Jump to content

Recommended Posts

All those who deny Jesus' Deity, can you explain this passage?

 

...Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Christ being of God/Second Person/Word of God become flesh, was justifed by the Spirit and fulfilled the calling of His Father, after which He ascended to sit on the throne of glory.

 

Nothing here says Christ is God the Father. The Trinty Doctrine is as man made as your intentions are now. Keep being delusional, it doesnt even make sense.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Before the appearance of the man Jesus son of Joseph, He existed only as the spoken Word of God. When the Lord spoke, "Let there be" in Genesis, the Word of God came to be through Gods utterance.

 

In short Christ in power and authority is not equal to His Father, it doesn't even make scriptural sense, Christ says that His Father is greater then all. The trinity doctrine is just a fancy theory that promotes Polytheism. Jesus isn't Hercules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Practically speaking, if Jesus is less than God how can He forgive sin?

 

 

Who is this speaking about?

 

“For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 9:6 NKJV)

 

and this?

 

“For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9 NKJV)

 

and this?

 

Who is the Alpha & Omega?

 

4 John, to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne,
5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood,
6 and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.
8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." Revelation 1:4-8 NKJV

Did God die?

 

9 ¶ I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet,
11 saying, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last," and, "What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea."
12 Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands,
13 and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band.
14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire;
15 His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters;
16 He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength.
17 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, "Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last.
18 "I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death. Revelation 1:9-18 NKJV)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Sorry you're going to have to chose one verse at a time and will go from there, having to respond to 4 at a time just ends up derailing conversations and the other readers will get lost. To much to read plus I dont have the patience.

 

So to your question...

 

Jesus did whatever His Father gave Him authority to do, Christ in the same manner gave authority to the Apostles and those chosen of God to forgive sin through the Son. Just because the Apostles forgave sin doesn't make them God. Again the logic doesn't make sense.

 

John 5:22

 

The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father.

 

As for Isaiah 9:6...

 

“For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 9:6 NKJV)

 

This is speaking of the annointed of the Lord who was King Hezekiah, Isaiah is simply prophesying of the coming rule of Hezekiah upon the throne of Israel. Remember you're quoting from a Christian Bible that doesnt really show what Isaiah really said, the Hebrew text is much different. Lots of lip service had to get done to prove the false Polytheistic theory of the Trinity.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 9:6 NKJV)

 

King Hezekiah? Mighty God...?

 

From the Hebrew - The word for God

 

0410 לא ‘el ale

 

As in 'El Shaddai

 

No where in Scripture is King Hezekiah referred to as "God" or 'El" only God Is

 

BTW, Isaiah and King Hezekiah were contemporaries

 

Not prophetic... This is speaking about a child

 

Who is the Child?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest the truth

Maybe I should've added more detail..

 

For one if the Trinity was so important, so important that a person is a heritic if he doesn't subscribe to it, then why didn't Christ specifically say, "I AM GOD MY FATHER". Trinitarians say that Jesus was fully God and fully Man, yet Christ says, "My Father is greater then I."

 

The Christian scriptures have severely misunderstood what Isaiah was really saying here, they're trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

 

First of all the tense is completely wrong, the tense is past and not future, you're right that Isaiah and Hezekiah were contemporaries, I should've have been more clear. The child WAS born, and the authority of God IS on his shoulders.

 

The name Hezekiah literally means Mighty God.

 

Gabriel means Strong God.

Ezekiel means God is strong.

 

Christian interpretation is very faulty when it comes to stuff like this, terms like God and Almighty are really misused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly you are operating under a misconception regarding Jesus' Deity

 

He IS NOT God the Father so He would not say "I AM GOD MY FATHER"

 

In speaking to the religious leaders Jesus makes this statement

 

56 "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad."
57 Then the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?"
58 Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM."
59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. John 8

 

How could Jesus see Abraham?

 

Jesus does point out His Deity by the simple statement "I AM"

 

Secondly, Hezekiah does not "literally" mean Mighty God

 

From the original language is does mean LITERALLY "Jehovah is my strength"

 

02396 היקזח Chizqiyah khiz-kee-yaw’ or והיקזח Chizqiyahuw khiz-kee-yaw’- hoo also היקזחי Yᵉchizqiyah yekh-iz-kee-yaw’ or והיקזחי Yᵉchizqiyahuw yekh-iz-kee-yaw’- hoo

from 02388 and 03050, Greek 1478 εζεκιας; ; n pr m

AV-Hezekiah 85, Hizkiah 1, Hizkijah 1; 87

Hezekiah or Hizkiah or Hizkijah= "Jehovah is my strength"

Also you are misquoting Scripture with your reference "My Father is greater then I."

 

Since you are most likely trying to twist the passage from John 10 , let's look at it in context

 

29 "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.
30 "I and My Father are one."
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him.
32 Jesus answered them, "Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?"
33 The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God."

 

The religious leaders took up stones to kill Jesus for alleged blasphemy.

 

They got what He was saying, why can't you?

 

By the way, you really have never dealt with the original passage where it overtly states "God was manifested in the flesh"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

I can quote scripture all day long to but lets stick with one passage at a time shall we? Non of what you've been quoting means anything to me about any trinity doctrine, I only see evangelical Christian talking points.

 

The Isaiah passage according to your Bible's perceptive is a perversion of the original language. The tense is in the present and past, when Jesus was born 700 years later, that right there says it doesn't make sense. Look up the dead sea scrolls or a Tanakh, the translation is not even close. There is no where in the Old Testament where this verbiage is used to describe the Messiah, so why is this the only passage where the rules change? Isaiah is speaking of King Hezekiah, from the line of David, who's reign was the most peaceful Israel has ever seen since Solomon.

 

Jehovah is my strength, God is Mighty, God is my Might, any of these can be used, it really doesn't matter because they all refer to a person who God anointed, not just Jesus but also His prophets and kings. The name Mighty God is name that explains the strength of God in which Sennacherib's army was destroyed in one of Israel's greatest victories during he reign of Hezekiah.

 

Again you're looking at this from a translation that is already trinity biased, no doubt from the Septuagint which was originally only the 5 Books of Moses, then centuries later they (Christians) added the rest of the Old Testament. Using your logic someone named Joshua means that he's the savior, (Joshua means Gods Salvation).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Hazaq in Hebrew is the root word for Hezek that you pasted from Strongs or wherever you got it from. Thanks for that...

 

Hazaq means mighty, strong, powerful so on and so on. Of course the Trinitarian will use the word that fits his agenda, ask any one who speaks Hebrew and they disagree with you.

 

Hazaq -Mighty, Strong Powerfull

Yahu - Name for God

 

Hezekiah is just a English transliteration from Greek which is a transliteration from Hebrew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The information regarding Isaiah and Hezekiah's name are from the Hebrew so it has nothing to do with a particular version of the Bible

 

Your assertion "Jehovah is my strength, God is Mighty, God is my Might, any of these can be used, it really doesn't matter because they all refer to a person who God anointed, not just Jesus but also His prophets and kings." has no basis

 

The references to Jesus versus all else has one enormous difference

 

Only Jesus can save from sin.

 

Back to the original passage

 

Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16

 

 

I can quote scripture all day long to but lets stick with one passage at a time shall we? Non of what you've been quoting means anything to me about any trinity doctrine, I only see evangelical Christian talking points.

 

The Isaiah passage according to your Bible's perceptive is a perversion of the original language. The tense is in the present and past, when Jesus was born 700 years later, that right there says it doesn't make sense. Look up the dead sea scrolls or a Tanakh, the translation is not even close. There is no where in the Old Testament where this verbiage is used to describe the Messiah, so why is this the only passage where the rules change? Isaiah is speaking of King Hezekiah, from the line of David, who's reign was the most peaceful Israel has ever seen since Solomon.

 

Jehovah is my strength, God is Mighty, God is my Might, any of these can be used, it really doesn't matter because they all refer to a person who God anointed, not just Jesus but also His prophets and kings. The name Mighty God is name that explains the strength of God in which Sennacherib's army was destroyed in one of Israel's greatest victories during he reign of Hezekiah.

 

Again you're looking at this from a translation that is already trinity biased, no doubt from the Septuagint which was originally only the 5 Books of Moses, then centuries later they (Christians) added the rest of the Old Testament. Using your logic someone named Joshua means that he's the savior, (Joshua means Gods Salvation).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Your first statement doesn't make sense because if it was that obvious then the scriptures would line up and match. Why did the translators of most English bibles feel obligated to change the tense of the verse and add words that further support a Trinitarian lean?

 

Secondly of course it has basis, it's of no fault of your own and I know your Bible study classes at evangelical Christian 101 don't cover this, but in Hebrew culture and scripture, god is refured to as a title and not as God quite often. If you are of God and appointed by God then you are god. If you represent God then you are god.

 

God made Moses a god to Pharoah.

 

So the basis is obvious, trinitarians don't realize this and falsly assume that this all applies only to Jesus.

 

The original message means that the Word of God became flesh in the man Jesus son of Joseph. How does this say that he is a part of some Godhead like Greek and Egyptian mythology? Jesus is from God, therefore he is god.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Only Jesus can forgive sin?

 

No God is the only one who can forgive sin, however He gives certain people the authority to forgive sin, it is written that He gave that authority to Christ and Christ also gave that authority to His apostles. All in the name of Christ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You continue to refer to "english bible" but that has nothing to do with the discussion

 

What I'm citing is coming from the Hebrew and/or Greek just like the "russian bible"

 

Same source, same words

 

This statement makes no sense "If you are of God and appointed by God then you are god. If you represent God then you are god."

 

Moses is not God

 

Now if you want to use the word god (small g), it's a different word in the Hebrew and refers to a representative of God as in a judge or the like

 

If your assertion is Jesus is a "god" and somehow less than God in power and authority, how can He save you from sin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please show me in Scripture when a man can forgive sin (singular)

 

Allow me to define forgive.

 

Forgiveness as in remove the penalty of Death for sin (singular)

 

Forgiveness as in Salvation

 

“For the wages of sin [is] death, but the gift of God [is] eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 6:23 NKJV)

 

"Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12 NKJV)

 

No other name


 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

It has plenty to do with the discussion, if you're going to use twisted interpretations that were interpreted incorrectly I have to expose that. Very simple. Same source same words but different interpretations that crept into the translation. If one of Jesus's titles was Mighty God, then why isn't it mentioned anywhere in the entire New Testament? We have the Son of God, Son of Man, Emanuel etc... Where's Mighty God?

 

I said Moses is god. Not God. Don't put words in my mouth.

 

Thanks for defining what you mean by forgive, there many ways a person can take this.

 

Jesus is not a God. He is god. Because He is of God. It is the Word of God that made the man Jesus god.

 

God gave the authority to forgive sin to His son. Just like how you quoted, the only name that can forgive sin is Jesus Christ. How does this prove the Trinitarian Doctrine? God can do whatever He wants to do. The Trinity Doctrine is telling God that Jesus can't forgive unless He is Devine which is crazy.

 

You can't even be sure because false Christianity is taught through the traditions of the Roman Church. Rome didn't comply to Christianity, Christianity complied to Rome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can Jesus forgive sin as a "god"?

 

Haven't you read?

 

And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission. Hebrews 9:22

 

If Jesus is just a man, His shed blood has no power

 

Does that seem reasonable?

 

Either Jesus is who He says He is or He's lumped in with the balance of humanity and subject to

 

“for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” (Romans 3:23 NKJV)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

He can forgive sin because that's the authority that God gave Him.

 

Again you are saying God can't do that because it doesn't comply with the tradition of the Pagan Christian church.

 

Jesus was the perfect sacrifice, the first perfect human. If he was 100% devine then it really doesn't count because God is and always is perfect. God didn't have to become human like Hercules. His true Word became flesh in man and with that Word he (Jesus) fulfilled the Law spiritually and was a perfect offering. With this offering Satan had no power over because a human defeated him.

 

All have sinned and fall short except for Jesus Christ.... Isn't that the whole point? Why do you need to be a part of a Devine Trinity with 3 Gods? That's Greek and Egyption, paganism.

 

If Christ was 100% Devine and 100% Man, then who was He praying to on the mount of Olives? The second part of Himself? Did God split in 2? If I kept talking to myself people would think I was a lunatic.

 

John 5

19 So Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is sin dealt with and salvation secured?

 

Did you read Hebrews 9?

 

Based upon OT Law blood MUST be shed for the remission of sin

 

OT style, sin (singular) truly was not erased but only covered hence Yom Kippur or Day of Atonement (day of covering)

 

And no, Jesus did not fulfill the law "spiritually" but iterally

 

"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. Matthew 5;17

 

From the Greek - 4137 πληρόω pleroo play-ro’-o

fulfil 51, fill 19, be full 7, complete 2, end 2, misc 9; 90

 

He paid the penalty for sin (singular)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Let me clarify...

 

He fulfilled the Law with spiritualness. In other words, perfectly.

 

Sin is dealt with by believing on who God has sent to us, namely Jesus Christ and our sins are forgiven through his innocent blood. It washes us daily, in which we become kings and priests, sons God.

 

You are correct, he paid the penalty for ages of sin that was only covered and not dealt with. He is our redeemer to inherit everlasting life.

 

But why is it that Christendom needs the pagan teaching of the Trinity to justify all of this? Where did it come from? Why wasn't it so obvious that it didn't have to be disputed for hundreds of years? Makes no sense.

 

Christendom is a new word for paganism, you accuse the Molokans of following tradition (I agree with you btw), yet you are following one of the most pagan and ancient traditions of them all. Unscriptural and created by MAN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

It "suffices" because the blood is from the innocent Lamb of God. Who was perfect, the devil had and has no power over him.

 

Christ intercedes for those washed in His perfect innocent blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Because Christ is the Word of God in flesh.

 

Paul continues on by saying: 24 But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

 

Obviously Paul is not speaking of Christ here, Christ is the one exception because God made it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

So what's the next question out of your "Convince The Unbeliever" handbook?

 

Evangelicals crack me up, you guys are no different the Catholic and Orthodox. Just less creepy clothes and no smoking incense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those interested there is a 12 sermon study on the Trinity doctrine here that will explain some of the fallacies that our guest thetruth is trying to put forth. But, to no avail. He does not speak truth, nor know truth.

 

Here is a link to to the 12 sermon study: http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?keyword=trbc&keyworddesc=&currsection=sermonssource&SourceOnly=true&keywordwithin=trinity

Edited by stevepiv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

I assume my answer to seeking fault wasn't deemed acceptable by the moderator or maybe I didn't hit the send button?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are speaking in circles

 

You say "Because Christ is the Word of God in flesh." but you are ignoring

 

1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.

He Who?

 

Again, coupling this with verse 14

 

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

 

You say Isaiah was speaking prophetically about King Hezekiah but they were contemporaries.

I'd have to say, not very prophetic at all to write about someone who is living

 

You say "Christ is the one exception because God made it that way.". Can you show me where I can find that in Scripture?

 

You say "Obviously Paul is not speaking of Christ here..."

 

You then say the exact opposite "Paul continues on by saying: 24 But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus."

 

Which is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Speaking in circles, or just not wanting to accept reality? In all honesty I've been very lenient on not making you answer my questions, you just go back to your preaching manual and find the next question to ask an unbeliever. Trinitarians like yourself NEED to assume and read things into the text to make it seem genuine. I’ve had one person tell me "well its all in the big picture". You can’t fit a square peg into a round hole.

 

Yes the Word become flesh and is God, fine, if I speak Words and my words become flesh then those Words are me, that doesn’t make it equal in power and authority. This passage doesn’t mention that one bit, very beautiful chapter by the way.

 

Of course Isaiah was speaking prophetically, he was a prophet of God was he not? Anybody with an inkling of understanding in prophecy would know this. I answered this a few times now you keep pushing the next button, uncomprehendable to the deceived soul.

 

The prophecy is a prefigurement, all prophecy doesn’t just stop once finished, you see it repeated over and over in different forms. Examples are riddled everywhere in the Bible to show that. Even through Christ Himself. However I wouldn’t ask a person not educated in this to understand. So that’s ok you can disagree.

 

 

Quote

You say "Christ is the one exception because God made it that way." Can you show me where I can find that in Scripture?

 

 

Really? I guess the answer isn’t located in your manual... I think God made it pretty clear who His beloved son was. How shallow is this going to get?

 

Luke 3:21 Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened, 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”

 

 

Quote

You say "Obviously Paul is not speaking of Christ here..."

 

You then say the exact opposite "Paul continues on by saying: 24 But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus."

 

Which is it?

 

 

 

Again, where are you coming from? Obviously Paul isn’t lumping Christ in with mankind because salvation is through Christ.

 

Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.

 

God made it that way, keep the word games coming, its fun. Oh btw keep ignoring my questions from above too, it just shows what you want to avoid.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which question?

There is a lot of spewage and I cannot decipher statement of opinions versus other

 

We agree Jesus existed, correct?

He came to the Earth in physical form, right?

Is He eternal or a created being?

Is He equal in power to God the Father or somehow less?

Is He fully man AND fully God? If not, is He like "superman" kinda' between with super hero powers but not Deity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Normally a question ends in a question mark, if you feel its a statement then respond to the statment, very simple.

 

No where is it written in the Old Testament that the Messiah is or will be "God".

 

So when the Messianic prophecies fulfilled in Christ, why would the rules change for Christ to be God?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you agree with this?

 

9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.
10 As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one; Romans 3:9-10 NKJV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Yes, now if we believe that the Old Testment prophecied of Christs coming, where in the Old Testament does it say that the Messaiah is or has to be God?

 

We know that God does not change.

 

Mal 3:6

For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whom is perfect?

 

Back to my previous post

 

Would you agree with this?

 

9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin.
10 As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one; Romans 3:9-10 NKJV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Easy...

 

Luke1:26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” 29 But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. 30 And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end. ”34 And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” 35 And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God. 36 And behold, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son, and this is the sixth month with her who was called barren. 37 For nothing will be impossible with God.” 38 And Mary said, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.

 

The man Jesus wasn't born from the ways of man, but from above, by a holy kiss. If the gospel writer was meaning to relay to us Jesus's deity, then why didnt he just outright say, "And the child born of her will be God."? Again, it doesn't make sense. He say's the Son of God, not God.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an odd stance to take in light of all the passages presented to include the one that began this thread

 

Your attempt to explain this rather simple passage falls flat

 

...Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16

 

God was manifested in the flesh

 

Your response was to indicate that Jesus was "OF" God yet the passage clearly states He Is God

 

There isn't an "of" in the passage

 

How do you reconcile this?

 

As previously stated and you seem to ignore

 

The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God."

 

The religious leaders took up stones to kill Jesus for alleged blasphemy.

 

They got what He was saying, why can't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

And so the circle of debate continues... I feel like i've been patient enough, have you asnwered one question i've asked the last few weeks?

 

There is nothing in that passage that equates Christ with God, the passage simply says that God was manifested in the flesh, this manifestation can be in many forms, doesnt prove nothing except your willingness to let psuedo christianity run the way you live and think. The trinity doctrine is blasphemy. I'll only respond to your next post if I feel its constructive, if we just keep doing circles then i'll ignore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who then is this passage referring to if not Jesus?

 

Manifested - 5319 φανερόω phaneroo fan-er-o’-o

 

to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown,

 

in the

 

Flesh

4561 σάρξ sarx sarx

1) flesh (the soft substance of the living body, which covers the bones and is permeated with blood) of both man and beasts

 

Seems pretty straight forward

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

No Timothy is speaking of Jesus, maybe I should've made it more clear.

 

I just wanted to clarify so you don't put words in my mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Yes I misspoke, of course Paul wrote the book, been a busy morning!

 

God is manifested in the flesh in the man Jesus of Nazareth. I don't know how I can be more clear.

 

However my point is that this passage doesn't have anything to do with a "trinity doctrine".

 

This doesn't say anything about being coequal.

 

Paul is just backing up what John wrote. That is, the Word became manifest in the flesh and dwelt among us.

 

When someone wears pseudo Christian glasses you can only see one interpretation, which is according to the teachings of the Ecumenical Councils. You may speak against Catholicism but yet you are still drinking water from the Popes sink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how you can

 

You say "God is manifested in the flesh in the man Jesus of Nazareth. I don't know how I can be more clear."

You say "Yes all are born in sin. Paul makes it very clear." to which you excluded Jesus adding "Of course not."

You say "Christ was the only perfect offering."

 

In your world Jesus is not God BUT perfect BUT not born in sin BUT God manifest in flesh BUT...

 

Your theology doesn't make any sense with the obvious and glaring contradictions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Oh quite the contrary, it's as clear as day for anyone not under the control of pseudo Christianity.

 

The Word of God became flesh (manifested) in the man Jesus son of Joseph. Born of a virgin (not in sin) and lived a perfect life. In doing so the devil no longer had the power to accuse the people of God, this salvation is only for those who believe in who God sent.

 

I'm not the one saying 100% fully God Jesus prayed to 100% God in heaven from earth.. Talk about not making sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Mary was sinless because she was a virgin?

 

Didn't you say "Yes all are born in sin. Paul makes it very clear."

 

That's a clear contradiction in your "theology"

 

You're starting to sound like a catholic with co-redemptrix issues

 

So why is Jesus sinless? According to you "Christ was the only perfect offering." which I would equate to being sinless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

First I must the question... What makes being born sinful? Or in other words, why is it that all of mankind is born in sin, what is the cause and effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Just wanted to read it from you first...

 

So now the question is, why is it that Adam is the one who brought sin into the world when it was his wife Eve who sinned first?

 

Why does Paul use Adam when he really wasn't the first to sin?

 

As Paul says,"For by Adam all die, but all by Christ will live." Why Adam and not Eve?

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Sorry but I'm going to have to stick to my guns here, you can't just brush this away like a pesky fly.

 

Why is it Adam and not Eve?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scripture does not say why so what am I supposed to do...guess?

 

I can make an educated guess but cannot say definitively

 

That still does not excuse the subject at hand because scripture is silent on an issue

 

Scripture IS clear regarding all being born in sin to which you agreed, remember?

 

From earlier in the thread

 

You say "God is manifested in the flesh in the man Jesus of Nazareth. I don't know how I can be more clear."

You say "Yes all are born in sin. Paul makes it very clear." to which you excluded Jesus adding "Of course not."

You say "Christ was the only perfect offering."

 

If Jesus is just a man, He's born in sin therefore He would be incapable of being perfect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Scripture isn't always black and white, infact majority of the time, scripture is in a grey area which is why you have different beliefs/faiths/religions.

 

Besides the point, you say scripture doesn't say. In other words there's nothing about this in your pseudo Chistian handbook.

 

You would think that something this important, that is, how sin came into the world, the Bible would at least be more clear as to who sinned first. The Old Testament say's Eve yet the New Testament say's Adam.

 

So now I must ask... How is the sinful seed passed down from generation to generation and through whom? Male or Female.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How sin came into the world is QUITE clear because Scripture states specifically.

 

You already know and agreed how sin entered. Have you already forgotten?

 

"Yes all are born in sin. Paul makes it very clear." to which you excluded Jesus adding "Of course not."

 

You are posing a straw man argument to avoid your obvious contradictions and nothing more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

Call it whatever you want, just answer the question.

 

I agreed that sin came into the world through Adam. So those born through Adam's seed are in his sinful nature.

 

Therefore, how is the sinful nature passed from generation to generation. Through male or female?

 

I'm making it real easy for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, my sense is you are trying to change the subject by introducing spurious rhetoric.

 

This is the worn out ploy cult members will use when they cannot deal with the evidence presented

 

I could make an issue about "What color was Judas' hair" and, if you cannot answer, I'll smugly sit and say "you need to answer or I'll..."

 

Again, you need to focus

 

You've already agreed sin was introduced into humanity through Adam

 

You also agreed Jesus is not included

 

So, what does that make Jesus?

 

The passage below states all too clearly the answer regardless of your wrong views

 

...Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

No subject is being changed.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but the subject is how Jesus and sinful nature in humanity relates to His Deity and the 1 Timothy passage.

 

It's very simple.

 

You call it rhetoric and tell me to focus yet you can't seem to focus enough to answer a simple question.

 

So I'll ask again.

 

How is the sinful nature passed from generation to generation. Through male or female?

 

You say the only way for Christ to not be connected to sinful humanity is for him to be God.

 

So the question is perfectly reasonable to ask.

 

How is the sinful nature passed from generation to generation. Through male or female

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer is, there's no answer according to Scripture

 

Seeing as it's a Spiritual issue not a physical one, I could guess and say it's neither

 

You're not saved by lineage but by Grace

 

A persons Salvation has no bearing on the Salvation of their progeny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

Dodge and duck all you want, I'll need something better then "there's no answer".

 

If it's spiritual then why was it necessary for Christ to be 100% human? Why didn't God just snap his finger and give us a savior for redemption?

 

I believe even the Nicene creed states that Christ was "Fully Human".

 

I never said anything about lineage or progeny, I'm talking about human nature, in other words, humanity in general.

 

Scripture is quite clear from whom the sinful nature is from and that it is passed down to every human except for one, the only perfect lamb of God.

 

So now I ask again...

 

Is the sinful nature passed down through the man or through the woman.

 

Is the nature of Adam, or of Eve?

 

I'll give you a hint.

 

Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one MAN, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.

 

I know what scripture says, so you can just say you don't know and I'll get to my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You got your best guess from me

 

"Seeing as it's a Spiritual issue not a physical one, I could guess and say it's neither"

 

BTW, citing Romans 5 and making man bold doesn't mean anything.

 

If you apply your failed logic to the balance of the passage where it states " and in this way death came to all men" does that exclude women? Of course not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

No wonder you guys are so far off, you have to GUESS through half the Bible to get anywhere and justify idolatry.

 

So sinful nature is from neither? Who did it come from then.

 

From whom did sinful nature come from, Adam or Eve?

 

Also, does someone from Gods seed sin? If he did then God is a sinner.

 

Those born of Adam are in sin.

 

Those born of God are without sin.

 

Therefore Jesus being born of Gods seed, is sinless.

 

Mary didn't have relations with mans sinful seed, she was a virgin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

strawman yet again

 

Scripture does not overtly state an answer so that's what you get

 

Again you are contradicting yourself

 

You said all were born in sin that includes Mary. Mary had a father so, according to your logic she was conceived in sin too

 

Haven't you read

1 There was a man named Nicodemus, a Jewish religious leader who was a Pharisee.
2 After dark one evening, he came to speak with Jesus. “Rabbi,” he said, “we all know that God has sent you to teach us. Your miraculous signs are evidence that God is with you.”
3 Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, unless you are born again, you cannot see the Kingdom of God.”
4 “What do you mean?” exclaimed Nicodemus. “How can an old man go back into his mother’s womb and be born again?”
5 Jesus replied, “I assure you, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and the Spirit.
6 Humans can reproduce only human life, but the Holy Spirit gives birth to spiritual life.
7 So don’t be surprised when I say, ‘You must be born again.’
8 The wind blows wherever it wants. Just as you can hear the wind but can’t tell where it comes from or where it is going, so you can’t explain how people are born of the Spirit.”

Since you are physically born, you are born IN SIN because of Adam's sin

 

You MUST be born again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest thetruth

A straw mans argument means I'm misinterpreting your argument to make it easier for me to debate you, so then I ask what am I misinterpreting?

 

You are saying that Jesus has to be God because all are born in sin correct?

 

I'm saying that Jesus doesn't have to be God to have no sinful nature.

 

The seed of our Almighty God entered Mary, therefore Christ is of Gods seed which is perfect. Jesus wasn't from the seed of a sinful human but of Gods.

 

Using your logic even if Jesus was 100% God he wouldn't be perfect because he was still "born" a human.

 

What then is the purpose of the virgin birth? Are you implying that Gods seed is sinful?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a misrepresentation and then assertions about non-issues to "validate" your un-Biblical position

 

Your use of logical fallacies have varied from the tu quoque, argumentum e silentio, petitio principii plus others so to say it's all been strawman is not entirely correct

 

By the way, please explain

 

1) How Many is "sinless" seeing as she had a father

2) Seeing as God is Spirit, did He LITERALLY have sex with Mary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×