If the above is your signature, then you need to make the word 'God' possessive. ...even if it's not your signature, seriously!
Peter identifies Jesus as our God and Savior
- Thread starter ChristisGod
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I have come to it on my very own. And, just to be clear, I vehemently denounce any deification of Jesus, or any other being than God the Father. To the point that I believe that doing so, is blasphemy. I'm not trying to be offensive, I just want you to appreciate who you are talking to, so that you don't waste your time making assumptions, or argue from an irrelevant position (isolated, and eisegeted verses).
Thanks!
Last edited:
amigo de christo
Well-Known Member
Always remember and take this to the grave , ISLAM is of satan . The abrahamic faith , IS THOSE whose entire faith is in JESUS ALONE .
ALWAYS remember that . No jew or anyone else , are of the Kingdom of GOD .
FOR GOD is ONE and SENT THE SON and jews or anyone else who denies that , DENIES GOD .
I have come in the glorious name of JESUS , to destroy all lies , well at least to expose those lies .
Not even a jew is saved , IF THEY confess not JESUS as the ONLY savoir . PEROID . let us always remember that .
This is a good start and I'm happy to see that you admit there is a case for Jesus Deity in 2 Peter 1:1.
Of course we should consider the rest of Scripture to form any doctrine we believe. I was just focusing on Peter in this epistle for our discussion of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus
Now I can make the same case with Paul in Titus 2:13 as the construction is almost identical to Peters in 2 Peter 1:1.
Titus 2:13
looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory, of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus
So now we can build upon the Apostles since we now have 2 of them saying the EXACT same thing about Jesus calling Him our God and Savior. Paul just adds the word Great when referring to Jesus as our God and Savior.
And from there we can bring many other passages where Jesus is referred to as God such as John 1:1, John 20:28, Hebrews 1:8 and 1:10 , 1 John 5:20 just to name a few.
hope this helps !!!
Agreed but my point is they are considered a monotheistic religion even though they worship a false god and prophet.
Ok, I guess the problem that we are having is, yes, I know from where the trinitarians derive their conclusions from. I don't believe that you are doing the same. You will not reply to me unless I concede your point, despite you not acknowledging the contrarian verses, and astutely trying to harmonize them. My contention has always been that the verses that unequivocally assert Jesus' reliance on the Father for everything, in both text amount and rationale, outweigh all the passages that appear to define his deity.
Even within the books, and chapter in one case, that you quoted (2 Peter 1:1, Titus 2:13), we have verses that are adverse to your conclusion. You are clearly not taking all of scripture into account.
Titus 1:4
1:4. To Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.
2 Peter 1:2
1:2. Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord;
I will admit for sure that Jesus relied upon the Father during His earthly ministry that is a given since Jesus is a man and had to experience what it was like to be a man with dependence upon the Father, temptation, growing in wisdom and knowledge as a man etc........ We have no differences when it comes to Jesus being a man as far a I'm aware of DNB.
Our differences are on His Deity in scripture. And as a trinitarian I believe Jesus is both fully man(a human, a human nature) and fully God( having the nature of God-a Divine nature). Hence there are 2 natures in Christ. I have a thread on that topic from Colossians 2:9.
hope this helps !!!
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
I have a question...
Do either one of you recognize the expertise of the theologians who determined early ideas like the Doctrine of the Trinity?
Often it seems like people who post here, with such conviction, have zero regard for theologians, historians and scholars in antiquity. In contrast, my opinion about them is, they were not only Godly, but extremely educated. After reading Athanasius ideas about the Trinity in response to the Arian heresy, his brilliance becomes obvious fairly quickly.
Armchair quarterbacking these ideas, 1800 years later is worse than first year psychology students dismissing Freud or Jung without considering the role they played in the history of the discipline.
Finally, the history of Christianity is filled with people who have dismissed established doctrine like the Trinity for the sole purpose of starting their own movement. Therefore, it appears crucial IMO to question the motives of these men and women, before going outside Christian doctrine by dismantling and rejecting traditional ideas.
Do either one of you recognize the expertise of the theologians who determined early ideas like the Doctrine of the Trinity?
Often it seems like people who post here, with such conviction, have zero regard for theologians, historians and scholars in antiquity. In contrast, my opinion about them is, they were not only Godly, but extremely educated. After reading Athanasius ideas about the Trinity in response to the Arian heresy, his brilliance becomes obvious fairly quickly.
Armchair quarterbacking these ideas, 1800 years later is worse than first year psychology students dismissing Freud or Jung without considering the role they played in the history of the discipline.
Finally, the history of Christianity is filled with people who have dismissed established doctrine like the Trinity for the sole purpose of starting their own movement. Therefore, it appears crucial IMO to question the motives of these men and women, before going outside Christian doctrine by dismantling and rejecting traditional ideas.
CharismaticLady
Well-Known Member
Father, Son and Holy Spirit all make up the ONE true God of the Bible. Call the doctrine whatever you like. Why do people try to "figure out" our infinite God of the Bible.
A powerful testimony...
Men of Flesh, "saw, heard, spoke, touched" Jesus, KNEW Him as a Flesh Man.
It was "understanding"....not what they could or did "see, hear, speak, touch" but what they could NOT "see, hear, speak, touch"... IS Spirit, they discovered, and Knew IS Christ.
Individuals coming to terms of what they KNOW... BY their mindful logic...IS completely Different what they KNOW in their heart....and which (within themselves) mind or heart are they going to trust.
2 Cor 5:
[16] ... yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
Just a thought,
Taken
Yes, we agree on the humanity of Christ, and I imagine, but maybe not, the full necessity of that - the Resurrection and Atonement are only effectuated in a viable manner if he were so - and, falls apart if he's something other than 200% man.
And yes, our differences lay in the matter of Jesus being God. Without going into a long thesis, or repeating myself from other threads, I think that your 2nd paragraph sums up the nature of the controversy - the trinitarian conclusion is so incomprehensible, implausible and even contradictory, that we cannot regard or esteem God or Jesus in this manner, nor the revelation of this in His Word.
No, that wasn't an accusation at all. It was an attempt to further clarify my position so that if you chose to engage any further, you don't conclude, for example, that I feel that one can be saved as a trinitarian (that kind of assumption).
I've made many assumptions about people being trinitarian, for example, because they said that Jesus was God, when it turned out that they were modalist - I wasted quite a few posts addressing the issue from a wrong angle.
That's all that I was trying to say. Sorry for confusion. Thanks!
Well, if it means anything to you aspen, from an absolutely objective standpoint, I find that the doctrine of the trinity is the most irrational, absurd and deranged doctrine in all of Christendom. To the point, that I can barely take a trinitarian serious. For, I have often said that I have never seen a doctrine that can turn men with a rather high acumen, into a bunch of confused, conflicted and incompetent novices, like this one.
I have not seen such shallowness and lack of wisdom in their exegesis, and such recklessness and abandonment in their inferred conclusion.
I have never witnessed a trinitarian glorify God in any of their tenets, but invariably always end up with their foot in their mouth whenever they speak, or capitulate with an appeal to mystery - euphemism for subversive nonsense.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Similar threads
