Scriptures that trinitarians Don't Want You to Know About - #5, Book of Acts

[Wrangler]

Yikes. In some Topologies, yes, squares can be twisted around into circles.

Prove it.

 

[Wrangler]

If you do not stay in the 2D plane.

But we are talking about 2D shapes. LOL

 

[Curtis]

Scripture says he died. I believe Scripture not you.

No it says His body died, because scripture is clear that soul sleep, aka souls taking a dirt nap, is unbiblical. Jesus preached to spirits in prison - you know - those conscious beings UNDER THE EARTH that the SDA denies exists:

1. Php 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

Php 2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

2. Rev 5:2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?

Rev 5:3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.

3. Rev 5:13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.

So, please explain why those beings under the earth are conscious, instead of sleeping, and how is it that if they’re in the grave, they are able to talk with a mouthful of dirt?

I await your reply.

 

[Emily Nghiem]

Prove it.

It is all by definition.
Basically, by morphing the shape of the surface, the same figure can still have "all points be the same distance from the center" (as the definition of a circle) and still have equal length "lines" between 4 points evenly spaced from each other (as the definition of a square).

Basically to you it would seem "cheating" by "changing" the definitions you are using in 2D to define what a square is. Like taking a wire square, then BENDING it "into a circle" and "still calling it a square because those same 4 points are still equidistant from each other."

In Topology, morphing the same wire into a circle or a square still meets the Topological definitions.

In your 2D field, if you define the square VISUALLY as requiring "four 90 degree/right angles" then your definition is DIFFERENT.

So basically this analogy is also saying
IT DEPENDS WHAT YOU *DEFINE* things to be.

For example: if an Atheist defines God to be something that "doesn't exist" (such as defining God to be a physical human White Man with a Beard who lives on a cloud and strikes people dead with lightning bolts), then by that DEFINITION, that thing does not exist.

Topologists are defining circles and squares to be "topologically the same."
Like they define donut shapes and coffee mug shapes "to be the same" as TORUS shapes that can morph into each other.

This is just applying different rules and definitions IN THAT FIELD or SPACE, so these things come out the same.

In the 2D space/field you are working in, by the rules and definitions there, squares and circles are DIFFERENT.

(The changing definitions in Topology are similar to saying cats and dogs are not the same species, but if you are talking about "plants vs animal kingdom", cats and dogs are both counted as ANIMALS by definition of what is an ANIMAL. But if you are talking about SPECIES or FAMILY, then cats and dogs are EXCLUSIVE of each other and are NOT the same things BY DEFINITION.)

 

[Emily Nghiem]

But we are talking about 2D shapes. LOL

You are.
You are talking with people who are talking about 3D with three things being one.
That is already outside 2D thinking.

Now if you want to restrict definitions to just what can be proven in 2D logic, we just need to agree to follow those same rules and definitions.

Then we can have consistent discussions without bending or changing rules/definitions to go outside the realm you are talking about.

That's fine. We just need to agree what the terms mean, and not keep framing them in different CONTEXTS that is causing the confusion and conflict.

Gladly!

 

[Wrangler]

No it says His body died

You are desperate to parse something to support your doctrine. Over and over and over again the Bible says he died and was resurrected. If he did not die, then you are undermining the greatest event in human history - Jesus being resurrected by God into a glorified body!

 

[Wrangler]

It is all by definition.

Exactly! It's is all by definition - conception. Changing a 2D shape is changing the definition of "square" and "circle." Such word games do not change the fact that piling on contradiction onto another does not change the fact that everything that exists is finite.

Don''t think for one second that copying and pasting this website link demonstrates that there is such a thing as square circles. NOTE in your own reference the use of the potential "can". IF you change a 2D geometry, project it onto different dimensions, THEN ... it 'can' be ... We are talking about 2D geometric shapes that are not equal. No word play will change that fact. Introducing multi-dimensional suppositions will not change the 2D differential.

Odd line of reasoning you are chasing.

 

[Wrangler]

You are.
You are talking with people who are talking about 3D with three things being one.
That is already outside 2D thinking.

Talking about contradictions does not make them true. 1 = 1. 3 = 3. 1 ≠ 3.

Scripture says over and over and over again that there is 1 God and He, singular, is the Father alone. For instance, many times, it says God the Father. Scripture never says God the son.

The Son of God ≠ God the Son, no matter how many dimensions one wants to suppose. Not everything is equal. The Son is not the Father.

 

[theefaith]

Jesus is a man. Mankind is not divine. Jesus, like all men, have but one nature.

Scripture says prayer otherwise Matt 16:18 18:18

 

[theefaith]

Jesus is a man. Mankind is not divine. Jesus, like all men, have but one nature.

Jn 1:16 His fullness grace for grace
No man can do this

 

[Wrangler]

Jn 1:16 His fullness grace for grace
No man can do this

You do realize that EVERYTHING John wrote was to prove Jesus was not God incarnate but the Messiah, right? John 20:31.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The one true church always teaches the truth for it is Christ Jn 16:13

This is correct. but the one true church is not a denomination, but a group of followers across all denominations. And Rome doesn't all teach the truth.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No. Your question is absurd. Jesus is the Jewish Messiah. Jesus was born under the law and said the Sh'ma was the most important commandment, which is the LORD God is alone. Jesus kept the commandments including the commandments, including the Sh'ma.

Yep No argument there. But Jesus is still divine as Scripture says especially in Phil 2 and John 1:1 and John 2:19. sorry you are so myopic as to not agree with what SCripture clearly teaches so that you have to come up with some mystical reinterpretation of simple words.

Do a word study of the shma. especially the word "one" you will find it is the ordinal one and not the cardinal one- IOW it is a compound one! Just like 'Adonai is plural, elohim is plural and god Plural created man in His own image and likeness.

Strongly hints? The explicit command proof text is the first commandment. You shall have no other god's before me. Singular pronoun tells the story, which destroys trinitarianism.

And trinitarians do not have any God before god! We just recognize what Scripture says- That the Father is called god, the son is called God and the Spirit is called god and they are ONe god not three gods.

The NT never calls Jesus God. I realize trinitarians desperately reach for any vague comment to support doctrine not in the unitarian text.

I already showed you it did. If you refuse it that is your problem and not the bibles nor mine.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Your linguistic gymnastics is something to behold.

• Hunter is the son of Joe. This makes Hunter NOT Joe.
• Jesus is the son of God. This makes Jesus NOT God.

The Bible refers to the God the Father many times. Not once does the Bible refer to God the Son.

And once again you are falsely equating Jesus as His Father. god is a Word that is used both of a specific entity and a nature. Jesus is not God the Father, He is God the Son. God refers to the nature of the Father, Son and spirit as well as a reference to as person like here:

1 Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, I am thankful we agree in spirit.
But I am telling you, some of that language
just comes across inconsistent or disrespectful.
I know what you mean, but run into
too many other people who read it as
denying that God the Father is greater than all.

(The terms "coequal" and "separate" I have found will trigger and rub people the wrong way. But I am one of those people who will talk to others using terms they can comprehend, like "Universe" instead of "God" when encouraging a friend in seeing that "Life" is on their side and bringing them positive things. When I talk with Jehovah's Witnesses, I have to literally refer to the "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" and not use the term "Trinity" at all or it derails any ability to communicate. It is easier just to remember that the One God is governing us and just let each person express their beliefs and relations. I am not going to nitpick over whether the term "Trinity" or "co equal" appears in the Bible, because I know what we both mean by God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit!)

Well if the truth comes across as disrespectful to some, I cannot apologize. Eternal destinies are at stake and if they get this message wrong, they are wrong for all eternity. Jesus never minced words and yet was meek. We should speak the truth, and speak it in love. I cannot water down words just because it may hurt someones sensibilites. I would rather offend their sensibilities in the hopes of saving their souls, than use nice polite words that do not make them understand their is only one way to get saved.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

True but irrelevant. This thread is about the Book of Acts.

Then do not respond to my posts then.

but if you knew jewish culture and understanding and how terms were used, you would know that jesus was declared God in the book of acts and Jews understood that preaching from the Apostles.

 

[Wrangler]

Yep No argument there. But Jesus is still divine as Scripture says especially in Phil 2 and John 1:1 and John 2:19.

Having the Spirit of God in us, are we too not divine, which is why we are called children of God?

Jesus is not divine but, like us, has divinity within him.

 

[Emily Nghiem]

Talking about contradictions does not make them true. 1 = 1. 3 = 3. 1 ≠ 3.

Scripture says over and over and over again that there is 1 God and He, singular, is the Father alone. For instance, many times, it says God the Father. Scripture never says God the son.

The Son of God ≠ God the Son, no matter how many dimensions one wants to suppose. Not everything is equal. The Son is not the Father.

Dear @Wrangler
1. Yes it is by definitions.
The way TOPOLOGY defines circles, squares, triangles, rectangles these are CLOSED LOOPS. So for that FIELD of math relations, as long as a figure is a CLOSED LOOP they are "Topologically" the same type of shape.

2. As for 1 + 1 + 1 = 3
There are other situations that can reflect a similar relationship:
1 Judicial system + 1 Legislative system + 1 Executive branch = 1 Federal Government

1 Mind + 1 Body + 1 Soul = 1 Human Being

These are NOT "addition" in the same terms used for 2D linear math.

These are Holistic/Interconnected relationships, so you cannot just "add them together" as you do finite members of sets that add together like the linear math relationship 1 + 1 + 1 = 3

These are TWO DIFFERENT CONTEXTS

That is why I TOTALLY agree with you we need to agree on definitions and contexts,
In order to be talking about the same things.

 

[Emily Nghiem]

Having the Spirit of God in us, are we too not divine, which is why we are called children of God?

Jesus is not divine but, like us, has divinity within him.

Dear @Wrangler
You appear to be referring to the Secular Gentile path of Natural Laws, where you see Jesus as representing more what we as God's children are supposed to do.

This is a distinct fold of the one flock.
The other fold are the Believers who believe Jesus embodies and fulfills Scriptural laws
as God's divine Justice.

If you see things in terms of manifesting in real world terms, that is the way secular gentiles operate.

I suggest we focus on this branch or fold, and not waste your time or energy disagreeing with Believers who see Jesus as more connected with God and fulfilling the Scriptures.

I do not think those are your target audience

The people who can relate to your approach and focus may be the secular humanists who seek a more real world practical application of faith in God and Jesus.

Let's explore that approach and see what you and I might agree is more effective ways of communicating.

I will share some Parables and explanations with you, and you can tell me if that approach makes more sense than anything to do with the Trinity teachings or calling Jesus God.

There are other approaches that might make sense to more people who don't see God that way.

Thanks @Wrangler
You definitely have a certain audience to address, so why not focus there and not on people who see it from another angle that you don't relate to. That will only cause frustration and doesn't help anyone.

I'm very interested and curious about how you explain and express the relations between God, humanity and Jesus.

Let's just focus there, the rest will work out once we establish how you define the relationships.

Yours truly, Emily

 

[Wrangler]

Jesus is not God the Father, He is God the Son.

Reiterating the assertion does not make it so. Jesus is no kind of God. Being the Son, means one is not the Father.

The Father alone is God alone.

‘For us, there is one God, the Father’
1 Corinthians 8:6