Exploring Trinitarian Logic

[Johann]

One of the key indicators that dualism is unbiblical is the overwhelming number of references to Jesus being in sin's flesh and fully identifying with us in every way.

I’ve asked Johann to provide a single verse that explains dualism—how many replies?

Zero... not a single one!

F2F

I did, on numerous occasions.

THE DUAL NATURE OF JESUS OF NAZARETH (Chapter One)

Christ Pantocrator Sinai Chapter One Introduction of the Fact For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the ...

bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com

Do your own homework.

J.

 

[face2face]

I did, on numerous occasions.

Not once!

THE DUAL NATURE OF JESUS OF NAZARETH (Chapter One)

Christ Pantocrator Sinai Chapter One Introduction of the Fact For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the ...

bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com

Do your own homework.

J.

@ProDeo

Johann's source!

Quote "By the historical creedal formulas presented above it can be seen that the Lord’s church in differing communities, in all parts of the earth, has universally acknowledged the two natures of Jesus of Nazareth; these being the natures of God and man. Each nature distinct one from the other; each individual nature acting upon, and receiving action from its world without any affect on the alternant nature. E.g. as the creeds have stated: Christ suffered as man, but the deity nature was in no way affected."

1. There is no shame in openly acknowledging creed formulas. They fully embrace the fact that these are man-made doctrines.
2. Can you see how dualism was created out of necessity? Without it, the Trinity doctrine collapses. It’s the falsehood that expanded and grew over time.
3. Why are they so concerned with the deity's nature remaining unaffected? I believe it’s because, on some level, they understand that Divine Holiness (nature) cannot coexist with or touch sinful flesh. They are creating a response to address their own objection!

As I told Johann, he still cannot provide a single verse from the Bible that supports this idea! Not one verse, and yet Johann has made this doctrine the foundation of his faith—faith in man-made creeds!

It's not even exegesis, as there is no biblical support to examine. It might as well be Elvish writing from The Lord of the Rings!

F2F

 

[Brakelite]

Yes. And so, we understand the passage from the perspective of the human being Jesus, not the supposed supernatural being "Word."

There is only one Jesus. His existence as a person doesn't consist of parts... part of Him human, part divine. The Son of God, the one in Whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelt, is all wrapped up in one person, Who chose to live without resorting to His divine power in order to bolster His reputation or use to protect Himself from abuse and insult or to exact revenge. When He spoke, He spoke as a whole being, a divine human person.

 

[face2face]

He spoke as a whole being, a divine human person.

An unexplainable paradox!...if you are inferring Dualism...if you mean Jesus had the mind of His Father then YES!

 

[Johann]

Johann's source!

You have lost this debate.

Jesus' Dual Nature in Scripture Using the LXX and Latin:

The concept of Jesus' dual nature, being both fully divine and fully human, is grounded in the teachings of the New Testament, though the Old Testament Scriptures (including the LXX) provide the necessary foundation.


a. The Messiah’s Humanity:
In the LXX, we see prophecy that points to the humanity of the Messiah.

Isaiah 7:14 (LXX):
"Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel."

This passage speaks of the Messiah's human nature, born of a virgin, taking on human flesh. The name Emmanuel means "God with us," which foreshadows His divine nature as well.

Micah 5:2 (LXX):
"But thou, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

Here, we see the Messiah’s eternal preexistence ("from everlasting") combined with His human birth in Bethlehem.

b. The Messiah’s Divinity:

Isaiah 9:6 (LXX):
"For a child is born to us, a son is given to us; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

This is a divine title for the Messiah, calling Him "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father," showing that He is fully divine.

The duality here is seen in His being both child and God.

2. New Testament: The Dual Nature of Christ

The New Testament fully reveals the dual nature of Jesus Christ, both as God and man. The LXX provides the Old Testament groundwork, but the New Testament articulates the union of these two natures in Jesus.

a. The Incarnation (Divinity and Humanity Together)

John 1:14 (LXX Translation):
"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father."

Here, we see the divine Logos (Word) becoming flesh. The duality is clear: Jesus is fully God (the Word) and fully human (He became flesh).

b. Philippians 2:6-7 (LXX Translation):
"Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men."

The divine nature of Christ ("form of God") is contrasted with His human nature ("likeness of men"). This passage strongly supports the idea that Jesus retained His divinity while assuming full humanity.

c. Hebrews 2:14 (LXX Translation):

"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil."

This highlights the humanity of Christ, as He partook of flesh and blood like us, but also emphasizes His purpose in death to overcome evil.

3. Latin Vulgate: Christ's Dual Nature
The Latin Vulgate, translated by St. Jerome in the 4th century, was a foundational version of Scripture for the Church and presents Jesus' dual nature clearly, often using terms like Deus (God) and homo (man).

a. The Incarnation in the Latin Vulgate:
John 1:14 (Vulgate):

"Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis, et vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi unigeniti a Patre, plenum gratiae et veritatis."

This translation mirrors the Greek, emphasizing that the Word became flesh (caro factum est). It conveys Jesus’ divinity (the Word) and His humanity (became flesh).

b. Philippians 2:6-7 (Vulgate):

"Qui cum in forma Dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse aequalis Deo: sed semetipsum exinanivit formam servi accipiens, in similitudinem hominum factus."

The Latin clearly distinguishes Christ's equality with God ("aequalis Deo") from His taking the form of a servant ("formam servi"), showing both His divinity and humanity in one person.

c. Hebrews 2:14 (Vulgate):

"Quoniam ergo pueri participes sunt carnis et sanguinis, et ipse similiter participavit eisdem, ut per mortem destrueret eum, qui habet mortis imperium, id est Diabolum."

Like the LXX, this passage emphasizes Jesus' full participation in humanity (carnis et sanguinis), yet His victory over death reveals His divine power.

Both the LXX and the Latin Vulgate support the doctrine of Jesus' dual nature-fully divine and fully human.

In the LXX, we see prophecy and typology that points to a Messiah who is both human and divine.

The New Testament then reveals this in clear theological terms, and both the LXX and the Vulgate preserve these truths in their translations.

The dual nature of Christ is integral to the Christian faith, affirming that Jesus is the eternal Son of God who became human for our salvation, while remaining fully divine.

J.

 

[face2face]

You have lost this debate.

Jesus' Dual Nature in Scripture Using the LXX and Latin:

The concept of Jesus' dual nature, being both fully divine and fully human, is grounded in the teachings of the New Testament, though the Old Testament Scriptures (including the LXX) provide the necessary foundation.


a. The Messiah’s Humanity:
In the LXX, we see prophecy that points to the humanity of the Messiah.

Isaiah 7:14 (LXX):
"Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel."

This passage speaks of the Messiah's human nature, born of a virgin, taking on human flesh. The name Emmanuel means "God with us," which foreshadows His divine nature as well.

Micah 5:2 (LXX):
"But thou, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

Here, we see the Messiah’s eternal preexistence ("from everlasting") combined with His human birth in Bethlehem.

b. The Messiah’s Divinity:

Isaiah 9:6 (LXX):
"For a child is born to us, a son is given to us; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

This is a divine title for the Messiah, calling Him "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father," showing that He is fully divine.

The duality here is seen in His being both child and God.

2. New Testament: The Dual Nature of Christ

The New Testament fully reveals the dual nature of Jesus Christ, both as God and man. The LXX provides the Old Testament groundwork, but the New Testament articulates the union of these two natures in Jesus.

a. The Incarnation (Divinity and Humanity Together)

John 1:14 (LXX Translation):
"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have seen His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father."

Here, we see the divine Logos (Word) becoming flesh. The duality is clear: Jesus is fully God (the Word) and fully human (He became flesh).

b. Philippians 2:6-7 (LXX Translation):
"Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men."

The divine nature of Christ ("form of God") is contrasted with His human nature ("likeness of men"). This passage strongly supports the idea that Jesus retained His divinity while assuming full humanity.

c. Hebrews 2:14 (LXX Translation):

"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil."

This highlights the humanity of Christ, as He partook of flesh and blood like us, but also emphasizes His purpose in death to overcome evil.

3. Latin Vulgate: Christ's Dual Nature
The Latin Vulgate, translated by St. Jerome in the 4th century, was a foundational version of Scripture for the Church and presents Jesus' dual nature clearly, often using terms like Deus (God) and homo (man).

a. The Incarnation in the Latin Vulgate:
John 1:14 (Vulgate):

"Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis, et vidimus gloriam eius, gloriam quasi unigeniti a Patre, plenum gratiae et veritatis."

This translation mirrors the Greek, emphasizing that the Word became flesh (caro factum est). It conveys Jesus’ divinity (the Word) and His humanity (became flesh).

b. Philippians 2:6-7 (Vulgate):

"Qui cum in forma Dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus est esse aequalis Deo: sed semetipsum exinanivit formam servi accipiens, in similitudinem hominum factus."

The Latin clearly distinguishes Christ's equality with God ("aequalis Deo") from His taking the form of a servant ("formam servi"), showing both His divinity and humanity in one person.

c. Hebrews 2:14 (Vulgate):

"Quoniam ergo pueri participes sunt carnis et sanguinis, et ipse similiter participavit eisdem, ut per mortem destrueret eum, qui habet mortis imperium, id est Diabolum."

Like the LXX, this passage emphasizes Jesus' full participation in humanity (carnis et sanguinis), yet His victory over death reveals His divine power.

Both the LXX and the Latin Vulgate support the doctrine of Jesus' dual nature-fully divine and fully human.

In the LXX, we see prophecy and typology that points to a Messiah who is both human and divine.

The New Testament then reveals this in clear theological terms, and both the LXX and the Vulgate preserve these truths in their translations.

The dual nature of Christ is integral to the Christian faith, affirming that Jesus is the eternal Son of God who became human for our salvation, while remaining fully divine.

J.

I've been waiting for 117 pages for you to start the debate and I'm still waiting for your evidence for dualism. Nothing in that list provides two natures (Divine and Sin' Flesh).

Why can't you just be honest and say I don't have the evidence!

BUT WAIT!!! HOLD THE PRESS!

Did you quote this?

"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil." Heb 2:14

This highlights the humanity of Christ, as He partook of flesh and blood like us, but also emphasizes His purpose in death to overcome evil."

So the only verse in your list which refers to flesh and blood nature and its teaching you Jesus took part in the same as us!

How do you do that and not learn a thing?

F2F

 

[Johann]

I've been waiting for 117 pages for you to start the debate and I'm still waiting for your evidence for dualism. Nothing in that list provides two natures (Divine and Sin' Flesh).

Why can't you just be honest and say I don't have the evidence!

BUT WAIT!!! HOLD THE PRESS!

Did you quote this?

"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil." Heb 2:14

This highlights the humanity of Christ, as He partook of flesh and blood like us, but also emphasizes His purpose in death to overcome evil."

So the only verse in your list which refers to flesh and blood nature and its teaching you Jesus took part in the same as us!

How do you do that and not learn a thing?

F2F

Right in front of your eyes-and you can't see it. Even @Brakelite can "see" this.

J.

 

[CadyandZoe]

My question wasn't intended to prompt a question, but rather an answer. You said that Jesus commissioned His apostles to initiate new disciples, as in Christians, of all nations for Him, by baptizing them in His name, and so you would think that Jesus would've told them to do that only in the name of the Son, but He didn't, rather said, "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." So, what's your explanation for why Jesus included the name of the Father and of the Holy Spirit if it's about baptizing in the Son's name?

I don't understand your question until you answer mine. What does it mean for them to be one?

 

[CadyandZoe]

I've been waiting for 117 pages for you to start the debate and I'm still waiting for your evidence for dualism. Nothing in that list provides two natures (Divine and Sin' Flesh).

Why can't you just be honest and say I don't have the evidence!

BUT WAIT!!! HOLD THE PRESS!

Did you quote this?

"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil." Heb 2:14

This highlights the humanity of Christ, as He partook of flesh and blood like us, but also emphasizes His purpose in death to overcome evil."

So the only verse in your list which refers to flesh and blood nature and its teaching you Jesus took part in the same as us!

How do you do that and not learn a thing?

F2F

Dueling with dualism? :)

 

[CadyandZoe]

There is only one Jesus. His existence as a person doesn't consist of parts... part of Him human, part divine. The Son of God, the one in Whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelt, is all wrapped up in one person, Who chose to live without resorting to His divine power in order to bolster His reputation or use to protect Himself from abuse and insult or to exact revenge. When He spoke, He spoke as a whole being, a divine human person.

I was careful to maintain a distinction between "Jesus" and "the Word." Allow me to use your statement to clarify my point. Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that what you say is true—though I do not personally believe it. If Jesus chose to live without using his divine power, then everything the New Testament says about Jesus pertains to a person living without divine power. Is that correct?

So, what difference does it make that he existed as "the Word" before his birth? None. The doctrine of the Trinity is irrelevant and inconsequential in this context because it provides no insight into Jesus as a man without divine power—at least, one could argue that he never utilized his divine power. One can assert that Jesus is 100% God all day long, but since he was 0% God while on earth, what significance does that hold?

 

[face2face]

Dueling with dualism? :)

I can't fathom adhering to a doctrine that I couldn't support with biblical evidence.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I can't fathom adhering to a doctrine that I couldn't support with biblical evidence.

Trinitarians believe that Jesus had a dual nature, but at the same time, they claim that Jesus emptied himself of his divine nature.

The parallel is the doctrine of the "Real Presence." It looks like bread, it tastes like bread, but . . .

 

[Johann]

This highlights the humanity of Christ, as He partook of flesh and blood like us, but also emphasizes His purpose in death to overcome evil."

Where I fundamentally disagree with you--

the same. The same (things), i.e. flesh and blood, not the same flesh and blood, which had become corrupted by Adam’s sin.

"the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same" The verb "share," (koinônia) perfect active indicative]) speaks of the initial and continuing full humanity of Jesus Christ. Heb_2:14; Heb_2:17 emphasize the true humanity of Jesus which was the theological problem of the early gnostic heretics (cf. 1Jn_4:1-6).

The phrase in Greek is literally "blood and flesh." This is exactly opposite from the normal use of the phrase. The rabbis used this phrase for the frailty of man.

The author of Hebrews possibly reversed the phrase to show that although Jesus was human, He was not affected by mankind's sinful fall (cf. Rom_8:3; Php_2:7-8).

Hebrews emphasizes both the deity (cf. Heb_1:1-3; Heb_4:14) and humanity of Jesus.

1. Heb_2:14 took on human nature

2. Heb_4:15 tempted in all ways as humans are

3. Heb_5:7 prayed to the Father with loud crying and tears

4. Heb_5:8-9 perfected by suffering

J.

 

[face2face]

Where I fundamentally disagree with you--

It's getting old now Johann - you are like a contortionists with the word-a twist here and twist there!

the same. The same (things), i.e. flesh and blood, not the same flesh and blood, which had become corrupted by Adam’s sin.

"the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same" The verb "share," (koinônia) perfect active indicative]) speaks of the initial and continuing full humanity of Jesus Christ. Heb_2:14; Heb_2:17 emphasize the true humanity of Jesus which was the theological problem of the early gnostic heretics (cf. 1Jn_4:1-6).

The phrase in Greek is literally "blood and flesh." This is exactly opposite from the normal use of the phrase. The rabbis used this phrase for the frailty of man.

The author of Hebrews possibly reversed the phrase to show that although Jesus was human, He was not affected by mankind's sinful fall (cf. Rom_8:3; Php_2:7-8).

How did God condemn sin in the body of Jesus Johann?

For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he (God) condemned sin in the flesh Ro 8:3.

You don't want to acknowledge that Christ died to sin once! You have never acknowledged it!

For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.

How did God condemn sin in the body of His Son?

If you had a clearer understanding of this matter, you might not be sharing this truine doctrine all over the forum.

Let me hear you say this:

"Jesus was raised in sinful flesh so that God could justly eliminate the sting of death, which is sin's power!"

If Jesus did not have 100% human nature God could not remove sin's power!

F2F

 

[Wrangler]

Matt 28:19 in most translations is a forgery...

True but even as it is, it is not the trinity verse they try to make it out to be. It says nothing of the nature of God OR that believing the trinity is required for salvation.

 

[Wrangler]

Not at all. But we are adopted.

And Jesus is the chosen servant of God! The language is not adopted but it means the same thing.

We get the same inheritance Jesus does! This proves he is not more of a son than we are.

Scripture says he is the firstborn of the New Creation. He can’t be the first born AND be fundamentally different from what follows.

 

[Wrangler]

Early Christian writings (such as those from the Didache, Ignatius, and others) present a more single view of God, which doesn't support the Trinitarian doctrine as it is taught today. By removing historical context helps avoid confronting these discrepancies and allows for the doctrine to be presented as if it were always understood in the same way it is today.

Lie upon lie is the trinity. They have to take things out of context. Jesus was not a trinitarian. I’ve asked this question many times but trinitarians just ignore it. Jesus did not teach the trinity. Why do Jesus followers teach what Jesus did not?

 

[Johann]

It's getting old now Johann - you are like a contortionists with the word-a twist here and twist there!

How did God condemn sin in the body of Jesus Johann?

For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he (God) condemned sin in the flesh Ro 8:3.

You don't want to acknowledge that Christ died to sin once! You have never acknowledged it!

For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.

How did God condemn sin in the body of His Son?

If you had a clearer understanding of this matter, you might not be sharing this truine doctrine all over the forum.

Let me hear you say this:

"Jesus was raised in sinful flesh so that God could justly eliminate the sting of death, which is sin's power!"

If Jesus did not have 100% human nature God could not remove sin's power!

F2F

Please provide a scripture reference where it explicitly states that Jesus "was raised in sinful flesh," as you seem to suggest that He took on Adam's sinful nature.

I ask so I can thoroughly address your claim and demonstrate how this misrepresents the clear teaching of Scripture.

Don't think of quoting Romans 8:3, which says Jesus came "in the likeness of sinful flesh" (ἐν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς ἁμαρτίας).

This does not mean He took on sinful flesh or Adam’s fallen nature; rather, He took on fully human flesh without inheriting sin or corruption.

J.

 

[APAK]

True but even as it is, it is not the trinity verse they try to make it out to be. It says nothing of the nature of God OR that believing the trinity is required for salvation.

I agree, it is not too damming if understood correctly. It just gives the appearance of this triune entity.

 

[APAK]

@RedFan @Wrangler @ProDeo @APAK

Ephesians 4:4-6 states, “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”

Christians from the post-biblical era used similar language to express the same theology. The Didache, a church manual from the late first century, outlines key beliefs such as salvation by grace, repentance, baptism, the Eucharist, the identity of Jesus Christ, the Second Coming, and the resurrection of the dead. These teachings are supported by numerous quotations from the New Testament, indicating that the apostolic writings were widely circulated and considered the standard of orthodoxy. However, there is no mention of three persons in the Godhead, nor any suggestion that Jesus is God. Bourke 2010

Of the 16 chapters in the Didache as follows:

• The Two Ways (Chapters 1-6): This portion outlines two paths for a Christian to follow—the way of life and the way of death. It provides ethical instructions, such as loving your neighbor, avoiding immorality, and practicing humility.
• Rituals (Chapters 7-10): This section discusses Christian rituals such as baptism, fasting, prayer, and the Eucharist. It includes guidelines on how baptism should be performed (preferably by immersion, but pouring is also acceptable) and how to fast and pray.
• Church Organization (Chapters 11-15): The Didache gives instructions on the roles of prophets, teachers, and bishops, as well as how to receive itinerant apostles or prophets and deal with false teachers. It also includes advice on the selection of bishops and deacons.
• The Coming of the Lord (Chapter 16): The final chapter speaks about the end times, the return of Christ, and the judgment.

What I have observed in many debates on the Trinity is that those advocating for the Trinity often attempt to remove historical context from the discussion. This is significant because Unitarian belief is strongly supported by historical evidence that consistently points to a singular, all-powerful God and His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. The historical context, including early Christian writings and teachings, emphasizes the distinct roles and relationships of the Father and the Son without the need for the Trinitarian framework.

Early Christian writings (such as those from the Didache, Ignatius, and others) present a more single view of God, which doesn't support the Trinitarian doctrine as it is taught today. By removing historical context helps avoid confronting these discrepancies and allows for the doctrine to be presented as if it were always understood in the same way it is today.

F2F

Off slightly: There are more scholars who think these teachings of the Didache were finalized around 1050 AD. And I tend to believe this date more.