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

[bbyrd009]

Interesting rule, but I don't think God is bound by someone else's rules. This isn't Scripture, this is not what God said, why would He be bound by it?

not Scripture? It’s in There twice?

And when you say "for another man's sins", are you meaning on account of another man's sins, or "to pay for" another man's sins, something different?

?

ah well i was just only Quoting, so that…would be up to you i guess
i note you cannot Quote “Jesus died for our sins” though…imo there is a subtle-terfuge going on there, how can both be true? How can Christ died for our sins and No son of man may die for another’s sins both be true?

John 11:25-26 KJV
25) Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
26) And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

How can this be?

Much love!

”Buried with Him in death, raised to new life in Him” maybe?
thats my current operating theory anyway

 

[Wrangler]

It is very possible to make strong statements that utterly contradict Trinitarianism, you just refuse to do it for some reason.

LOL. I’ve done it many times. You are just denying it. What are these strong statements that utterly contradict Trinitarianism again?

 

[Abaxvahl]

LOL. I’ve done it many times. You are just denying it. What are these strong statements that utterly contradict Trinitarianism again?

I am not denying it I seriously agree with your points (saving where I disagreed that one time), but if you want to accuse me of sin because you know my heart then go ahead, apparently you're the One True God who searches hearts now.

As for strong anti-Trinitarian statements I told you and you refused to make them: you can go for it being a contradiction and demonstrate the impossibility and inconceivability of it, either attacking the hypostatic union or the three hypostases that have one nature, you can go for a historical argument, you might take up Eunomius and his arguments again or any of the other heretics of old for they contradicted it by saying that the Lord Jesus was entirely and wholly and all that was within Him and who He is as a Person was created, you can make like a fleshly Jew and just go against the teachings of Jesus as a whole, which many do, and so on.

What doesn't contradict the Trinity are any number of the following statements:

1) The Father is only God.
2) Jesus has a human nature.
3) Many are called "god" and "lord."
4) The Father and the Son are different Persons.
5) The Father is greater than the Son.
6) The Son sits at the right hand of the Father.
7) God is one.
8) God selected Jesus like we were selected by God in Jesus.

And so on. These are all Trinitarian claims as well, so saying to us the things we already believe is not going to help.

 

[marks]

not Scripture? It’s in There twice?

Not exactly, and not the way you present it.

But what does it mean that one would die "for" another man's sins? There is more than one way to mean that.

Much love!

 

[marks]

i note you cannot Quote “Jesus died for our sins” though…imo there is a subtle-terfuge going on there,

Again . . . there are different ways this can be meant, and a more explicit statement would help.


I'm not trying to quote, Jesus died for our sins, but what of that? I'm taking my ideas, best I can anyway, from what the Bible does say.

Much love!

 

[marks]

”Buried with Him in death, raised to new life in Him” maybe?
thats my current operating theory anyway

Why would you need that? New life that is? The Bible says we're dead in sin, so was it because we were dead in sin that Jesus died, so that we could become alive in Him?

Much love!

 

[bbyrd009]

Why would you need that? New life that is?

it was a reply to “how can this be?” it was also just what pastor likely said over your baptism, i was just quoting

The Bible says we're dead in sin, so was it because we were dead in sin that Jesus died, so that we could become alive in Him?

seems like you're on a new subject here? And im not sure the context now, sorry; the obv reply is "yes," so why ask, iow

 

[bbyrd009]

And when you say "for another man's sins", are you meaning on account of another man's sins, or "to pay for" another man's sins, something different?

i recall having this discussion with you before? And while i prefer not to interpret for others, the vv seem clear enough,
The soul who sins is the one who will die. A son will not bear the iniquity of his father, and a father will not bear the iniquity of his son. The righteousness of the righteous man will fall upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked man will fall upon him from the Ezekiel ref, the Psalms one seems more of a reprise.

also fwiw other povs may be had by a copy/search of “No son of man may die for another’s sins,” with some attempts at reconciliation with our current…um, “mass delusion” is what comes to mind, but let’s just say “pov.” Which i havent read any of them yet,

but then the question will be asked how “Jesus” might fit into that re us, since we perceive Him as “Son” and we arent His “Father,” but of course Jesus is also a “Father” to us, i think?
Give me some of that red stew, or i will die!
.

The Bible says we're dead in sin, so was it because we were dead in sin that Jesus died, so that we could become alive in Him?

so, after a couple days of marinating on this, the best reply im able to post is that Christ died for our sins, which is…starts out as the same thing, to us, right?

How can both be true? Which, being Scripture, and witnessed, they both pretty much have to be?

and this directly relates to “Trinity,” at least imo, i mean if you believe in “the Trinity”—which i do—you should wanna have the um characters IDed correctly, huh? Next i would be examining the character of our (anthropomorphized) “holy ghost,” a la “Casper the friendly” or whatever, as imo it has been occluded also, but we prolly wont get that far anyway i guess

 

[Cooper]

not Scripture? It’s in There twice?
ah well i was just only Quoting, so that…would be up to you i guess
i note you cannot Quote “Jesus died for our sins” though…imo there is a subtle-terfuge going on there, how can both be true? How can Christ died for our sins and No son of man may die for another’s sins both be true?
”Buried with Him in death, raised to new life in Him” maybe?
thats my current operating theory anyway

Do you think Jesus died for our sins, or do you think Jesus died for the sinner?
.

 

[bbyrd009]

Do you think Jesus died for our sins, or do you think Jesus died for the sinner?
.

i’ll go with option three there m cooper,
Christ died for our sins
No son of man may die for another’s sins

which is a puzzle of sorts, but imo not unsolvable. The tale of Jacob and Esau provides some clues/support imo, and if it helps any i will end up agreeing with you up there, in both iterations even, i guess? i die daily might even be considered in that context i think

 

[Wrangler]

Do you think Jesus died for our sins, or do you think Jesus died for the sinner?
.

An esoteric question. Not sure how you are parsing the difference.

I’ve said both before, taking the sentences as synonymous. Maybe, ‘Jesus died for us’ is simpler but avoids the nuanced point you are attempting to make.
A. I made dinner for my wife is hungry.
B. I made dinner for my hungry wife.

 

[Cooper]

i’ll go with option three there m cooper,
Christ died for our sins
No son of man may die for another’s sins

which is a puzzle of sorts, but imo not unsolvable. The tale of Jacob and Esau provides some clues/support imo, and if it helps any i will end up agreeing with you up there, in both iterations even, i guess? i die daily might even be considered in that context i think

Ah, I understand where you are coming from, I didn't before. I will simply say that as no man can forgive sins against God, and Jesus can, then to my mind Jesus must be God.

I shall have to leave it here I'm afraid.
.

 

[bbyrd009]

Ah, I understand where you are coming from, I didn't before. I will simply say that as no man can forgive sins against God, and Jesus can, then to my mind Jesus must be God.

I shall have to leave it here I'm afraid.
.

forgive, and you will be forgiven?

 

[TheHC]

"Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross." (Phil 2:5-8)

Why do trinitarians always stop at vs.8?
Did Paul end his thought there?

No, he went on: vs.9 (NLT) says
“Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor
and gave him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

(If Jesus was God, would he really need someone to ‘elevate’ him? Or ‘give’ him anything? No, Jesus would have already had it!)

And what about “the form of God”? Well, what form is God in? He’s in the form of spirit, not flesh. So was God’s Son Jesus, before he was sent to Earth.

I’ve been studying the Bible for over 40 years and this is what I’ve found, that trinitarians use individual passages, but many times, the context will reveal a different picture.

You know who deeply studied the Bible, and did it daily?

Isaac Newton. And he was not a trinitarian. In fact, he actually found out that 1 John 5:7 was a spurious passage, not in any Biblical manuscripts prior to the Council of Nicea. That passage was added later!

Look it up.

 

[TheHC]

Is this what JESUS wants, that we *worship* him? Did he say this? Never.

He always directed attention to his Father.

In fact, he stated at John 4:23,24, that “true worshippers will worship the Father, because the Father is looking for such-like ones to worship Him. God is a spirit, and those worshipping Him must worship in spirit and truth.”


If there are “true” worshippers, could there also be *false* worshippers?

In vs24, Jesus said, “…those worshipping Him”; Jesus didn’t say “us.”

There are passages about ‘denying Jesus’, one is at 2 Timothy 2:12; Paul said not to deny him. In what way did Paul mean? Deny that Jesus was God? No. Paul said, at 1 Corinthians 8:5,6 that “to us (Christians) there is one God, the Father…. And there is one Lord, Jesus Christ.”

The Apostle Paul’s view was the same as the Apostle John’s, who wrote at 1 John 2:22: “Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son.”

So as followers of Jesus, we should not deny that he is the Christ, because God made Jesus, His first-born, our Savior.

 

[APAK]

Why do trinitarians always stop at vs.8?
Did Paul end his thought there?

No, he went on: vs.9 (NLT) says
“Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor
and gave him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue declare that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

(If Jesus was God, would he really need someone to ‘elevate’ him? Or ‘give’ him anything? No, Jesus would have already had it!)

And what about “the form of God”? Well, what form is God in? He’s in the form of spirit, not flesh. So was God’s Son Jesus, before he was sent to Earth.

I’ve been studying the Bible for over 40 years and this is what I’ve found, that trinitarians use individual passages, but many times, the context will reveal a different picture.

You know who deeply studied the Bible, and did it daily?

Isaac Newton. And he was not a trinitarian. In fact, he actually found out that 1 John 5:7 was a spurious passage, not in any Biblical manuscripts prior to the Council of Nicea. That passage was added later!

Look it up.

Yes, there is one common thread with these folks in question. I've been saying it for years and they keep doing it. They always select, and usually single verses at that, to tell their story, and skip the context entirely because their tale would then become just that, fantasy and incredible to believe. And they must actually believe in what they write....amazing...

Welcome aboard to the interesting CB site....have a blessed day!

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

.

 

[APAK]

View attachment 38182 View attachment 38183

Ah man.... or I should say men. Would that I could get into this debate... BUT it is a discussion on a forbidden subject and "my" participation would only lead to me into trouble View attachment 38184 with the powers that be,,,,, therefore you carry on with your misleading the folks

Policy - Topics That Can No-Longer Be Discussed at CyB

Christianity Board has alway prided itself in being a place of scholarly discussion, friendship and an environment where members can grow, learn and share their experiences in Christ. Our team at Cyb have worked hard over the years to ensure that this ethos is maintained and upheld however, we...

www.christianityboard.com

Policy - Topics That Can No-Longer Be Discussed at CyB​

• Nov 16, 2022
• Add bookmark
• #1

Christianity Board has alway prided itself in being a place of scholarly discussion, friendship and an environment where members can grow, learn and share their experiences in Christ.

Our team at Cyb have worked hard over the years to ensure that this ethos is maintained and upheld however, we would like to bring to your attention, certain recurring topics, that have caused much division and strife here over the years.

These topics have tended to cause heated debate, strife and division between members and/or inappropriate behavior within those discussions, which simply will not be tolerated here at CyB

We are not disputing the fact that these topics are important however, they also tend to bring out the worse in members. To a point where such behavior is unacceptable in a Christian forum

At the moment, we only have issue with one particular topic, which is "The Trinity".

This topic may not be initiated, discussed or debated at Christianity Board, whether it be for or against the Trinitarian view. Included in this is the side mantra of "Jesus is not God" Such posts/threads will be deleted immediately and disciplinary action will be taken in the form of warning points and/or bans depending on the outcome. Old threads will also be removed from public view as well as new ones.

Thank You

May you be blessed mightily here at Christianity Board

The Christianity Board Moderating Team

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 16, 2023

• Jun 16, 2023
• Add bookmark
• #3

Leaving an exception for non-Christians has proven to be more trouble than it is worth. As we are not getting questions from curious seekers, but more arguments from opposing sides.

So the exception here is removed and effective immediately the Trinity topic is totally banned , even in non-Christian or General Discussion sections of the forum.

The question was raised with the staff of rather we should allow discussion on the Trinity again, and the majority believe it is not yet time.

• Jun 16, 2023
• Add bookmark
• #4

Update: The Trinity rules applies to all forums accross the board, including the 3 non christian forums at the bottom of the forum page.

Thank you
Angelina
Admin

@Angelina ~ May I respectfully suggest that as this is a forbidden subject that any work-around tries be locked so no other comments can be made for this one certainly begs of some.

Why be eager to inform the authorities to dump yet another layer of concrete over their already fractured foundation they previously laid down in the town square, covering the bodies of innocent witnesses . I believe they will find it for themselves and fix it at their leisure.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

.

 

[Rella ~ I am a woman]

.