I don't think you are here to have a conversation. As
@APAK said, you ring and run.
Then you think I'm lying to you. Your mistake.
Matthias said Jesus is his lord, who has a God and Jesus God is his God. Your response? ... crickets ... crickets.
Jesus identified with men in all respects. But you will find yourself bowing to Jesus, the Creator of all.
You rememeber that Jeremiah wrote that YHWH is the God of all flesh. Did Jesus get baptized by John because He had sinned?
Odd that you think it needs to be clarified. You don't think you have a math problem when you say 100% + 100% = 100%? We have the burden to 'clarify' while you have no burden to fix your math.
- You - were the one to make the assertion, so - you - are the one to substantiate it. Fobbing it off isn't that. Making up some math thing doesn't begin to address the topic. We can all play games like that. 1 x 1 x 1 = 1. Clever, yes?
Only trinitarian ideology, imposing its interpretation onto unitarian text holds such a contradiction.
This speaks to the core of trinitarianism that you reject. Your rejection is not a proof.
NOTHING in the Bible shows Jesus is God incarnated in the flesh. Rather, my Bible says Jesus died. This is how we know he is not God.
Try that statement using the Biblical meaning of death. I think this is where you would most benefit. A word study in the Bible, and in particular the NT, to show the meaning of "death". When you are able to supply a meaning of "death" that is true every place the word appears, that will clarify things enormously, I think.
Acts 20:27-28 KJV
27) For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
28) Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers,
to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Whose blood?
Furthermore, Acts 17:31 explicitly states that God raised Jesus from dead. Do you grasp how one cannot be the subject if they are the object of the sentence? God, the one doing the acting, with the passive object being the lifeless corpse of the man Jesus.
Again, this speaks to the heart of trinitarianism which you reject. "Father and Son cannot be one", that's it, right? But Jesus, I and the Father are one. Do you believe that as stated?
John 2:18-22 KJV
18) Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?
19) Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple,
and in three days I will raise it up.
20) Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21) But
he spake of the temple of his body.
22) When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them;
and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.
God raised Jesus from the dead. Jesus foretold that He would raise the temple of His body in three days. And the Spirit is also credited,
1 Peter 3:18 KJV
18) For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God,
being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
Your theology is riddled with contradictions, starting with math and ending with <death = some form of life>.
So say you. But the thing is, I barely have to say a word, I can just post the Scriptures which teach these things.
Yes, the Father raised Jesus from the Dead. Yes, Jesus raised Himself from the Dead. Yes, the Spirit raised Jesus from death. So, which do you believe is true? This is no issue with a Triune God. But otherwise, which one of these Scriptural truths will you hold to, and which two will you reject?
Because of the Father and the Son are not the same God . . . well, polytheism is another problem for the non-trinitarians. But that's a whole 'nother angle.
The Bible explicitly said Jesus is a man.
And the Bible explicity said that Jesus "took on the form of a servant". Not that He was "created" a man.
Philippians 2:7-9 KJV
7) But
made himself of no reputation, and
took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8) And being found in fashion as a man,
he humbled himself, and
became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
9) Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
Each of these bolded parts show His pre-existence. I've NEVER disputed that Jesus is a man. But I continue to assert exactly what the Bible teaches, that Jesus is just the same our Creator God. "whom He purchased with His Own blood"
Jesus never taught the trinity.
I'll come back to this. I hardly know where to begin. Call that another ding dong ditch'em if that makes you feel superior or something. But there are too many directions to approach this from, so I'll come back later.
Why do you, a Jesus follower, teach what Jesus did not?
I teach what the Bible teaches.
I look forward to you demonstrating you are here to have conversations, rather than just ignore what others say who don't agree with you, then re-state your agenda/theology.
The thing is, I personally find all of your loaded language, and presumptions of me, to be distasteful, empty, and not edifying. Look at what you just wrote right here,
I look forward to you demonstrating you are here to have conversations, rather than just ignore what others say who don't agree with you, then re-state your agenda/theology.
This is supposed to attract me to a discussion with you? It doesn't.
You think I'm a liar, riddled with contridictions, ignoring others, I really think you lack better arguments to the things I'm saying. Show me otherwise, I may be more interested.
Much love!
