For those who think Christ is not God.

[Waiting on him]

what am I sayin' that aren't?
J.

That Jesus is fully man and fully God. There maybe scripture supporting this saying, not saying there isn’t only I’d like to see the reference.

 

[Waiting on him]

...yet there is no unity among the brethren on this forum...
J.

I suppose that is because all people are at different places in their walk with God.

 

[Johann]

I suppose that is because all people are at different places in their walk with God.

Guess you are right.
J.

 

[Johann]

That Jesus is fully man and fully God. There maybe scripture supporting this saying, not saying there isn’t only I’d like to see the reference.

What about the "us" recorded in the Torah?
J.

 

[Waiting on him]

So @Johann try again and answer;
When Jesus cried out My God My God why have you forsaken me

was Jesus talking too and forsaking himself?

 

[Johann]

was Jesus talking too and forsaking himself?

Good night.
01:40 in the morning
J.

 

[Waiting on him]

Good night.
01:40 in the morning
J.

Get some rest. God bless!

 

[APAK]

Tit 2:13.
“that, according to passages like Mat 16:27, Mar 8:38, Christ appears in the glory of the Father and at the same time in His own glory (Mat 25:31), and His appearance may therefore be called the appearance both of God’s glory and of His own.”

Yes, I agree with most of this commentary eventhough it is not styled for the lay-person to really understand, that God is the Father only, and Christ and God share in their own glory that are quite different. The ultimate and the source of Christ's glory emanates from his Father. And scripture speaks to this point.

 

[Wrangler]

"our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus" Jesus is here unambiguously given the title of God!

I nominate this post for the Best Attempt At Rationalization of the Year!

‘For us, there is one God, the Father.’ Jesus said he had a God (the Father) and his God is the only God. What do these verse unambiguously proclaim? Or do you find them too ambiguous to determine?

 

[Wrangler]

Jeshua Hamashiach is God friend

Not an answer to my question.

1st, it is not true that the concept is pervasive. Every Epistle identifies solely as the Father alone with God.

2nd, so what if it were pervasive? Where is the verse that makes believing the trinity, which violates the 1C, a condition of salvation?

Why can’t you answer the question? It’s all I need to be convinced?

 

[face2face]

First of all, you don't know who the "author" is, how he lives, how he believes.

I am not interested Johann, clearly you have a bias with absolutely no interest or desire to discover truth.

Secondly, the author deliberately chose this topic.

Well done!

Thirdly, if you had any biblical knowledge as you profess to have, then why dismiss the Christ as NOT God?

Because true Bible understanding without the philosophical statements of man is all that is needed to interpret Scripture.

"Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Corinthians 2:13)

The trinity is not spiritual but man-made!

The demons believe, and they shudder and the author is well aware of his shortcomings but not in his conviction and trust in Christ Jesus as his Savior.

Again, you write things you have no knowledge of.

You don't really believe there is "one" God, do you? James 2:19! Those demons certainly had no knowledge of a triune god, but you do. I wonder where that knowledge came from?

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Johann said:
Listen Barney, I know I am in good hands.[/QUOTE]

I know as long as I believe what Jesus says in the scriptures like for example at John 17:3- that you must know two persons to get eternal life and after Jesus was resurrected from the dead said at John 20:17- that he has a Father and God that is also his apostles and disciples Father and God and if I believe John 3:16 that it was God who sent his Only Begotten Son to mankind, as well as many other scriptures I feel as you do, that I'm in good hands.
This disagreement of who Jesus is, God or the Only Begotten Son of God, as I said has been going on for centuries. I believe that God sent his Only Begotten Son to mankind. I believe Jesus Christ who is the Only Begotten Son of God to be the seed of promise at Genesis 3:15.

 

[Brakelite]

Yes, this is the beginning. When the light came into the world

first century.

John wrote his gospel for one purpose...
KJV John 20:31
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name

Have you ever wondered, considering it was John's intent to prove Jesus is the messiah and the Son of God, that John made absolutely no mention of His birth in Bethlehem? Does that make any sense of Jesus were a mere man, and not the literal Son of His Father prior to the incarnation?
.

 

[Johann]

The ultimate and the source of Christ's glory emanates from his Father. And scripture speaks to this point.

What are Unitarian beliefs?

Unitarianism is a Christian religious denomination. Unitarians believe that God is only one person. Unitarians reject the Trinity and do not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. Followers of Unitarianism also do not accept the concepts of original sin and of eternal punishment for sins committed on earth.

I am not interested Johann, clearly you have a bias with absolutely no interest or desire to discover truth.

..of the Son, for no mere creature, no matter how high in the scale of being,
could ever be “in the form of God.” Three words are used concerning the
Sons’ relation to the Godhead.
First, He subsists in the “form” of God, seen in Him alone.
Second, He is “the image of the invisible God” (<510115>Colossians 1:15),
which expression tells of His manifestation of God to us (cf. <470406>2
Corinthians 4:6).
Third, He is the “brightness of his glory and the express image of his
person” (<580103>Hebrews 1:3), or more exactly, the “effulgency
(outshining) of His glory and the exact Expression of His substance”
(Bagster Interlinear). These perhaps combine both concepts suggested
by form and image, namely, that the whole nature of God is in Christ,
that by Him God is declared and expressed to us.
“Who being,” or subsisting (it is hardly correct to speak of a divine person
“existing.” He is self-existent; He always was in “the form of God.”
“Form” (the Greek word is only found elsewhere in the New Testament in
<502007>Philippians 2:7, <411612>Mark 16:12) is what is apparent. “The form of God”
is an expression which seems to denote His visible glory, His displayed
majesty, His manifested sovereignty. From eternity the Son was clothed
with all the insignia of deity, adorned with all divine splendor. “The Word
was God” (<430101>John 1:1).
“Thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Almost every word in this
verse has been the occasion of contention. But we have sufficient
confidence in the superintending providence of God to be satisfied the
translators of our authorized version were preserved from any serious
mistake on a subject so vitally important. As the first clause of our verse
refers to an objective delineation of the divine dignity of the Son, so this
second clause affirms His subjective consciousness. The word “thought” is
used (here in the aorist tense) to indicate a definite point in time past. The
word rendered “robbery” denotes not the spoil or prize, but the act of
167
taking the spoil. The Son did not reckon equality with the Father and the
Holy Spirit an act of usurping.
“Thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” This is only a negative way
to say that Christ considered equality with God as what justly and
essentially belonged to Him. It was His by indisputable right. Christ
esteemed such equality as no invasion of Another’s prerogative, but
regarded Himself as being entitled to all divine honors.

Because He held
the rank of one of the Three coeternal, coessential, and co-glorious persons
of the Godhead, the Son reckoned His full and perfect equality with the
other two was His unchallengeable portion. In Verse 6 is no doubt a latent
reference to Satan’s fall. He, though “the anointed cherub” (<262814>Ezekiel
28:14), was infinitely below God, yet he grasped at equality with Him.

How much clearer can this Be?
J.

 

[Johann]

You don't really believe there is "one" God, do you? James 2:19! Those demons certainly had no knowledge of a triune god, but you do. I wonder where that knowledge came from?

“But made Himself of no reputation.” The meaning of the words is
explained in those which immediately follow. So far was the Son from
tenaciously insisting upon His personal rights as a member of the blessed
Trinity, He voluntarily relinquished them. He willingly set aside the
magnificent distinctions of the Creator, to appear in the form of a creature,
yes, in the likeness of a fallen man. He abdicated His position of
supremacy, and entered one of servitude. Though equal in majesty and
glory with God, He joyfully resigned Himself to the Father’s will (<430638>John
6:38). Incomparable condescension was this. He who was by inherent right
in the form of God, suffered His glory to be eclipsed, His honor to be laid
in the dust, and Himself to be humbled to a most shameful death.
“And took upon Him the form of a servant.” In so doing, He did not cease
to be all that He was before, but He assumed something He had not been
previously.

There was no change in His divine nature, but the uniting to
His divine person of a human nature.
“He who is God, can no more be not God, than he who is not God,
can be God” (John Owen).

None of Christ’s divine attributes were relinquished, for they are as
inseparable from His person as heat is from fire, or weight from substance.
But His majestic glory was, for a season, obscured by the interposing veil
of human flesh. Nor is this statement negated by <430114>John 1:14 — “we
beheld His glory” (explained by <401617>Matthew 16:17), in contrast from the
unregenerate masses before whom He appeared as “a root out of a dry
ground,” having “no form nor comeliness” (<235302>Isaiah 53:2).
169
It was God Himself who was “manifest in the flesh” (<540316>1 Timothy 3:16).

The One born in Bethlehem’s manger was “The mighty God” (<230906>Isaiah
9:6), and heralded as, “Christ the Lord” (<420211>Luke 2:11). Let there be no
uncertainty on this point. Had He been “emptied” of any of His personal
excellency, had His divine attributes been laid aside, then His satisfaction
or sacrifice would not have possessed infinite value. The glory of His
person was not in the slightest degree diminished when He became
incarnate, though it was (in measure) concealed by the lowly form of the
servant He assumed. Christ was still “equal with God” when He descended
to earth. It was “The Lord of glory” (<460208>1 Corinthians 2:8) whom men
crucified.
J.

 

[APAK]

What are Unitarian beliefs?

Unitarianism is a Christian religious denomination. Unitarians believe that God is only one person. Unitarians reject the Trinity and do not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. Followers of Unitarianism also do not accept the concepts of original sin and of eternal punishment for sins committed on earth.



..of the Son, for no mere creature, no matter how high in the scale of being,
could ever be “in the form of God.” Three words are used concerning the
Sons’ relation to the Godhead.
First, He subsists in the “form” of God, seen in Him alone.
Second, He is “the image of the invisible God” (<510115>Colossians 1:15),
which expression tells of His manifestation of God to us (cf. <470406>2
Corinthians 4:6).
Third, He is the “brightness of his glory and the express image of his
person” (<580103>Hebrews 1:3), or more exactly, the “effulgency
(outshining) of His glory and the exact Expression of His substance”
(Bagster Interlinear). These perhaps combine both concepts suggested
by form and image, namely, that the whole nature of God is in Christ,
that by Him God is declared and expressed to us.
“Who being,” or subsisting (it is hardly correct to speak of a divine person
“existing.” He is self-existent; He always was in “the form of God.”
“Form” (the Greek word is only found elsewhere in the New Testament in
<502007>Philippians 2:7, <411612>Mark 16:12) is what is apparent. “The form of God”
is an expression which seems to denote His visible glory, His displayed
majesty, His manifested sovereignty. From eternity the Son was clothed
with all the insignia of deity, adorned with all divine splendor. “The Word
was God” (<430101>John 1:1).
“Thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Almost every word in this
verse has been the occasion of contention. But we have sufficient
confidence in the superintending providence of God to be satisfied the
translators of our authorized version were preserved from any serious
mistake on a subject so vitally important. As the first clause of our verse
refers to an objective delineation of the divine dignity of the Son, so this
second clause affirms His subjective consciousness. The word “thought” is
used (here in the aorist tense) to indicate a definite point in time past. The
word rendered “robbery” denotes not the spoil or prize, but the act of
167
taking the spoil. The Son did not reckon equality with the Father and the
Holy Spirit an act of usurping.
“Thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” This is only a negative way
to say that Christ considered equality with God as what justly and
essentially belonged to Him. It was His by indisputable right. Christ
esteemed such equality as no invasion of Another’s prerogative, but
regarded Himself as being entitled to all divine honors.

Because He held
the rank of one of the Three coeternal, coessential, and co-glorious persons
of the Godhead, the Son reckoned His full and perfect equality with the
other two was His unchallengeable portion. In Verse 6 is no doubt a latent
reference to Satan’s fall. He, though “the anointed cherub” (<262814>Ezekiel
28:14), was infinitely below God, yet he grasped at equality with Him.

How much clearer can this Be?
J.

Well first off I'm not a label or a Unitarian Johann although I do agree with a lot of their doctrine. So I would be in their camp say over yours for sure.

And no, you are mistaken, they do believe that Jesus Christ is definitely the Son of God with extreme prejudice, indeed.

 

[Johann]

Not an answer to my question.

To know Christ as God, to know Him as man, to know Him as God-man,
and this by a divine revelation of His person, is indeed to have eternal life
in our hearts. Nor can He be known in any other way than by divine and
special revelation.
“But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s
womb and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me”
(
<480115>Galatians 1:15-16).
An imaginary conception of His person may be obtained by diligently
studying the Scriptures, but a vital knowledge of Him must be
communicated from on high (<401617>Matthew 16:17). A theoretical and
theological knowledge of Christ is what the natural man may acquire, but a
saving, soul-transforming view of Him (<470318>2 Corinthians 3:18) is only
given by the Spirit to the regenerate (<620520>1 John 5:20).
“But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of
a servant, and was made in the likeness of men”
(
<502007>Philippians 2:7).
171
The first clause (and the preceding verse) was before us in the last two
chapters. The two expressions we consider here balance with (and thus
serve to explain) those in verse 6. The last clause of v. 7 is an exegesis of
the one immediately preceding. “Made in the likeness of men” refers to the
human nature Christ assumed. The “form of a servant” denotes the position
or state which He entered. So, “equal with God” refers to the divine
nature, the “form of God” signifies His manifested glory in His position of
Lord over all.
The humanity of Christ was unique. History supplies no analogy, nor can
His humanity be illustrated by anything in nature. It is incomparable, not
only to our fallen human nature, but also to unfallen Adam’s. The Lord
Jesus was born into circumstances totally different from those in which
Adam first found himself, but the sins and griefs of His people were on
Him from the first. His humanity was produced neither by natural
generation (as is ours), nor by special creation, as was Adam’s. The
humanity of Christ was, under the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit,
supernaturally “conceived” (<230714>Isaiah 7:14) of the virgin. It was
“prepared” of God (<581005>Hebrews 10:5); yet “made of a woman”
(
<480404>Galatians 4:4.).
The uniqueness of Christ’s humanity also appears in that it never had a
separate existence of its own. The eternal Son assumed (at the moment of
Mary’s conception) a human nature, but not a human person. This
important distinction calls for careful consideration. By a “person” is meant
an intelligent being subsisting by himself. The second person of the Trinity
assumed a human nature and gave it subsistence by union with His divine
personality. It would have been a human person, if it had not been united
to the Son of God. But being united to Him, it cannot be called a person,
because it never subsisted by itself, as other men do. Hence the force of
“that holy thing which shall be born of thee” (<420135>Luke 1:35). It was not
possible for a divine person to assume another person, subsisting of itself,
into union with Himself. For two persons, remaining two, to become one
person, is a contradiction. “A body hast thou prepared me” (<581005>Hebrews
10:5). The “me” denotes the divine Person, the “body,” the nature He took
unto Himself.
J.

 

[Johann]

And no, you are mistaken, they do believe that Jesus Christ is definitely the Son of God with extreme prejudice, indeed.

Well, we are commanded to test the spirits @APAK

Unitarianism rejects the mainstream Christian doctrine of the Trinity, or three Persons in one God, made up of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They typically believe that God is one being - God the Father, or Mother. Jesus was simply a man, not the incarnate deity.

The above true?
J.

 

[Truther]

Well first off I'm not a label or a Unitarian Johann although I do agree with a lot of their doctrine. So I would be in their camp say over yours for sure.

And no, you are mistaken, they do believe that Jesus Christ is definitely the Son of God with extreme prejudice, indeed.

I have a former incarnationist friend turned Unitarian.

The problem he has now, as I explained is Thomas declaring Jesus as God.

You know what?

He refused to even read the verse.

This is how messed up he got.

Fact is, as I explained to him, that Jesus was made God after he was resurrected by his God.

My now Unitarian friend REFUSES to see this and fix his overreach.

Instead, he doubts Thomas.

 

[Truther]

I even tested Thomas' statement on JW's and they refused to read it.

This is weird.