Who is Jesus to a Non-Trinitarian?

[Matthias]

Right, you think you do.


Not one iota.


I do, if ~ again, if ~ regardless whether it is coming from Catholic or Protestant theologians, it is meant in the way that I said it is very possible to correctly understand that statement, that Jesus is not merely a "human person."


I did. I did, Matthias. I get that you somehow don't think so, but I did.


Agreed. But that's quite because you supposed me to have said anything differently from what I have said in the last few posts now.

By all means, though, let's see how long we can keep this ridiculous conversation going. LOL!

Grace and peace to you.

Was it you or was it me who said the trinitarians I quoted are “false trinitarians”?

 

[PinSeeker]

Was it you or was it me who said the trinitarians I quoted are “false trinitarians”?

I think I said, Matthias, that if they truly meant that statement in the way that you are supposing them to have meant it, then they are false trinitarians.

Grace and peace to you. Especially grace, since you seem to not be able to have any... Again, just hackin' atcha...

 

[Matthias]

I think I said, Matthias, that if they truly meant that statement in the way that you are supposing them to have meant, then they are false trinitarians.

Grace and peace to you. Especially grace, since you seem to not be able to have any... Again, just hackin' atcha...

You think you said?

I defended them, you assaulted them.

I clearly said from the beginning that they were accurately presenting trinitarian teaching. You had an opportunity from the beginning to express agreement. Go back there and see what we said and did.

 

[PinSeeker]

I defended them, you assaulted them.

Nope. I think it's quite the other way around. Hey, let's argue about that now! That'll be fun...

You think you said?
I clearly said from the beginning that they were accurately presenting trinitarian teaching.

It was not so clearly said, Matthias. For somebody to label anything as "accurate" is many times at least a bit subjective, and it certainly was in this case. It was really a bit hard to get a handle on exactly what you were saying, and that's probably at least a bit due to the ambiguousness of that Catholic statement itself.

You had an opportunity from the beginning to express agreement.

Okay, but again, there was a good bit of ambiguity in what was being said.

Go back there and see what we said and did.

LOL! I think that's quite unnecessary. Can we stop this inanity now? Please?

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Matthias]

Nope. I think it's quite the other way around. Hey, let's argue about that now! That'll be fun...

Grace and peace to you.

It’s all preserved for anyone who cares to look at it.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

As a believer in the true oneness of God, thereby denying the trinity, I'm called many rather unsavory names. Perhaps "rank heretic" is most common.

So who is Jesus to a "rank heretic?"

Ideally He's the Savior, whose perfect SIN offering when applied in Faith cleanses us from all SIN. The rest of the stuff is just "Theology".

 

[PinSeeker]

It’s all preserved for anyone who cares to look at it.

Admittedly, at first, I was just taking your word for it, assuming they were saying exactly what you were saying, without really looking at the statement(s). But then on actual review, I realized they were probably not really saying what you were attributing to them.

Grace and peace to you, "hound of Jewish monotheism."

 

[Gregory]

I’m 100% orthodox and historically accurate with the Trinity and 2 natures in Christ . Do you have any questions regarding my statements/ comments as they relate to the Creeds of Christendom?

In the scriptures Jesus appears to his frightened disciples and told them not to be afraid, he said, behold my hands and my feet, handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bone as ye see me have. (see Luke 24:39)

According to the doctrine of the Trinity, the 3 in the Godhead are made of the same substance. We know from Luke that Jesus is made of flesh and bone (and I will add his own spirit). So if Jesus is flesh and bone and spirit. God the Father is flesh and bone and spirit, and so is the Holy Ghost.

This is orthodox, (coming from the scriptures) It is historically true. Is it part of your orthodoxy?

 

[ChristisGod]

In the scriptures Jesus appears to his frightened disciples and told them not to be afraid, he said, behold my hands and my feet, handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bone as ye see me have. (see Luke 24:39)

According to the doctrine of the Trinity, the 3 in the Godhead are made of the same substance. We know from Luke that Jesus is made of flesh and bone (and I will add his own spirit). So if Jesus is flesh and bone and spirit. God the Father is flesh and bone and spirit, and so is the Holy Ghost.

This is orthodox, (coming from the scriptures) It is historically true. Is it part of your orthodoxy?

No the Son is Eternal and has the same Divine essence/substance, nature, being as the Father and Holy Spirit- Spirit. They all share the exact same Divine attributes as God. God is Immutable. The Son became flesh ( a man ) but remained fully God. The Father and Holy Spirit did not become man only the Son became man.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Rich R]

Ideally He's the Savior, whose perfect SIN offering when applied in Faith cleanses us from all SIN. The rest of the stuff is just "Theology".

When you get down to the nuts and bolts of the matter, I would say that by and large you have a very good point. As long as we are saved by faith, born again children of God, we will someday know the truth and nothing but the truth. Guaranteed!

But I'm not sure about, "The rest of the stuff is just Theology." I think the scriptures do say one thing and one thing only and I wouldn't necessarily call it theology. I'd call it the truth. Now it may be, and certainly is, that we don't always get the truth, that we end up substituting theology for the truth, but I wouldn't say that therefore there is no truth. There is a truth and some of our "theology" agrees with it and undoubtedly some does not. It's that way for all of us and it'll be that way until Jesus returns, the dark glass is removed, and we see ourselves as He sees us. Then we'll shed all theology and the truth will be written in our hearts. I sometimes wonder if we'll even remember any of the erroneous things we may believe in this life about God. We'll see!

 

[Matthias]

Jesus is not a human person - in trinitarian theology.

“Christ has a human nature, but He is not a human person. The Person of the Mediator is the unchangeable Son of God. In the incarnation He did not change into a human person; neither did He adopt a human person. He simply assumed, in addition to His divine nature, a human nature, which did not develop into an independent personality, but became personal in the Person of the Son of God. After this assumption of human nature the Person of the Mediator is not only divine but divine-human; He is the God-man, possessing all the essential qualities of both the human and the divine nature. He has both a divine and a human consciousness, as well as a human and a divine will. This is a mystery which we cannot fathom.”

(Louis Berkhof, A Summary of Christian Doctrine, p. 87)

Bold is mine.

As a trinitarian, when you read about Jesus in the NT this is what you are required by the doctrine to see, hear, understand and confess.

Word up! Bow down.

“When you hear the call you’ve got to get it under way.”

P.S. Asserting that “Jesus is a human person” removes us from the camp of trinitarianism.

“Jesus is a human person” is incompatible with the fundamental trinitarian tenet of faith that “Jesus is not a human person.”

If we truly want to be trinitarian then we must insist and confess “Jesus is not a human person.”

I’m no longer in the camp of trinitarianism, and haven’t been for decades. As a Jewish monotheist, I insist and confess - against trinitarianism - “Jesus is a human person.”

 

[Matthias]

“I’m a trinitarian who believes Jesus is a human person.” - A person who is trinitarian in name only, denying the fundamental tenet of trinitarian doctrine.

When I read about Jesus in scripture, I’m reading about a human person. Ipso facto, I’m not a trinitarian.

The instant I say “Jesus is a human person” those who are properly trained in trinitarian theology will immediately recognize that I’m not trinitarian. Nothing else need be said by me in order for them to make this determination.

 

[Matthias]

“Jesus is a human person.”

From the trinitarian perspective - heretic spotted.

“Jesus is not a human person.”

From the trinitarian perspective - no heretic spotted.

Could a person who says “Jesus is not a human person” still be a heretic, from the trinitarian perspective?

Yes. More information is needed to make the determination.

 

[Kermos]

As a believer in the true oneness of God, thereby denying the trinity, I'm called many rather unsavory names. Perhaps "rank heretic" is most common.

So who is Jesus to a "rank heretic?"
In Genesis he is the promised seed of the woman.
In Exodus he is the Passover lamb.
In Leviticus he is the High Priest.
In Numbers he is the star to rise out of Jacob.
In Deuteronomy he is the two laws: Love God and love your neighbor.
In Joshua he is the captain of the Lord of Hosts.
In Judges he is the covenant angel named Wonderful.
In Ruth he is the kinsman redeemer.
In Samuel he is the root and offspring of David.
In Kings he is the greater than the Temple.
In Chronicles he is the King's son.
In Ezra & Nehemiah he is the rebuilder.
In Esther he is the savior of God's people.
In Job he is the daysman.
In Psalms he is the song.
In Proverbs he is the wisdom of God.
In Ecclesiastes he is the one among a thousand.
In The Song of Solomon he is the bridegroom of the bride.
In Isaiah he is Jacob's branch.
In Jeremiah he is our righteousness.
In Lamentations he is the unbelievers' judgement.
In Ezekiel he is the true shepherd.
In Daniel he is the stone that became the head of the corner.
In Hosea he is the latter rain.
In Joel he is God's dwelling in Zion.
In Amos he is the raiser of David's tabernacle.
In Obadiah he is the deliverer on Mount Zion.
In Jonah he is our salvation.
In Micah he is the Lord of kings.
In Nahum he is the stronghold in the time of trouble.
In Habakkuk he is our joy and confidence.
In Zephaniah he is our mighty Lord.
In Haggai he is the desire of the nations.
In Zechariah he is our servant The Branch.
In Malachi he is the son of Righteousness.
In Matthew he is Jehovah's Messiah.
In Mark he is Jehovah's servant.
In Luke he is Jehovah's man.
In John he is Jehovah's Son.
In Acts he is the gift of holy spirit.
In Romans he is the believers' justification.
In Corinthians he is the believers' sanctification.
In Galatians he is the believers' righteousness.
In Ephesians he is the believers' heavenly standing.
In Philippians he is the believers' self adequacy.
In Colossians he is the believers' completeness.
In Thessalonians he is the believers' soon glorification.
In Timothy he is the faithful men.
In Titus he is the fellow-laborer.
In Philemon he is the love of a believer.
In Hebrews he is the High Priest for sin.
In James he is the royal law.
In Peter he is the pastor.
In John he is as we are.
In Jude he is the beloved.
In Revelation he is the King of kings and the Lord of lords.
I think this is a much higher view than simply thinking God always somehow managed to obey Himself, and also went so far as to believe Himself that He'd raise Himself from the dead. God is much bigger than that.

God managed to come up with a plan (the actual logos of John 1) so that a man with free will, tempted in all points as us, could believe enough to follow that plan to perfection. God was a genius for coning up with the plan and Jesus was a hero of heroes for carrying out the plan despite the grave consequences he had to experience.

Making Jesus God simply minimizes the greatness of both God and His son. God became little more than a bully who did whatever He wanted to do despite man's free will, That would be a perfect description of all the other Ancient Near East gods, but it's an insult to the greatness of our God, YHWH.

The Jesus of a Non-Trinitarian is a false god because Non-Trinitarians think that John 1:1 reads that Jesus is a god thus Non-Trinitarians have more than one god, yet God is One (Deuteronomy 6:4) and there are no other gods (Isaiah 45:5).

Jesus is the Word as illuminated in John 1:1-5, John 1:14, and Luke 1:1-2 - The word "Word" defined in scripture.

"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the Word" (Luke 1:1-2).

Luke wrote "eyewitnesses" "of the Word" (Luke 1:2), and the "eyewitnesses" includes people like the Apostle Thomas who humbly acknowledged "My Lord and my God" to to TO Jesus (John 20:28).

In Luke 1:1-2, the word "Word" is translated from the Greek word "Logos".

Luke further elaborates that the "eyewitnesses" "of the Word" (Luke 1:2) are also "servants of the Word" (Luke 1:2), so the "eyewitnesses" see and hear and serve the Word of God.

The "eyewitnesses" includes people like the Apostle John who illuminates the Word is Jesus with "the Word became flesh" (John 1:14).

In John 1:14, the word "Word" is translated from the Greek word "Logos".

Both the Apostle John and Luke illuminate that Jesus is the Word.

Thus John refers to Jesus in John 1:1-5 as the "Word" and "He" and "Him" and "Life" and "Light":

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the Life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
​

In John 1:1-5, the word "Word" is translated from the Greek word "Logos".

The following describes how "Word", "He", "Him", "Life", and "Light" all refer to Jesus.

The first word of John 1:2 is "He", and that "He" is the "Word" in John 1:1, and that "He" in John 1:2 is the "Him" in John 1:3 and John 1:4; moreover, the "Him" in John 1:3 is the "Life" in John 1:4, and the "Him" in John 1:3 is the "Light" in John 1:4 and John 1:5.

Truly, we have a Spiritually accurate linguistic linkage from "Light" in John 1:5 back to "Word" in John 1:1.

Jesus says "While I am in the world, I am the Light of the world" (John 9:6), so we have Jesus being the Light in John 1:4-5 and John 9:6.

Jesus says "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" (John 14:6), so we have Jesus being the Life in in John 1:4 and John 14:6.

John witnesses that Jesus is the Word with "the Word became flesh" (John 1:14), so we have John further identifying Jesus as the Word (Logos).

Lord Jesus Christ is the Word of God (John 1:1-5, John 1:14), a.k.a. the Logos of Theos, and the Word of God is God.

Jesus, truly God, is the God of Jesus, truly Man; moreover, Jesus, truly God, is God with the Father.

Jesus reveals Himself as truly God and truly Man at His discretion because Jesus Christ is truly Man (Luke 1:26-33) - the Son of Man, and Jesus Christ is truly God (Luke 1:34-35, John 8:58, John 20:28, John 5:18, John 10:30-31) - the Son of God.

NO SCRIPTURE STATES THAT JESUS WAS CREATED, NOT EVEN ONCE IN THE VERSES THAT YOU CITED!

 

[Matthias]

“Jesus is a human person.”

Dead giveaway.

 

[Rich R]

The Jesus of a Non-Trinitarian is a false god because Non-Trinitarians think that John 1:1 reads that Jesus is a god thus Non-Trinitarians have more than one god, yet God is One (Deuteronomy 6:4) and there are no other gods (Isaiah 45:5).

Not all unitarians think that John 1:1 says Jesus is, "a god." At least not me.

According to Greek Grammar John 1:1c could be read to say that the "word" was God Himself ("...and the word was God"). Since we know from many other verses that only the Father is God, John 1:1 says nothing about Jesus being God since Jesus is the son and not the Father.

The usual Trinitarian view actually is guilty of making two gods out of John 1:1. How else could the word be "with" God if there is only one god? So long as we accept the normal meaning of words, to be "with" another automatically means there are two things. As such it contradicts John 1:1c which is clearly talking about one person, not two or more. Someone can't be "with" someone else and "be" that something at the same time.

Trinitarians avoid this by making God, not a person, but an essence, a grotesque "thing" supposedly composed of three persons. It's an absurd idea, a way of getting around the obvious meaning of John 1:1 so as to keep the false trinity doctrine alive.

Finally, the word "with" in John 1:1b is the Greek word "pros" and it doesn't usually mean "with" anyway. It means "to," "towards," "with reference to," or pointing towards." If translated that way there is no contradiction with John 1:1c.

 

[Rich R]

Jesus is not a human person - in trinitarian theology.

“Christ has a human nature, but He is not a human person. The Person of the Mediator is the unchangeable Son of God. In the incarnation He did not change into a human person; neither did He adopt a human person. He simply assumed, in addition to His divine nature, a human nature, which did not develop into an independent personality, but became personal in the Person of the Son of God. After this assumption of human nature the Person of the Mediator is not only divine but divine-human; He is the God-man, possessing all the essential qualities of both the human and the divine nature. He has both a divine and a human consciousness, as well as a human and a divine will. This is a mystery which we cannot fathom.”

P.S. Asserting that “Jesus is a human person” removes us from the camp of trinitarianism.

“Jesus is a human person” is incompatible with the fundamental trinitarian tenet of faith that “Jesus is not a human person.”

Good point. That's exactly what the heresy of Docetism says, i.e., Jesus only "appeared" to be human. He wasn't a "real" human." Docetism - Wikipedia

 

[Kermos]

I'm glad you responded!

Not all unitarians think that John 1:1 says Jesus is, "a god." At least not me.

According to Greek Grammar John 1:1c could be read to say that the "word" was God Himself ("...and the word was God"). Since we know from many other verses that only the Father is God, John 1:1 says nothing about Jesus being God since Jesus is the son and not the Father.

The Greek grammar of "the Word was God" (John 1:1) decisively states that "the Word" is being referred to as "God", so your writing 'the "word" was God Himself' reflects accuracy.

John chapter 1 is a cohesive whole, so the Apostle John does identify Jesus as the "Word" with "the Word manifested flesh" (John 1:14).

Since John chapter 1 is a whole passage, then John 1:14 makes the "Word" in John 1:1 refer to Jesus.

Luke refers to the "Word" as Jesus in Luke 1:1-2, so Luke's writing makes the "Word" in John 1:1 refer to Jesus.

Jesus is God according to the Apostle John; therefore, you deny Apostolic testimony.

You cannot point at a single scripture that states that the Father is the "Word"; on the other hand, the Apostle John clearly says that Jesus is the Word with "the Word manifested flesh" (John 1:14, the same passage as John 1:1).

The usual Trinitarian view actually is guilty of making two gods out of John 1:1. How else could the word be "with" God if there is only one god? So long as we accept the normal meaning of words, to be "with" another automatically means there are two things. As such it contradicts John 1:1c which is clearly talking about one person, not two or more. Someone can't be "with" someone else and "be" that something at the same time.

The Word being God is clear, see "the Word was God" (John 1:1), and you wrote 'the "word" was God Himself' accurately, earlier.

As to "the Word was with God", since the Word refers to Jesus Himself, then we have an equivalency with the clause "Jesus was with God", so John reveals One True God existing in the person of the Word as well as the person of the Father (John 10:30) as well as the person of the Holy Spirit (John 16).

Truly, that is One True God revealed in three persons, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit of God.

It appears you forgot our earlier dialog about the words "in" and "with" - you desperately tried to change the Word of God into "that they also may be one with us" in John 17:21-22, so you are making yourself out to be greater than the Word of God (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1003 in another thread), so you nullify the Word of God, Jesus (John 1:1, John 1:14) in your heart by exalting your thoughts above God's thoughts (Isaiah 55:8-9).

We continued about "in" and "with" when
you foolishly claimed the Greek "en" can mean "with", yet "en" truly means "in", and your foolishness targets your thoughts that Jesus does not mean "one" when Jesus says "one" both in John 10:30 and John 17:21-22 (as shown in Truth [John 14:6] post #1213 in another thread), so you are under the delusion that. Jesus is not one with the Father despite Jesus truthfully declaring of the Father and Himself "We are One" (John 17:22). You are fixated on the temporal instead of the eternal.

Now, it's time to bring the "in" and "with" dialog into the current "the Word was with God" (John 1:1) dialog.

Just like the Word of God DOES NOT say "that they also may be one with us" in John 17:21-22 which would linguistically result in the children of God becoming God, so John DID NOT write "the Word was in God" which could result in Jesus being separate from God.

Truly, just as the Word of God DOES say "that they also may be one in us" in John 17:21-22 which linguistically results in God's children being one with this "one" being inside God, so John DID write "the Word was with God" which linguistically results in Jesus being God.

The Apostle John proclaims that Jesus is One Person with the One True God (Deuteronomy 6:4), and John accomplished this with "the Word was with God" (John 1:1), so Jesus is securely God.

Your heart's convolution that this says "the Word was with the Father" is NOT what the Apostle John wrote, so you adulterate John's writing to satisfy your own lusts.

You also appear to have forgotten another earlier correspondence about Jesus Christ that Jesus is truly Man (Luke 1:26-33) - the Son of Man, and Jesus Christ is truly God (Luke 1:34-35, John 8:58, John 20:28, John 5:18, John 10:30-31) - the Son of God.

Based on this Truth (John 14:6), Jesus Christ can refer to Himself as Man at his discretion and when He deems it is appropriate.

Furthermore. Jesus Christ can refer to Himself as God at his discretion and when He deems it is appropriate.

Here is an instance of Jesus, truly God, saying "I and the Father are One" (John 10:30) in which Jesus speaks in His capacity of God thus including both the person of Jesus and the person of the Father in the One True God.

Here is another instance, this time of Jesus, truly Man, saying "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'" (John 20:17) in which Jesus speaks in His capacity of Man thus including the person of Jesus and His brothers in one (John 17:21). See, the Son of Man being the firstborn of the born of God persons (Romans 8:29, Colossians 1:15, John 3:3-8).

We, children of God, can also refer to Jesus in his capacity as truly God as well as His capacity as truly Man. We can use context to make the distinction.

We, born of the Holy Spirit of God persons (John 3:3-8), are one in God (John 17:21) because of the indwelling Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17), thus God is One. We are the blessed beneficiaries of the Holy Spirit of God's work in us.

John does exactly this with "the Word was with God" (John 1:1).

I proclaim Spiritual matters to you, but you do not understand Spiritual matters because you live in the temporal (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Trinitarians avoid this by making God, not a person, but an essence, a grotesque "thing" supposedly composed of three persons. It's an absurd idea, a way of getting around the obvious meaning of John 1:1 so as to keep the false trinity doctrine alive.

You are very insulting against God because in your state as a natural man, you wickedly adulterate the Word of God.

"The natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he is not able to understand them, because spiritually they are discerned" (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Finally, the word "with" in John 1:1b is the Greek word "pros" and it doesn't usually mean "with" anyway. It means "to," "towards," "with reference to," or pointing towards." If translated that way there is no contradiction with John 1:1c.

I'm applying your thoughts on the Greek word "pros" to John 1:1.

The result of your thought is "the Word was to God", yet the result is linguistically broken as a clause - the preposition "to" is grammatically improper, even illegal mechanics.

Do recall, you wrote 'the "word" was God Himself' accurately earlier regarding "the Word was God" (John 1:1), so I don't know your objective in mentioning a contradiction with "the Word was with God" (John 1:1) or your "the Word was to God" in relation to "the Word was God" (John 1:1).

The Greek preposition "pros" includes the meaning of the English preposition "with". The Greek lexicon and concordance illumines this fact.

The Greek word "pros" properly translated is "with" in "the Word was with God" in John 1:1; therefore, John proclaims that God includes the person of Jesus.

Immanuel (Matthew 1:23 "God with us"), Jesus, is truly Almighty God, YHWH, with us (Revelation 1:8) (see see the Truth [John 14:6] that God had me compose in post #283 to expose the deception of tigger 2 and Rich R).

 

[PinSeeker]

Jesus is not a human person - in trinitarian theology.

“Christ has a human nature, but He is not a human person. The Person of the Mediator is the unchangeable Son of God. In the incarnation He did not change into a human person; neither did He adopt a human person. He simply assumed, in addition to His divine nature, a human nature, which did not develop into an independent personality, but became personal in the Person of the Son of God. After this assumption of human nature the Person of the Mediator is not only divine but divine-human; He is the God-man, possessing all the essential qualities of both the human and the divine nature. He has both a divine and a human consciousness, as well as a human and a divine will. This is a mystery which we cannot fathom.”

(Louis Berkhof, A Summary of Christian Doctrine, p. 87)

Bold is mine.

Okay, I think we were just missing a bit on the "Jesus is not a human person" thing, which I'll be glad to take the entire blame for. In this respect, right, He never was and will never be a human person ~ and one day we will be just like Him. But a person He always was, is, and will be ~ and again, one day we believers will be just like Him. Hey, in the sense that we're speaking here now, as Berkhof above, I would state that Adam was not, in this sense, a human person either before the events of Genesis 3. But of course the Fall occurred, plunging all of his posterity ~ the entire human race, and even creation itself ~ into this fallen state. From that point forward, he was a human person (along with Eve) and remained so until his death, and so it is with all men (and women). Again, one great Day, we will be just like Christ. Still not Christ, of course, but just like Him. We were all created in God's image, and one great Day this image will with absolute certainty be perfectly restored.

Asserting that “Jesus is a human person” removes us from the camp of trinitarianism. "Jesus is a human person” is incompatible with the fundamental trinitarian tenet of faith that “Jesus is not a human person.” If we truly want to be trinitarian then we must insist and confess “Jesus is not a human person.”

Well, sure, but it is necessary to understand what one means by "human person" (see above). Jesus did humble Himself for a time ~ His approximately 33 years on this earth as a man ~ and take the form of man, taking the very nature of man... though in the form of God, in the very nature of God (Philippians 2). This is what qualifies Him (and Him alone) as Mediator between God and man and able to accomplish our redemption and reconcile us to God, which He did in His death on the cross (Philippians 2). As He said in His last dying breath, "It is finished!" (John 19:30).

I’m no longer in the camp of trinitarianism, and haven’t been for decades. As a Jewish monotheist, I insist and confess - against trinitarianism - “Jesus is a human person.”

See, now this is puzzling. I mean, you seem to shift back here to the misunderstanding I had of what you were saying with the whole "human person" thing ~ which is missing Louis Berkhof's point in the passage from his Doctrine that you cited above. Yes, that's quite astonishing. Okay, so be it. We could look at several things throughout the New Testament (and the Old, too, actually), but I would encourage you to... well, "hang out," so to speak, and meditate on the Philippians 2 passage I cited above. Or Colossians 1 and 2... Or Hebrews 7... It's all over. May the Holy Spirit ~ not the force... ~ be with you.

Grace and peace to you, Matthias.

 

[Matthias]

Okay, I think we were just missing a bit on the "Jesus is not a human person" thing, which I'll be glad to take the entire blame for. In this respect, right, He never was and will never be a human person ~ and one day we will be just like Him. But a person He always was, is, and will be ~ and again, one day we believers will be just like Him. Hey, in the sense that we're speaking here now, as Berkhof above, I would state that Adam was not, in this sense, a human person either before the events of Genesis 3. But of course the Fall occurred, plunging all of his posterity ~ the entire human race, and even creation itself ~ into this fallen state. From that point forward, he was a human person (along with Eve) and remained so until his death, and so it is with all men (and women). Again, one great Day, we will be just like Christ. Still not Christ, of course, but just like Him. We were all created in God's image, and one great Day this image will with absolute certainty be perfectly restored.


Well, sure, but it is necessary to understand what one means by "human person" (see above). Jesus did humble Himself for a time ~ His approximately 33 years on this earth as a man ~ and take the form of man, taking the very nature of man... though in the form of God, in the very nature of God (Philippians 2). This is what qualifies Him (and Him alone) as Mediator between God and man and able to accomplish our redemption and reconcile us to God, which He did in His death on the cross (Philippians 2). As He said in His last dying breath, "It is finished!" (John 19:30).


See, now this is puzzling. I mean, you seem to shift back here to the misunderstanding I had of what you were saying with the whole "human person" thing ~ which is missing Louis Berkhof's point in the passage from his Doctrine that you cited above. Yes, that's quite astonishing. Okay, so be it. We could look at several things throughout the New Testament (and the Old, too, actually), but I would encourage you to... well, "hang out," so to speak, and meditate on the Philippians 2 passage I cited above. Or Colossians 1 and 2... Or Hebrews 7... It's all over. May the Holy Spirit ~ not the force... ~ be with you.

Grace and peace to you, Matthias.

It’s simple.

“Jesus is not a human person” - what trinitarianism teaches about Jesus.

“Jesus is a human person” - the presentation of Jesus in the Bible.

I frequently meet trinitarians who say they believe Jesus is a human person. Which is to say, I frequently meet people who self-identify as trinitarian but do not believe - primarily because they’ve never heard in detail - what trinitarianism teaches about Jesus.

Is it a problem that they don’t believe what trinitarianism teaches about Jesus?