The Alpha and Omega; the First and the Last; the Beginning and the End

[APAK]

This originated Biblical idiom phrase of ‘alpha and omega’, the same as ‘first and the last’ and ‘beginning and the end’ especially used in the Book of revelation, describe:

God’s eternal nature, and his Son’s deserved unique accomplishments. These phrases indicate that the current subject, person, at hand, spoken of, is the the only one, the origin and culmination of something, suggesting completeness and uniqueness.

In a broader context, these idioms can be used to convey that someone or something is the sole entity that fits a particular event or subject, implying there are no others. For example, if you say, “I am the alpha and the omega of this project,” it means you are the primary and ultimate figure involved, with no one else fitting that role.

These phrases emphasize the completeness and exclusivity of the subject, highlighting its singular importance and role in the context being described.

Now, for Unitarians, the Bible, calling God the alpha and omega, by its very definition, for whatever circumstance or event he is unique, is prooftext that God can be only, a carinal one person, and not two or more persons.

Trinitarians or Binitarians to-date cannot provide a useful and convincing answer or explanation on this most crucial subject. They are literally stumped.

So, if you want to chime in and provide an explanation why these three idioms do not or do, either way, mean that our Biblical God can ONLY be ONE Person, or NOT, feel free to do so.

The floor is yours.....

Blessings to all those in Christ, amen

 

[Wrangler]

This originated Biblical idiom phrase of ‘alpha and omega’, the same as ‘first and the last’ and ‘beginning and the end’

Trinitarians fail to discern God's word properly, conflating literal with figurative. Another example widely used in the ancient Near East is the idiom, "king of kings and lord of lords." This applied to many.

The same with the title "lord." Trinitarians claim certain idioms apply only to God. This claim is false. There are dozens of lords in Scripture.

Scripture has explicit teachings on who God is. (His name is YHWH, who we identify as Father.) Trinitarians ignore these Biblical teachings, preferring to invent a logical chain with false premises, such as:
P1. This applies (only) to God.
P2. This applies to Jesus.
C.

Worship is another great example. Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar and David were worshipped. Other prophets raised people from the dead. The Apostles forgave sin. Time and time again they try to invoke a premise that applies to Jesus and falsely claim it only applies to God. Even if an idiom is applied to only these 2 people, it does not make one of them God; they don't realize how P2 contradicts P1:

• If an idiom only applies to Person A, then it does not apply to Person B.
• If the idiom applies to more than one person, then it does not apply only to one person.

The entire reason they must resort to relying on their own understanding in inventing these logical constructions is precisely because the trinity doctrine is:

A. Not in Scripture​

B. Contradicts Scripture​

There is no verse in Scripture that teaches what trinitarians believe. Jesus did not teach the trinity. He taught us to pray to our Father, not to the trinity. Profound.

 

[APAK]

Trinitarians fail to discern God's word properly, conflating literal with figurative. Another example widely used in the ancient Near East is the idiom, "king of kings and lord of lords." This applied to many.

The same with the title "lord." Trinitarians claim certain idioms apply only to God. This claim is false. There are dozens of lords in Scripture.

Scripture has explicit teachings on who God is. (His name is YHWH, who we identify as Father.) Trinitarians ignore these Biblical teachings, preferring to invent a logical chain with false premises, such as:
P1. This applies (only) to God.
P2. This applies to Jesus.
C.

Worship is another great example. Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar and David were worshipped. Other prophets raised people from the dead. The Apostles forgave sin. Time and time again they try to invoke a premise that applies to Jesus and falsely claim it only applies to God. Even if an idiom is applied to only these 2 people, it does not make one of them God; they don't realize how P2 contradicts P1:

• If an idiom only applies to Person A, then it does not apply to Person B.
• If the idiom applies to more than one person, then it does not apply only one person.

The entire reason they must resort to relying on their own understanding in inventing these logical constructions is precisely because the trinity doctrine is:

A. Not in Scripture​

B. Contradicts Scripture​

There is no verse in Scripture that teaches what trinitarians believe. Jesus did not teach the trinity. He taught us to pray to our Father, not to the trinity. Profound.

Excellent, and you just extended your typical logic analysis of the the illogical Trinitarian approach to scripture using these idioms.

You could write a book of this subject, on just this style of scripture logic you use to dissect the flaws in Trinitarian thought.

 

[Wrangler]

Excellent, and you just extended your typical logic analysis of the the illogical Trinitarian approach to scripture using these idioms.

You could write a book of this subject, on just this style of scripture logic you use to dissect the flaws in Trinitarian thought.

With trinitarians, it's always the same with the 4 pillars against it at every turn:

1. Definition
2. Logic
3. Language Usage
4. Explicit Scripture

 

[Wrangler]

Trinitarians start off with the fallacy of Circular Reasoning, that their premise (doctrine, dogma) is correct. Then they look for "support" and have no rejection criteria ... there is such a thing as square circles ...

 

[APAK]

Trinitarians start off with the fallacy of Circular Reasoning, that their premise (doctrine, dogma) is correct. Then they look for "support" and have no rejection criteria ... there is such a thing as square circles ...

And do they realize that is the product they advertise, and impossible theological reality? It must be agonizing and difficult to hang on to a God model born out of paganism to then apply it to scripture. So, they have to resort to using major assumptions as their undeniable facts, by just stating them, without any qualification. When did Jesus say he was divine? Never! When did a writer of the Bible say Jesus was divine? Never! Did God, is Father ever say his son was divine? Never! And still they force it down the throats of others, and actually believe it.

There must be a psychological fitting term for it...cognitive dissonance.....the internal conflict with what they must see in scripture that is different from what they have been taught by their Trinitarian leaders and fathers....it must be a real nightmare. They cannot maintain both views and beliefs without discomfort, so many usually end up trashing and misusing scripture instead to keep idolizing their pagan non-descript god and its worship.

 

[Wrangler]

P1. This applies (only) to God.
P2. This applies to Jesus.
C.

My favorite premise is that God said I am, which is a claim of deity. Everyone who says I am is claiming to be a deity and that proves they are a deity. Well, maybe not everyone. Just this one guy. LOL

In this case, they are not invoking an attribute unique to God but a common expression everyone uses. Then, they pivot that when their god says it, that imbues special meaning. The fact that their god says the Father is the only true God means nothing to them. Curious.

 

[Wrangler]

They cannot maintain both views and beliefs without discomfort,

Hence, their resorting to mystical dualism.

Recently, a trinitarian lad confessed the trinity cannot be understood, only believed. Wrong on both counts. Nonsense is not supposed to be understandable (that is, one can understand it is nonsense, not understandable, not to be confused with our not having the ability to understand it) AND it is only to be disbelieved.

Dualism is the principle that logic does not apply. For instance, if word meanings can be stretched or compressed to reject the Biblical Unitarian view, it ALSO is no basis to accept the trinity. It is laughable if it did not keep people from giving all glory to God, or worse, keep people from God altogether.

 

[APAK]

Hence, their resorting to mystical dualism.

Recently, a trinitarian lad confessed the trinity cannot be understood, only believed. Wrong on both counts. Nonsense is not supposed to be understandable AND it is only to be disbelieved.

Dualism is the principle that logic does not apply. For instance, if word meanings can be stretched or compressed to reject the Biblical Unitarian view, it ALSO is no basis to accept the trinity. It is laughable if it did not keep people from giving all glory to God.

That is so keen and insightful, of this dualism effect. They forget when they use dualism for themselves, in what they do to convince others of their truth, it instantly neutralizes its effects to even the point of insanity, a waste of time and effort, illogical and completely counter-productive. Most don't have the foresight and understanding to know any differently, so they keep at it of course....pounding their heads, and really for what...and then some, out of immaturity and in desperation, love to throw out chaff, as many lists of so-called Trinity-centric or enabled verses for YOU to answer in short order....insane. As if to say, take that.....can you match that......oh well

 

[APAK]

My favorite premise is that God said I am, which is a claim of deity. Everyone who says I am is claiming to be a deity and that proves they are a deity. Well, maybe not everyone. Just this one guy. LOL

In this case, they are not invoking an attribute unique to God but a common expression everyone uses. Then, they pivot that when their god says it, that imbues special meaning. The fact that their god says the Father is the only true God means nothing to them. Curious.

You surely have these folks figured out, and getting even more precise with a wider view over time.

 

[Wrangler]

Getting back to the Alpha and the Omega that Isaiah first wrote about; all prophets speak the words of God, as Isaiah did. For some reason, when the prophet Jesus says God's words, they take that to mean only this prophet is God.

The exploration that Jesus is a prophet is clear for it is the very purpose of John's opening chapter. We find at v 21 and 45 affirmation that Jesus is the expected prophet that Moses told them about. So, 2 prophets speak God's words of him being the Alpha and the Omega first found In Isaiah, where YHWH affirms he is the only God.
This is what Yahweh, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, Yahweh of Armies, says:
“I am the first and I am the last,
and there is no God except me

What hey do trinitarians wish to make of this? When Prophet A says it, it means nothing. When Prophet B says it, it is imbued with theological significance, a claim of deity. Odd that they call their god a liar since he said YHWH, our Father is the only true God. They reject the explicit words of their god, subordinate it to their own understanding of reading into what he says. I worship my God so much, I literally reject what he literally says. Curious indeed.

 

[APAK]

Getting back to the Alpha and the Omega that Isaiah first wrote about; all prophets speak the words of God, as Isaiah did. For some reason, when the prophet Jesus says God's words, they take that to mean only this prophet is God.

The exploration that Jesus is a prophet is clear for it is the very purpose of John's opening chapter. We find at v 21 and 45 affirmation that Jesus is the expected prophet that Moses told them about. So, 2 prophets speak God's words of him being the Alpha and the Omega first found In Isaiah, where YHWH affirms he is the only God.
This is what Yahweh, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, Yahweh of Armies, says:
“I am the first and I am the last,
and there is no God except me

What hey do trinitarians wish to make of this? When Prophet A says it, it means nothing. When Prophet B says it, it is imbued with theological significance, a claim of deity. Odd that they call their god a liar since he said YHWH, our Father is the only true God. They reject the explicit words of their god, subordinate it to their own understanding of reading into what he says. I worship my God so much, I literally reject what he literally says. Curious indeed.

You beat me to the punch..I was going to dig up OT scripture to support the OP.....and what you just brought up you would think cannot be disputed...it's funny how Jesus as the prophet as one of his roles is viewed quite differently speaking of his Father, as compared with those in the OT who speak on the same subject.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

Trinitarians fail to discern God's word properly, conflating literal with figurative. Another example widely used in the ancient Near East is the idiom, "king of kings and lord of lords." This applied to many.

The same with the title "lord." Trinitarians claim certain idioms apply only to God. This claim is false. There are dozens of lords in Scripture.

Scripture has explicit teachings on who God is. (His name is YHWH, who we identify as Father.) Trinitarians ignore these Biblical teachings, preferring to invent a logical chain with false premises, such as:
P1. This applies (only) to God.
P2. This applies to Jesus.
C.

Worship is another great example. Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar and David were worshipped. Other prophets raised people from the dead. The Apostles forgave sin. Time and time again they try to invoke a premise that applies to Jesus and falsely claim it only applies to God. Even if an idiom is applied to only these 2 people, it does not make one of them God; they don't realize how P2 contradicts P1:

• If an idiom only applies to Person A, then it does not apply to Person B.
• If the idiom applies to more than one person, then it does not apply only to one person.

The entire reason they must resort to relying on their own understanding in inventing these logical constructions is precisely because the trinity doctrine is:

A. Not in Scripture​

B. Contradicts Scripture​

There is no verse in Scripture that teaches what trinitarians believe. Jesus did not teach the trinity. He taught us to pray to our Father, not to the trinity. Profound.

Wrong !

Trinitarians is BS ! their is no Trinitarians in fact, as you put it !

The Trinity is a reality and it's Biblical, it's their for all to see, only no name was set for such. because it's not truly needed, because it's nothing to do with Trinitarians at all in fact !

I was reading the Bible and I came across the Trinity once and stroped ! It jumped out at me ! and I said that's the Trinity ! right their written out ! not the word trinity but the workings is right their in fact !

Now now many people have a stupid opinion of what the Trinity truly is in fact, that is clear !
I seen a JW gave me on the subject, it was totaly pathetic opinion on the Trinity in fact, that of a 3yo or totaly stupid deranged moron to make such a claim. for it had nboting at all to do with the reality if the treal issue at all, Satanic at best in fact, slander !

Such attacks are only carnal religious nonsense in fact !

An Idom ?

Regarding the Holy Spirit ! the carnal and even the religious carnal can not truly understand such a nature in fact ?

When a fool makes a claim that their are 3 people in one, it's a carnal issue in fact !
Now the 3 in question are not one ! but 3 as in one ? as in all 3 have their Office ?
They are not the same but all 3 are as one in the same ! get that?
One may say that one person and another are of the same Order ?
So they believe is the same regarding what ever that be ? like a machanic and another would agree to the same order, regarding the facts of reality regarding the laws of reality, as to how an engine works, in regards what to do or not to do and iron out the nonsense if another comes up with half baked ninny claimes.