Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Doh! I look forward to the Appeal to duality for the trinitarians to explain that! He was a servant of himself? He only took the form of a servant?
Last edited:
A Curious Question For Non-Trinitarians
- Thread starter Hidden In Him
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Doh! I look forward to the Appeal to duality for the trinitarians to explain that! He was a servant of himself? He only took the form of a servant?
Oh come on, Wrangler.
Your weakness is you use straw man arguments all the time, which turn otherwise interesting discussions into exercises in tedium. Christ and the Father are taught as two separate individuals in Trinitarian thought, with the Son answerable to the Father, yes? Why are you always citing these arguments against the Trinity when they are never denied?
:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Oh come on, Wrangler.
Your weakness is you use straw man arguments all the time, which turn otherwise interesting discussions into exercises in tedium. Christ and the Father are taught as two separate individuals in Trinitarian thought, with the Son answerable to the Father, yes? Why are you always citing these arguments against the Trinity when they are never denied?
I didn’t make an argument; just stated what I’m looking forward to.
Regarding 2 separate individuals, a trinity is not made.
Seriously though, you are going with ‘individual’ and forgoing the usual tedious ‘being’ persons?
Regarding 2 separate individuals, a trinity is not made.
LoL!
I believe I'll leave it there. We agree on something.
Unless someone has already overcome the world as Jesus overcame the world. Anyone else who is moving in the right direction at the end of his course may well be doing what God expects from him already!
Why are you really curious in the simple concept of serving Christ and thus the Father?
And there is a real difference!
I can see why yourself as a staunch Trinitarian can be confused because you must believe there is no difference in serving Christ and serving your triune god, that is the fusion of one divine essence of your Father, your Christ and another person you call the Holy Spirit. I guess what also might add further confusion for you is that you have to squeeze in somehow, in your mind at least, serving the 3rd person of your same trinity god because the chosen OP scripture in it leaves it absent deliberately. I wonder why?
We serve our lord Christ because he serves his Father, the one true God. And when we serve others who are over us we do it in the same spirit of Christ we have in our heart. We are all servants to the one true God, the Father, of all souls. Even Christ serves him today as he has always done since he was old enough to know his Father. So we ultimately do not serve Christ just for himself, for his own sake only.
Christ is also a servant to his own Father today as we are. We serve Christ to serve and do the will and give glory to our Father, period.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Pot calling kettle black. The biggest trinitarian strawman argument is that the trinity is in the Bible when it is not.
The trinity is the false doctrine and it is clear from the reliance of vague Scripture to 'support' way beyond what the word of God actually says, demanding an interpretation that imposes trinitarianism onto unitarian text and asking questions phrased in oddly and obviously trick question ways like this thread.
Appeal to Ignorance. That is the fallacy at play here. The idea that you deny evidence against the trinity AS IF that denial supports it. In point of fact, there is no 'Scriptural proof', no verse that explicitly states the trinity. The obvious reason is because Biblical authors were not believers in this violation of the 1C. Jesus did not teach the trinity and that is an inconvenient fact. Folks like @Hidden In Him have to resort to Ad Homenim, as this thread shows, even though I give him credit for invoking that particular fallacy in a joking (or mocking) way.
The OP asks for 'Scriptural proof' but does not put the same burden on himself, on his doctrines. It is obvious why this double standard needs to be employed.
Last edited:
This is in some respects a beautifully-worded post. Found it pleasant to read.
About not seeing the Holy Spirit in the passage, that kinda operates under the assumption that all Three should always be mentioned anytime any of the other Two are or the teaching is in error. I don't see that as a prerequisite. But aside from that this post is beautifully worded.
It's not Ad Hominem!! LoL. I am playing, for heaven's sakes : ) One thing about me is that most of the time I am walking in joy, and one of the ways it manifests is that I poke fun at others and get a kick out of them poking fun at me, because I actually don't take myself as seriously as some people think I do. No man should.
Now if I'm ticked off, that's another story, but you can usually tell because the sarcasm gets more biting. But can you please relax?! Heavens. I'm just trying to put a little levity in the conversation, and I don't see the harm in that. Mellow out a little. Not every discussion has to be a Life and Death debate. Besides, I'm the one holding to the orthodox position here. If anyone should be getting all up tight about things it ought to be me, but I'm not stressing out. Neither should you.
And STOP LABELLING everything as a debate tactic! LoL. Gets on my nerves. You need to lighten up just a tad. It will make your day go better, trust me.
Last edited:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Well, only if the assumption is true that the trinity is valid.
Said differently, you are working under the assumption that evidence against your doctrine should be disregarded as being presumptive, i.e., another Appeal to Ignorance. It's kind of odd that verses that contain all 3 are used as proof positive of the trinity but the many more verses that do not contain all 3 is no-never-mind.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
If it is not Ad Homenim, then stop all your playing, poking fun, LOL-ing, etc.
It all just a form of mocking. The Mocking Spirit vs The Holy Spirit | Daily Manna (wordpress.com)
The problem is non-trinitarians, like me, have the burden to change. You have no burden to stop mocking.
You use mocking to cover up your lack of a mature, Scripture-based, logical reply to theological points you do not agree with.
Your persistent mocking achieved the desired end. How to discern and silence a mocking spirit (ugchristiannews.com) Rather than discuss the many brilliant answers to your questions, the subject is now non-trinitarians need to lighten up and your total commitment to playing, poking fun, mocking those you don't agree with but have no answer.
The 'labeling' that unnerves you is the proper identification of reality.
The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name.
Buddha
If it is not Ad Homenim, then stop all your playing, poking fun, LOL-ing, etc.
It all just a form of mocking. The Mocking Spirit vs The Holy Spirit | Daily Manna (wordpress.com)
Oh, boy... According to this article you provided, I do not have the Holy Spirit and I am damned in my current state. Correct?
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
How about we break it down and see how other scripture explains what Paul said and believed....
"You slaves, be obedient in everything to those who are your human masters"
Ephesians 6:5-6 Paul repeats...
"Slaves, be obedient to your human masters, with fear and trembling in the sincerity of your hearts, as to the Christ, 6 not only when being watched, just to please men, but as Christ’s slaves doing the will of God whole-souled."
So, subjection to human masters (lords) was required of Christian slaves.
"not only when they are watching, just to please men, but with sincerity of heart, with fear of Jehovah.”
We are told to fear Jehovah but nowhere are we told to fear Jesus Christ. (proverbs 2:1-5)
“23 Whatever you are doing, work at it whole-souled as for Jehovah, and not for men, 24 for you know that it is from Jehovah you will receive the inheritance as a reward. Slave for the Master, Christ. "
Luke 10:27...Jesus, repeating God's law....
"In answer he said: “‘You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole strength and with your whole mind’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’”
Who is spoken of as "the rewarder of those earnestly seeking him" ?
Hebrews 11:6
"Moreover, without faith it is impossible to please God well, for whoever approaches God must believe that he is and that he becomes the rewarder of those earnestly seeking him." (See also Zephaniah 2:3)
By failing to use God’s name, scripture became a playground for the devil, confusing people about which “Lord” was being spoken about.
Jehovah (Yahweh) has a personal name for a reason.....it is the only name that he has made known to man. (Psalm 83:18 KJV) Jesus OTOH has many names and many roles as his Father’s most trusted servant. (Acts 4:27)
As my previous post highlighted, the title "Lord" applies to many different people in different ways. It's not just a title for God and his Christ....and as I have said many times, if the Jews had retained the divine name, we would not be having this conversation. The clear distinction between the "Lord Jehovah" and the "Lord Jesus Christ" would have been obvious, but confusing the title and assigning it to only one entity, produced the supposed duality of God and his son...add to that the even later addition of the third "person"....and the trinity was born.....but not until hundreds of years after Jesus died. How is that possible?
The Jews did not know a triune God. (Deuteronomy 6:4) Jesus was born a Jew and died a Jew. His apostles never mentioned a three in one god.
I believe that this deception has been so successful that Jesus’ words at Matthew 7:13-14 need no explanation as to why “few” are on the road to life.
But the apostles were also Jews, and were doing the same thing. You don't think they would have corrected things if there actually were a problem as you suppose?
Hope you're having a nice day, btw, and always nice speaking with you.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Hang on....what??? The problem never arose with the apostles...they were the restraint, keeping the apostates at bay until the completion of what would become the last books of Christian scripture.
After the death of the last apostle John, the foretold apostasy gained ascendency, and “while men were sleeping” the devil planted his “weeds” which took over the whole “field”...... Christendom is the result.
Hopelessly fractured and divided, I do not believe that they represent the teachings of the Master in any way.
I’ll be having better days when all the tourists go home and stop stealing our food and parking places.
It’s the downside of living where others want to take their vacation....but I guess we get to enjoy it out of the commercialized ‘holiday’ seasons.
Hope your day is enjoyable too.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
What? According to you, that article died not apply to you since you are not mocking.
I meant that since, as you say, had the Jews retained the Divine Name we would not be having this discussion, the problem with this argument being that the apostles were Jews. If there was indeed a problem with understanding things properly, wouldn't they have fixed it themselves? Because they didn't. They continued to use κυρίος in all sorts of contexts where, as JWs try to argue, the word is referring to Jehovah one instant and Jesus the next.
What? According to you, that article died not apply to you since you are not mocking.
According to you it apparently did, Lol.
- Status
Similar threads
