA? I didn’t.

 

[dak]

I didn’t know where this thread was going to go when I started it. Now that it has progressed I’m left wondering if it went where @RLT63 thought it would go. He knows I’m not interested in discussing the Trinity. Did he envision it becoming a discussion about the non-trinitarian “bridge” offered by @ScottA? I didn’t.

That's one of the reasons I thought it interesting: two non-Trinitarians disagreeing.
Where will it go? I know not, at least at this point. :)

 

[ScottA]

You denied that you claimed God is your authority. I accepted that.

You deny the God of Jewish monotheism. I accept that.

I do not deny my saying that God is my authority.

Certainly not. I’m a Jewish monotheist. The Shema is my creed.


I assert that God is in Messiah.

You have been clear. However, the scriptures say Messiah is the Word, and the Word is God.

As for God being in Messiah, that is different that saying they are One as the scriptures say.

Everyone should offer the bridge they believe in to others. You offered me the bridge you believe in. Thank you.

I offered you the bridge I believe in.

The trinitarians offer both of us the bridge they believe in. I thank them.

The bridge that I offered was not from me to you, but from God to you.

You offered, by your own admission, what you believe assuming I was doing the same. I was not.

As for trinitarians, they know and acknowledge God by many names. In that, they are no offense.

 

[Matthias]

I do not deny my saying that God is my authority. You'll do better to stop with the double negatives.

Then go back and see what I initially said in response to your claim.

You have been clear.

I’m pleased to hear that but a little surprised to hear it after what you just said.

However, the scriptures say Messiah is the Word, and the Word is God.

Please see my comments on John’s prologue in his Gospel if you’re interested in my position. John himself is a Jewish monotheist and it is my contention that what Jewish monotheists write should be understood as the Jewish monotheist writers understood them and intended their readers to understand them.

As for God being in Messiah, that is different that saying they are One as the scriptures say.

See the trinitarian commentary I’ve used in other discussions to support my position against yours.

The bridge that I offered was not from me to you, but from God to you.

As I pointed out earlier, the bridge you offered isn’t from the God of Jewish monotheism to me.

You offered, by your own admission, what you believe assuming I was doing the same. I was not.

I offered you what I offer everyone -> a bridge to the God of Jewish monotheism.

As for trinitarians, they know and acknowledge God by many names. In that, they are no offense.

While your theology is closer to theirs than mine is, they assert that both yours and mine is heretical. It speaks well of you that you don’t take offense at it.

 

[ScottA]

Then go back and see what I initially said in response to your claim.



I’m pleased to hear that but a little surprised to hear it after what you just said.



Please see my comments on John’s prologue in his Gospel if you’re interested in my position. John himself is a Jewish monotheist and it is my contention that what Jewish monotheists write should be understood as the Jewish monotheist writers understood them and intended their readers to understand them.



See the trinitarian commentary I’ve used in other discussions to support my position against yours.



As I pointed out earlier, the bridge you offered isn’t from the God of Jewish monotheism to me.



I offered you what I offer everyone -> a bridge to the God of Jewish monotheism.



While your theology is closer to theirs than mine is, they assert that both yours and mine is heretical. It speaks well of you that you don’t take offense at it.

None of this was ever a debate that I should go back and discover the details of your position. I have no position, and make no claims that are mine. But you are not representing the One True God well, in fact have crossed a line where you admittedly refer to a religious sect as your authority rather than God Himself, even making false and unbiblical claims against Christ.

Meanwhile, I have [again] explained a biblical matter to you as a plumb line between your position and claims, and what is actually true--which I do by the Spirit of all truth as foretold--meaning we two have nothing to discuss. Even so, all truth--not fully revealed during the times and origins you now hold to--was to come, and has come.

 

[dak]

even making false and unbiblical claims against Christ.

Hi Scott, can you please specifically point out and explain the "false and unbiblical claims against Christ" that he made? (I mean explain from the scripture why you say the claims were unbiblibal). Or is this really mostly about John 1:1 which you have already mentioned?