I have a question that remains unanswered:

[Wrangler]

Despite your hostile-sounding presuppositions

Impeccable logic is hostile to flawed arguments.

If the issue was decided in a court of law, your case wouldn't be any stronger than those you oppose.

Appeal to Ignorance. One odd argument trinitarians make is this sort of equality of statements, compounded with the supposition that the benefit of the doubt should go to them. What is funny is that in courts of law, statistics and logic, the one making the positive claim has the burden of proof.

Trinitarians want to assert the absence of compelling strength means the 'tie' should go to them. This is illogical. They have to overcome the fact that the trinity is not in the Bible - not the word and not the doctrine. There simply is no verse that says something like The nature of God is a trinity - consisting of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit where they are all co-equal, co-substantial and co-eternal - and if you do not believe this, you cannot be saved but are damned to hell forever. There are many verses that explicitly go against the trinity. For instance, every Epistle's introduction is written in the name of God the Father and Jesus. Not only does this identify the Father alone as God, conspicuously absent is the Holy Spirit in each Epistle's introduction.

Given this absence, the tie goes to the one denying the claim, the Defendant, etc. Considering all this, it is so odd that trinitarians make their doctrine the highest importance, higher than the 1C. The trinity is so important, in 66 books, it is not mentioned once?! Jesus did not teach the trinity. Powerful refuting of this 4th century doctrine.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Did He lie in these verses?

Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (John 8:58)

I and my Father are one. (John 10:30)

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? (John 14:9)​

Was Isaiah lying in this verse?

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6)​

Are these questions worth asking, in light of the OP?

These questions are absolutely worth asking, but unless you have an open mind and heart, taken at face value and with a closed mind, they can say the exact opposite to what you think they do.

Scripture does not contradict itself.....in fact it confirms the truth if you take the Bible as a whole instead of cherry-picked 'bits' of it.

Let me take each verse there and analyse it with other scripture....in context.
John 8:58.....if you understand that God’s name never meant “I Am” in the first place, this allows us to see what Jesus really said to his accusers.

The Jewish Tanakh gives the meaning of God’s name (YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah) as “I Wii Be What I Will Be”.
"14 God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'"
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9864

It is not a statement of God’s existence, but a statement of his intention to “BE” whatever he needs to be, in order for his will to be carried out.
So John 8:58 has no connection at all to Exodus 3:13-15.

In context, John 8:56-58 says....
"56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." (ESV)

You can see that Jesus was answering a question about his age, and replied that he “was” in existence before Abraham was even born. The “I am” there should be “I was” because the present tense makes no sense in that statement.

Jesus said “I am” on many occasions identifying different aspects of his work on earth, but none of them are a reference back to Exodus 3:14.
John 6:35, 41. John 14:2, 4.
John 14:28...
"You heard that I said to you, ‘I am going away, and I am coming to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."
How can the Father be greater than a part of his equal self?

John 10:30 is clarified by another of Jesus’ statements in John 17:21-22...
"that they may all be one; just as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.
The glory which You have given Me I also have given to them, so that they may be one, just as We are one".
This is a unity of spirit and purpose.....not an indication of a trinity unless you think all his disciples were part of the trinity too? See what happens when you cherry pick?

John 14:9.....Like Father, like Son. He is the image of his Father (Colossians 1:15) but an image is a reflection of the real thing. Jesus never once claimed to be God nor did he ever seek equality with him. All glory went to the Father. (Philippians 2:11)

And lastly Isaiah 9:6...a prophesy about the Messiah and the roles that he would fill in that position.
"The mighty God, The everlasting Father". These two descriptions seem to indicate godship here, but they are not what you think if you read with the rest of scripture in mind.

Since the Jews were monotheistic, to suggest that the Messiah was Almighty God would have been blasphemy of the highest order, so look carefully..."The mighty God" is not Almighty God. Can the Messiah be a "god" and not be the Almighty? The scriptures answer YES!

John 10:31-36..
" The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus replied to them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33 The Jews answered Him, “We are not stoning You for a good work, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” 34 Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law: ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be nullified), 36 are you saying of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?" (NASB)
Who was Jesus talking about? Who were these "gods" he mentioned? They were the judges of Israel appointed by God and given authority by him. Having this God-given authority made them God's representatives. Yahweh himself called them "gods". (Psalm 82)
The word "god" in Greek simply means a "mighty one"...their divinities all had various powers.
Even satan is called a "god" so its not an exclusive term. (2 Corinthians 4:4)

Now, how about this one.....? "The everlasting Father"
The term "father" ("'āḇ") in Hebrew has a range of meanings. According to Strongs Concordance, it can mean....

1. "father of an individual
2. of God as father of his people
3. head or founder of a household, group, family, or clan
4. ancestor
   1. grandfather, forefathers — of person
   2. of people"

So according to that understanding, Jesus can be the "head or founder of a group, family or clan". His sacrifice would give them everlasting life.
This is how he becomes an "everlasting father" to those who are covered by his sacrifice.

Jesus identified his Father as the one who was in Heaven when he was on the earth. (Matthew 6:9)
He is not his own Father. So interpreting Isaiah 9:6-7 as the Messiah being God is completely blasphemous.

Let the Bible tell its own story.....

 

[Wrangler]

How can the Father be greater than a part of his equal self?

Outstanding question!

Undoubtedly, if a trinitarian even attempts to answer this, he will employ mystical dualism where logic is no constraint at all. Supporting the flawed doctrine at all cost to intellectual integrity is what seems to matter to them.

This is a unity of spirit and purpose.....not an indication of a trinity unless you think all his disciples were part of the trinity too?

And all subsequent believers in the billions.

Aunty Jane, if you could help me with Hebrew that would be wonderful. One trinitarian went do far as to assert the "our" in make man in 'our image' refers not to an unspecified plural but to a collective of, you guessed it, 3. I suspect this was just another attempt to make a mockery of language, specifically singular and plural pronouns. Thoughts?

 

[Wrangler]

Can the Messiah be a "god" and not be the Almighty? The scriptures answer YES!

The CEV translation Psalm 82:1 was the verse of the year last year for me. It's the Original Sin all over again!

Jesus used v6 to justify calling himself the son of God. Powerful stuff to realize the Bible recognizes that we are all 'gods' (in the Bible sense of being law givers and judges to those under our authority) while also recognizing one LORD, who is the almighty Creator and Supreme Being, the God of our master (and lord) Jesus.


When all of the other gods[a]
have come together,
the LORD God judges them ...
6 “I, the Most High God, say
that all of you are gods[c]
and also my own children.
Psalm 82:1, 6 (CEV)

 

[BarneyFife]

Impeccable logic is hostile to flawed arguments.



Appeal to Ignorance. One odd argument trinitarians make is this sort of equality of statements, compounded with the supposition that the benefit of the doubt should go to them. What is funny is that in courts of law, statistics and logic, the one making the positive claim has the burden of proof.

Trinitarians want to assert the absence of compelling strength means the 'tie' should go to them. This is illogical. They have to overcome the fact that the trinity is not in the Bible - not the word and not the doctrine. There simply is no verse that says something like The nature of God is a trinity - consisting of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit - and if you do not believe this, you cannot be saved but are damned to hell forever. There are many verses that explicitly go against the trinity. For instance, every Epistle's introduction is written in the name of God the Father and Jesus. Not only does this identify the Father alone as God, conspicuously absent is the Holy Spirit in each Epistle's introduction.

Given this absence, the tie goes to the one denying the claim, the Defendant, etc. Considering all this, it is so odd that trinitarians make their doctrine the highest importance, higher than the 1C. The trinity is so important, in 66 books, it is not mentioned once?! Jesus did not teach the trinity. Powerful refuting of this 4th century doctrine.

There can be no doubt here that you are much more desperate to prove there isn't a doctrine of trinity than nearly anyone is to prove there is. Hardly anyone is starting threads about it except those who vehemently oppose it. The damnation remark is certainly a straw man in my case. Intellectual rants don't change a thing.

 

[Wrangler]

Intellectual rants don't change a thing.

My friend, intellectual rants are not intended to change ones beliefs, only show readers the relative strength of arguments.

There is nothing wrong with saying 'I believe X' without being able to defend it to the nth degree. But stop lying to yourself about having thought through the believe you hold but cannot Scripturally defend - with explicit teaching (as opposed to merely inferential 'support').

There can be no doubt here that you are much more desperate to prove there isn't a doctrine of trinity than nearly anyone is to prove there is.

Well, not desperation, just an abiding passion.

The damnation remark is certainly a straw man in my case.

Here, you reveal how personally you take the posts. I am not attacking you but a self-contradictory concept. If damnation is not tied to not believing the trinity, why do so many advocates make this claim? Or do you deny, if not you, other trinitaraisns also don't make this claim?

 

[BarneyFife]

...unless you have an open mind and heart, taken at face value and with a closed mind, they can say the exact opposite to what you think they do.

Scripture does not contradict itself.....in fact it confirms the truth if you take the Bible as a whole instead of cherry-picked 'bits' of it.

Yes, it must be that I am just a closed-minded cherry picker.

if you understand that God’s name never meant “I Am” in the first place, this allows us to see what Jesus really said to his accusers.

Who said it did? Not me. You presuppose that we all think alike. It's really quite an us-and-them thing, isn't it?

Let the Bible tell its own story.....

Or we could let mental gymnastics tell it, obviously. What is the common man to do?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Aunty Jane, if you could help me with Hebrew that would be wonderful. One trinitarian went do far as to assert the "our" in make man in 'our image' refers not to an unspecified plural but to a collective of, you guessed it, 3. I suspect this was just another attempt to make a mockery of language, specifically singular and plural pronouns. Thoughts?

Ah yes....Genesis 1:26....
The Scriptures make it clear that the Son was God's first creation (Revelation 3:14; Colossians 1:15-17)....it also indicates that God was not alone in his creative works as Proverbs 8:30-31 indicates......as the 'wisdom of God', the Son was his "Master workman" in the creation process. (1 Corinthians 1:24, 30)

In understanding the co-operation of the three, who are not part of a triune godhead, but who all featured in creation we can see that in Genesis 1:1 the involvement of God's Holy Spirit.....the application of God's power in bringing about the material universe, but as God was clearly speaking to someone in Genesis 1:26, the scriptures indicate that it was to his "Master workman".....the one "through" whom all things came into existence.
Does that help?

 

[BarneyFife]

But stop lying to yourself about having thought through the believe you hold

What do you know about what has happened in my mind?

Here, you reveal how personally you take the posts.

It really is about making others look weak, isn't it? I don't care what you think about me. This is kind of narcissistic, isn't it?

Or do you deny, if not you, other trinitaraisns also don't make this claim?

I'm not concerned with what other "trinita-raisins" do. I'm not, as I said before, even sure I'm a textbook case.

Sorry, but this sandbox is really starting to bore me. You could PM me, I guess, if you mature enough to have an adult discussion.

Ciao

 

[Wrangler]

Or we could let mental gymnastics tell it, obviously. What is the common man to do?

That reminds me of a verse I came across the other day. It reads that there is no special or hidden message in our words (of Scripture). Yet, that is exactly what trinitarians do at every turn. For instance, I offer proof that Jesus is not God. The proof is that Jesus died.

Mental gymnastics assert that he only physically died. This is Exhibit A of imposing doctrine onto text that does not explicitly support it.

 

[Wrangler]

What do you know about what has happened in my mind?

I know enough. Did you read up on axiomatic analysis?

You have repeatedly posted some version of your personal POV, experience, or thought processes. Yet, you fail that is irrelevant to the discussion for we are not talking about you BarnyFife. Yes, I did say "you" in the post in question but I meant it as "one," such as "one" who supports this view. I just happen to think using "one" is a bit academic. Isn't that common language usage?

If one wants to be healthy, one must pay attention to diet and experience.
If you want to be healthy, you must pay attention to diet and experience.

Neither objective statements depend on knowing what has happened in your (another's) mind.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Yes, it must be that I am just a closed-minded cherry picker.

Who said it did? Not me. You presuppose that we all think alike. It's really quite an us-and-them thing, isn't it?

Or we could let mental gymnastics tell it, obviously. What is the common man to do?

Any actual reply to the content of the post?

I have used scripture to expose what Christendom has done to transform the nature of God into something he never was.
That is what the Jews did to Jesus...accused him of blasphemy when they were the ones guilty of it. They too twisted the scriptures to suit their own man-made traditions. (Matthew 15:7-9) Jesus told them that their worship was "in vain".

Can you refute anything I said? Mature adults can do this in a civil fashion I hope. Its not personal so why make it so?....

 

[Nancy]

@Robert Gwin

Not a lie if each man effectively judges himself as he applies, or fails to apply, what God has spoken... [that is, the Word of God]!

When did God speak all of His Word applicable to men?

Indeed, if 100% God as commonly stated, how could Jesus not know what the Father knew? Does God change? Does God learn? So then split Jesus into two parts or consider that Jesus was not God as his Father was God. Hmmm? Consider this! Must we know the answer definitely?

Perhaps at the time Jesus said that, God "The Father" did not yet speak the time or hour of His return? The "Word of God"?

 

[amadeus]

Perhaps at the time Jesus said that, God "The Father" did not yet speak the time or hour of His return? The "Word of God"?

I am being careful at the moment not to speculate. I am not confused, but neither is my vision of Him absolutely clear. Going in God's direction as He leads us, we are not confused.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Perhaps at the time Jesus said that, God "The Father" did not yet speak the time or hour of His return? The "Word of God"?

Faith is not built on perhaps or maybe...it is built on certainties.

Hebrews 11:1...
"Now faith is the certainty of things hoped for, a proof of things not seen."

 

[FDS]

God the Father, Yahweh
Christ says My Father which is in heaven or just My Father at least 27 time in the Gospels.

Oh my goodness. Man made up doctrine. God the Faher (Yahweh) is correct but then deception steeped in claiming he never stated things that he actauly did.

After Jesus was speaking to Mary Magadaline here on the earth outside the tomb. Jesus informed Mary, “Stop clinging to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothersi and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’”

Jesus did not make himself equal to God but rather he made himself equal to Mary Magdalene. ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’ John 20:17

I do hope religon stops telling lies about the Bible.

 

[Taken]

Many people teach that Jesus is God, fact is he either is or isn't. So my question is, if Jesus is God then did he lie in these verses?:
Mr 10:40But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared

Mr 13:32But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

I do not believe Jesus lied, and likely you do not either, so how does one who believes Jesus is God, explain this?

BACKGROUND -

Explanation - is likened to revealing Understanding.

The mystery of Understanding "spiritual" things, IS; the Understanding of anything "spiritual", comes from a "spiritual thing".

God IS Spirit, Man IS NOT A Spirit...
A sort of a "communication" conundrum?

Observe the teaching "method"...
Analogies... Revealing that which IS Spiritual...in a manner TO: what IS familiar to a Mankind....

Begin with..."father" being mentioned hundreds of times, IN: Gen; Ex; Lev; Num.
It expressly Applies to An Earthly Man, Head of his Household, Authority, Rulemaker, Oversseer, Responsible for revealing Knowledge and Care of his Household....

THEN QUESTION...WHY is God in Heaven, called: The Father?

That ANSWER...is revealed IN Deut.

Deut. 32:
[6] Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?

THAT one verse, reveals a Parallel, between the LORD, Whose "HOUSE". "THRONE", "KINGDOM"....IS Heaven, Whose Authority, Oversseeing, Rulmaking, Knowledge, Care....IS SUPREME over HIS HOUSE...and ALL "earthly men", and heads of "their" household.

THAT...is the Revelation, the Revealing, the Analogy, Parallel ...OF
Example for all of mankind, especially heads of their household, to Hear, Listen, Learn, Mimic....FOR "success" according TO the LORD. The FATHER of ALL mankind.... "who made man and established man".

Continued...

Many people teach that Jesus is God, fact is he either is or isn't. So my question is, if Jesus is God then did he lie in these verses?

No, Jesus did not lie.

Jesus FULFILLED a Promise of God, IN the manner/fashion,WAY...according to Gods WISDOM and METHOD.

Gods Promise?
* To SEND A Messiah....FROM Gods "HOUSE, His Kingdom IN HEAVEN ....
* To Earth, (mankinds Habitat, Estate, NOT Gods Kingdom, IS Gods footstool.)
* TO to walk among men ON Earth, to be seen by men ON Earth, to be heard by men, TO Offer Salvation (for the souls of men) TO men ON Earth.

* The Conundrum?
Earthly mens EYES, CAN NOT....
SEE God, SEE Heavenly things....and remain ALIVE.

* The FACTS...Almighty God...is expressly, Supreme Power.
* The FACTS...Almighty God... CAN purpose IN HIMSELF to "APPEAR" to the eyes of men, "SPEAK" to the ears of men....BY His Power....IN ANY FASHION that IS Good and Maintains His Holiness....While revealing Spiritual Mysteries.

God IN His Heavenly Kingdom, sent forth OUT of His mouth, His Word, In the LIKENESS and fashion AS An Earthly man....
* AN...Express Earthly mans look; as a Jew.
* TO...an Express people; Jews
* TO...an Express place; Judah, Israel
* WITH...an Express Name; Jesus
* WITH...Express titles; (at the time of his arrival...Son of Man, Son of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, son of Joseph, son of Mary.
* WITH..Express forknowledge of what he "would also" be called; Messiah, Teacher, Lord, Truth, Life, Way, Son of God, Word of God, Holy, Savior, Salvation, Power of God, Wisdom of God, Quickening Spirit, Christ, ....
* ALSO, foretold in Isaiah..."would be" called: God, Mighty, Head of Government, Everlasting Father etc.

Did Jesus Lie? No.
God Himself revealed...the foreknowledge, of His MANNER, of HOW He would Reveal Himself TO: mankind IN A FASHION mankind COULD SEE and HEAR....WITHOUT compromising, tainting...Gods HOLINESS.

Continued -

MYSTERY REVEALED -

"COVER"...
Nothing New from the Beginning of Mankind.
God IS HOLY...Mankind was created and made;...VERY GOOD...(not holy).

God has ALWAYS....been "shrouded" with "A COVER", A "shield", that PROTECTS His HOLINESS, FROM "ALL THINGS CORRUPT".

Examples;
* A Barrier:
firmament Between Heaven and Earth.
* A Curtain;
In the Temple Between People and the holy of holies.
* A Body;
Prepared By God, FOR His Word to Walk among men.

THE MYSTERY...IS:
"REMEMBER"...God reveals knowledge to mankind, OF Spiritual things...IN A FASHION, An Analogy, that a man IS familiar with...

Spiritual Understanding IS: TRUSTING THE KNOWLEDGE....OF WHAT IS
"UNDER, BEHIND.... THE COVER"....WITHOUT EVER "SEEING"...under, behind the Cover. [/B]

** An individual who has Heard, Learned the Knowledge Revealed....and TRUSTS to Believe the KNOWLEDGE REVEALED....
* Speaks, Testifies, Relays...."THEIR BELIEF, THEIR CONFIDANCE, THEIR ASSURANCE...."
OF "WHAT" IS "under, behind" the COVER, Which man has been ALLOWED TO see ....IS IN FACT...the Lord God Almighty Himself.

* IS Jesus the Word of God, the Son of God, the Wisdom of God, the Power of God, the Christ, the Quickening Spirit of God, the Truth of God, IS God....etc. etc. etc. ??

* FOR any man, WHO TRUSTS to BELIEVE IN God, and WHO TRUSTS to believe God revealed that Knowledge to Mankind...AND Speaks the Same openly...IS SPEAKING "HIS TRUTH", that he has Accepted, IS his TRUTH.

* CAN A MAN....PROVE "his TRUTH" should be or must be....another mans "TRUTH"? No.

* Another Conundrum? DID Jesus himself face the same conundrum? Yes.
AND WHAT was Jesus' "solution" ?

Simple solution...
1) Speak what you Believe.
2) Certainly Speak Scriptures that formed your Belief.
3) Do not attempt to PROVE what you Believe, to satisify a Doubter.
4) Do Reveal "your works" to others, that "they" may SEE the "results" of "your works"...
5) Give God "credit" for " your works".

John 10:
[38] But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

God decided, elected, chose....TO "purpose" IN Himself...and Call Himself, by names, by titles, by descriptions....According to His own desire.
(And BTW...men do the SAME thing. Men choose names, titles, descriptions they themselve Choose to be "called by" such things.)

Eph 1:
[9] Having made known unto us the mystery of his will , according to his good pleasure which he hathpurposed in himself:

Heb 1:
[5] For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son ?

Heb 10:
[5] Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

Heb 10:
[10] By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

IS JESUS GOD?
My view, my belief, my truth IS; YES.

DID I Confess my view, my belief, my truth TO the Lord God Himself? YES.

AM I sanctified (set apart), exclusively "unto" the Lord God? My view, my belief, my truth IS: Yes.

Do I "benefit", with Blessing, Good fortune, Contentment, Comfort, Inner Peace.... BECAUSE of the Lord Gods WORKS IN ME? My view, my belief, my truth IS: Yes.

Does what I Observe of "goings on" IN the World...make me ANGRY? Yes.
CAN I "FIX" that? No.

IS the "goings on" IN the World...Observed BY God and make God ANGRY? Yes.
Can God, Shall God "FIX" that? Yes.
"Patience and Waiting"...All in DUE TIME, according to God.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Robert Gwin]

Forgive me, I'm not sure what you mean by this.

The Matthew 4:10 quote was written in Exodus 20?

Very similar Gen, but it was actually a quotation of Deut 6:13.

 

[Robert Gwin]

I believe one of the purposes of Jesus was to set an example for us. Therefore, he couldn't say, "I am God."

Fully agree Bob, satan would have won for sure.

 

[Robert Gwin]

YOu have no scripture other than the rewritten NWT that says Jesus is a created being. The NWT does not qualify as a real bible for its intentional rewrites of many passages of Scripture. It was not translated from the greek by any greek linguistic exspert nor Hebrew linguistic expert.

Rev 3:14