Trinity

[ksalzar]

In reply:

Hi Kyle.

You wrote...

Thank you for your response.

The points you made I have looked at and they do not lead me to the conclusion that Jesus is God. The reason is that if one does a study of those points you will find the following:

As for Jesus being Omniscient:

QUOTE

Edited August 23, 2004 by ksalzar

[ksalzar]

Trinity I do not wish to spam, which is what I would be doing if I responded to everyone of those point by point. You mentioned John 10 as a support for Jesus being God, could you reply to my points made as a rebuttle on John 10?

I think that is as good a starting point as any.

[toothless]

ksalzar:

We actually had for awhile a couple in our bible study what were uniterians.

I really enjoyed their comments they seemed very insightful.

I suppose there are plenty here who will play scriptural tit for tat.

I went throught the trinity battle a while ago, after going over the basic

scriptures, I was drawn to the philosophical side.

This may be overly simplistic, but the questions were greater on the non side

that the pro. I'll give a few, if Christ was not fully God then how could he be

a propititation for our sins? Who would be able to pay the supereme cost for

mankind. The implications are great and complex, for example if Christ isn't

God then there is room for Gods toleration of sin, or God being the author

of sin. The list goes in all different directions, depending on which position

you take.

This may sound even weirder but I trust the patronic views, those men saw

every form of heresy and responded with creeds and councels to countermand

the growing misunderstandings, for some reason it feels right to trust

some one who studied the Greek and Hebrew all their lives than somebody with

a new idea. I know none of this is a direct answer to any question posed,

accept in principle. And that's not much fun to debate.

What I see in your belief is each understanding leads to more complex

manipulations of scripture to answer the preceeding question.

Quite soon into the discourse you must abandon the clearly stated intention

of scripture and go to the hidden meaning.

I fear I can not be much help because I don't go to deeper meanings

and bypass the clear intention, with the possible exception of prophecy.

However I would love to entertain possible outcomes and if possible ask you a

question or two. If you would humor me with this question, could a man

if he lived a perfect life be capable of atoning for all of mankinds sin?

Bill.

[Trinity]

I and my Father are one.

=

I and my Father, though two distinct Persons, are yet one in essence, nature, dignity, power, will, and operation. Hence, in the matter of securing the safety of my sheep, what I do, my Father does likewise. I do not act independently of him and him without me.

[ksalzar]

ksalzar:

We actually had for awhile a couple in our bible study what were uniterians.

I really enjoyed their comments they seemed very insightful.

I suppose there are plenty here who will play scriptural tit for tat.

I went throught the trinity battle a while ago, after going over the basic

scriptures, I was drawn to the philosophical side.

This may be overly simplistic, but the questions were greater on the non side

that the pro. I'll give a few, if Christ was not fully God then how could he be

a propititation for our sins? Who would be able to pay the supereme cost for

mankind. The implications are great and complex, for example if Christ isn't

God then there is room for Gods toleration of sin, or God being the author

of sin. The list goes in all different directions, depending on which position

you take.

This may sound even weirder but I trust the patronic views, those men saw

every form of heresy and responded with creeds and councels to countermand

the growing misunderstandings, for some reason it feels right to trust

some one who studied the Greek and Hebrew all their lives than somebody with

a new idea. I know none of this is a direct answer to any question posed,

accept in principle. And that's not much fun to debate.

What I see in your belief is each understanding leads to more complex

manipulations of scripture to answer the preceeding question.

Quite soon into the discourse you must abandon the clearly stated intention

of scripture and go to the hidden meaning.

I fear I can not be much help because I don't go to deeper meanings

and bypass the clear intention, with the possible exception of prophecy.

However I would love to entertain possible outcomes and if possible ask you a

question or two. If you would humor me with this question, could a man

if he lived a perfect life be capable of atoning for all of mankinds sin?

Bill.

for some reason it feels right to trust

some one who studied the Greek and Hebrew all their lives than somebody with

a new idea.

Well I think you are looking at a many things from the wrong angle. For instance biblical unitarian is not something that sprung up centuries after christianity started, it has been around.

Could a man pay for our sins? Of course, and one did. Just as 1 Timothy states that the man Jesus Christ is the mediator between God and man.

if Christ was not fully God then how could he be

a propititation for our sins? Who would be able to pay the supereme cost for

mankind

What do you mean by supreme cost? Do you mean an eternity in hell? Jesus did not pay that. Jesus paid what was required for our sins. That is a perfect obedient life pinnacled by the cross. For without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.

The implications are great and complex, for example if Christ isn't

God then there is room for Gods toleration of sin, or God being the author

of sin

I disagree sharply, how do you come to such a conclusion?

[ksalzar]

I and my Father are one.

=

I and my Father, though two distinct Persons, are yet one in essence, nature, dignity, power, will, and operation. Hence, in the matter of securing the safety of my sheep, what I do, my Father does likewise. I do not act independently of him and him without me.

One in essence, nature; the context does not bear this. The context is clearly potrayed as will and action. Jesus starts off saying:

25 Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my FAther's name bear witness about me,

26 but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock.

And closes saying:

37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me;

38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.

Nothing about essence or nature here.

Indeed Jesus goes on to say in John 17:

22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they  may be one even as we are one,

23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and love them even as you loved me.

Again showing that it is speaking of a unity of will and action; not of essence and nature.

[Trinity]

Could a man pay for our sins? Of course, and one did. Just as 1 Timothy states that the man Jesus Christ is the mediator between God and man.

I disagree with that statement

Psalm 49

7 No man can redeem the life of another

or give to God a ransom for him-

8 the ransom for a life is costly,

no payment is ever enough-

And if Jesus was Just a man, then we have no salvation!

[ksalzar]

Could a man pay for our sins? Of course, and one did. Just as 1 Timothy states that the man Jesus Christ is the mediator between God and man.

I disagree with that statement

Psalm 49

7 No man can redeem the life of another

or give to God a ransom for him-

8 the ransom for a life is costly,

no payment is ever enough-

And if Jesus was Just a man, then we have no salvation!

The point of that psalm is not that a man cannot be the way God chooses to reconcile men to himself, but rather that a man cannot pay the price with money or any other means on his own.

But if you disagree that a man can pay for our sins you disagree with 1 Timothy 2:5-6 for this is exactly what it says:

1 Timothy 2

5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

6 who gave himse as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.

[ksalzar]

Perhaps you could explain your understanding of Hosea 11:9 for me trinity:

Hosea 11:9

I will not execute my burning anger; I will not again destroy Ephraim; for I am God and not a man, the Holy One in your midst, and I will not come in wrath.

[Trinity]

Jesus is Fully God and fully Man. God didn't take on the form of a man yet.