A Roman Catholic on the Trinity

[Unveiled Artist]

Our flesh is sin. Our gift from God , our spirit, is sinless. I'm sorry, but that is as clear as I can make it. If that still doesn't answer your question, pray to God for clarity. I'm sure He'll make it plain. Just give it time. Don't give up.

There are many things that took me years to understand. There are still things I don't understand. Until Jesus returns we will not know it all. The main thing is that we admit we don't know instead of making up answers that may not be scriptural.

Its not personal. I dont believe in god.

But, no. You didnt answer the question.

Our flesh is sin. Our gift from God , our spirit, is sinless.

That would mean your sin does not need eternal punishment; since, the sin (edit) flesh dies anyway, there is no need for a savior.

Now if it were sin of the spirit, and your flesh is temporal, than, I can see why you would need a savior. Why save the flesh if the spirit is what lives with god?

In other words, if your spirit is sinless, you dont need christ.

-

But, because you sinned, your spirit is now held responsible for your flesh. Jesus would only be like you if he actually sinned.

If jesus is sinless (his spirit) and your spirit is sinless, the flesh doesnt matter, you wouldnt need a savior.

Since (from how I understand it), your spirit sinned because of the flesh, you would need a savior.

If the latter, jesus is sinless. You are with sin (because of your flesh). The two dont match. Its like oil and water.

If your spirit is sinless, you are god.

 

[shmogie]

Our flesh is sin. Our gift from God , our spirit, is sinless. I'm sorry, but that is as clear as I can make it. If that still doesn't answer your question, pray to God for clarity. I'm sure He'll make it plain. Just give it time. Don't give up.

There are many things that took me years to understand. There are still things I don't understand. Until Jesus returns we will not know it all. The main thing is that we admit we don't know instead of making up answers that may not be scriptural.

There is nothing about us that is sinless.

As Luther said, we are TOTALLY depraved.

We have nothing to commend us to God, nothing. Grace covers us totally and completely.

If our spirit is sinless, it doesn´t need Grace, a fundamental part of us doesn´t need Godś Grace.

To declare any part of us as acceptable to God without his gift of Grace is blasphemy

 

[shmogie]

The word "Godhead" appears three times in the KJV. You can look them up in a concordance. I don't see any of them as relating to your analogy.

Well, explain the Godhead. The term appears in most modern English translations.

You either don´t understand the term, or the analogy

 

[Oeste]

Then why doesn't 1 Tim 2:5 read as follows:

For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the god-man Christ Jesus?

That is quite at odds with what it actually says:

For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

It seems that had God wanted us to know Jesus was a god-man this would have been an excellent opportunity for Him to have done that.

Scripture says it very clearly in more than one passage:

“but of the Son he says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom' “ (Heb. 1:8)​

“… as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13)​

Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours (2 Peter 1:1)​

So is Jesus God? The answer is yes.

Hypostatic union are words used to describe concepts that are not in the scriptures. They are man made, not found in the scriptures themselves.

Hypostatic union are words used to describe concepts that are in the scriptures. They are man-made and based in scripture itself

Let me ask you a question: Does your church throw out “man made” terms like Exegesis, Eisegesis, Christology, Soteriology, Hermeneutics, Pneumatology, and Theology for the exact same reason?

Those are not good verses to make for the trinity. God does not worship Himself.

No one claims He does. Man worships God and Christ was fully man. It just so happens that scripture tells us he was also fully God.

There is a one who worships and and one who is worshiped. Two people not one.

When the people worshiped Caesar and Caesar worshiped Zeus, was Caesar one person or two?

There is no hint that the two are somehow one.
That is both impossible and not scriptural. Simple English is all that is required to see two

If you do not give the same honor to the Son that you give the Father, you are honoring neither, and the highest honor we can give the Father is worship!

“…so that all people will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.” John 5:23​

We do not give one honor to the Son and a higher honor to the Father. We give the Son the same high honor we give the Father.

The son of God is God, just as the Son of Man is man.

It works the same everywhere else…the son of frog is frog, and the son of dog will always be dog. The son of God is not man any more than the son of frog is a dog. The Son of Man is man precisely because he is Son of Man and the Son of God is God precisely because he is Son of God.

Jesus is called Son of God and Son of Man because he has a dual nature. A dual nature does not mean he is two people…no more than Caesar is two in the example I gave above.

One person can have a dual major in physics and biology. The idea that a dual nature necessitates two people is not impossible but ludicrous.

(Continued)...

 

[Oeste]

We are reading a preconceived idea that a god can only be the one true God.

Any “a god” is a false God. There is only one true God and anyone called “a god” ain't it.

There are several places where men are called gods.

Agreed! There are even places where stick and stones are called gods:

There you will worship man-made gods of wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or eat or smell. Deuteronomy 4:28​

Either notion is as ridiculous to Christians as it is to God.

The ancient Hebrew understood a god to be someone with power and authority. I offer the following verses as examples of where men with authority are called gods: Ex 7:1, Ex 22:28 (context speaking of the judges), John 10:35 (speaking of the Israelite people).

These judges of Israel were corrupt individuals, those who had neither knowledge or understanding, made false gods by the Israelites and judged by the true God. Let's read Psalm 82:5-7:

The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken

I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
nevertheless, like men you shall die,
and fall like any prince.”​

Here is a question for you: What if God had called these men “despicable” instead of "gods"? Would anyone claim it was God that made them despicable? So why would anyone claim it is God who makes men gods?

It is not God who makes other gods, @rrobs. It is always men. They made men gods just as they made sticks and stones the same. God calls them both gods, but they are false gods.

At no time was Jesus equating himself with these gods.Jesus was simply pointing out the hypocrisy in their charge. You stone me because I make myself to be God, but you never stoned your judges whom the Father called Gods, and whom you yourself made Gods.

In other words, if you're stoning me for making myself God, then stone yourselves for making your Judges the same.

But never God the Son. Those born again are also called sons.

Jesus is both Son of God and Son of Man. That is his dual nature.

Claiming Jesus is not God because he is never called “God the Son” is like claiming Jesus is not man because he is never called “Man the Son”.

Let’s be consistent with our assertions @rrobs.

Continued...

 

[Oeste]

Abraham prayed to his sister (Gen 12:13). Praying simply means asking another for something. It in no way automatically makes the one prayed to God.

Genesis 12:

10 Now there was a famine in the land, and Abram went down to Egypt to live there for a while because the famine was severe. 11 As he was about to enter Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai, “I know what a beautiful woman you are. 12 When the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me but will let you live. 13 Say you are my sister,so that I will be treated well for your sake and my life will be spared because of you.”​

Where is Abraham praying to his sister?
.

God cannot be tempted (James 1:13).

Correct! Jesus as God cannot be tempted.

If Jesus was tempted, he can't be God.

No, and your reasoning through a logical fallacy.

Jesus as God could not be tempted, but Jesus as man certainly could be.

That is the nature of dual. Dual does not mean mutually exclusive.

If you are a plumber you are not an electrician. If you are an electrician you are not a plumber. But when you are both…

If someone knows all things they can hardly grow in wisdom. Men can grow in wisdom, but not God.

Exactly Rrobs!

Peter, addressing Jesus said "Lord, you know all things. You know I love you." (John 21:17) Since Jesus knows all things he can hardly grow in wisdom.

Yet the same person who knows all things did exactly that...he grew in wisdom (Luke 2:15) and didn't know the time of the end (Mark 13:32).

This is the hypostatic union, and you just located it in scripture.

As a Unitarian, you downplay any verse where "Jesus knows all things" and you play up any verse where he "grows in wisdom".

As a Christian Scientist, you downplay any verse where he grows in wisdom, and you play up any verse where he "knows all things".

As a Trinitarian you accept both, giving them equal weight.

God died?

No, man died! Remember God took the form of man. You have to be able to reconcile rather than ignore certain verses and not interject preconceived notions into them:

Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross.… Philippians 2:6-8​

You can’t get much more direct than that.

Now let's look at the verses I quoted you for any evidence of a dual nature again:

and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. (John 10:28)​

The "I" in this verse is Jesus, not the Father. It is Jesus that gives eternal life, yet he cannot save himself on the cross and dies! Remember those guards and scribes taunting Jesus earlier?

Is this looking as "impossible" as you claimed earlier?

But the verse I was really hoping you would sit up and take notice of was John 5:8.

It's extremely late (1am) where I am and I have to work tomorrow, but I don't want to address this only to you, but I'd like to ask the same question to any other Unitarian out there, so I'll put it in a separate post.

In any case those two verses say nothing about a trinity or that Jesus was God. They make two, more or less, different assertions about two different people.

Trinity? I'm specifically addressing the hypostatic union here...two words you stated we won't find together in scripture, like "theocratic ministry". I'm all for discussing the Trinity but I'd rather do it after we get hypostatic union out the way.

It's extremely late, after 1 am and I have to work tomorrow. I'll have to finish up later but I will post an "assignment" for some of the Christian doubters here so we'll continue our discussion later.

 

[shmogie]

Genesis 12:

10 Now there was a famine in the land, and Abram went down to Egypt to live there for a while because the famine was severe. 11 As he was about to enter Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai, “I know what a beautiful woman you are. 12 When the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me but will let you live. 13 Say you are my sister,so that I will be treated well for your sake and my life will be spared because of you.”​

Where is Abraham praying to his sister?
.



Correct! Jesus as God cannot be tempted.



No, and your reasoning through a logical fallacy.

Jesus as God could not be tempted, but Jesus as man certainly could be.

That is the nature of dual. Dual does not mean mutually exclusive.

If you are a plumber you are not an electrician. If you are an electrician you are not a plumber. But when you are both…



Exactly Rrobs!

Peter, addressing Jesus said "Lord, you know all things. You know I love you." (John 21:17) Since Jesus knows all things he can hardly grow in wisdom.

Yet the same person who knows all things did exactly that...he grew in wisdom (Luke 2:15) and didn't know the time of the end (Mark 13:32).

This is the hypostatic union, and you just located it in scripture.

As a Unitarian, you downplay any verse where "Jesus knows all things" and you play up any verse where he "grows in wisdom".

As a Christian Scientist, you downplay any verse where he grows in wisdom, and you play up any verse where he "knows all things".

As a Trinitarian you accept both, giving them equal weight.



No, man died! Remember God took the form of man. You have to be able to reconcile rather than ignore certain verses and not interject preconceived notions into them:

Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross.… Philippians 2:6-8​

You can’t get much more direct than that.

Now let's look at the verses I quoted you for any evidence of a dual nature again:

and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. (John 10:28)​

The "I" in this verse is Jesus, not the Father. It is Jesus that gives eternal life, yet he cannot save himself on the cross and dies! Remember those guards and scribes taunting Jesus earlier?

Is this looking as "impossible" as you claimed earlier?

But the verse I was really hoping you would sit up and take notice of was John 5:8.

It's extremely late (1am) where I am and I have to work tomorrow, but I don't want to address this only to you, but I'd like to ask the same question to any other Unitarian out there, so I'll put it in a separate post.



Trinity? I'm specifically addressing the hypostatic union here...two words you stated we won't find together in scripture, like "theocratic ministry". I'm all for discussing the Trinity but I'd rather do it after we get hypostatic union out the way.

It's extremely late, after 1 am and I have to work tomorrow. I'll have to finish up later but I will post an "assignment" for some of the Christian doubters here so we'll continue our discussion later.

Excellent post ! Great exposition of forcing scripture to fit a pre conceived idea rather than the other way around.

 

[rrobs]

Its not personal. I dont believe in god.

I wish you would have told me that before. I thought you were sincere in your questions. If I had known you don't believe God I would have taken a different tack.

Take care...

 

[rrobs]

There is nothing about us that is sinless.

As Luther said, we are TOTALLY depraved.

We have nothing to commend us to God, nothing. Grace covers us totally and completely.

If our spirit is sinless, it doesn´t need Grace, a fundamental part of us doesn´t need Godś Grace.

To declare any part of us as acceptable to God without his gift of Grace is blasphemy

Luther, nor any other man for that matter, is not my source of truth. I stick with the scriptures and nothing but the scriptures.

In light of what you said, I would be interested to get your take on the following three verses in the Epistles.

Rom 3:22,

Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
​

Eph 1:4,

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
​

Col 1:22,

In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:​

 

[rrobs]

Well, explain the Godhead. The term appears in most modern English translations.

You either don´t understand the term, or the analogy

Strait out of Strong's Concordance:

G2320 θεότης theotes (the-o'-tees) n.
divinity (abstractly).
[from G2316]
KJV: godhead
Root(s): G2316

The root word (G2316) referred to is theos, which is almost always translated as God.

I do understand what the word "Godhead" means, but no, I don't understand the analogy between your family and God.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I wish you would have told me that before. I thought you were sincere in your questions. If I had known you don't believe God I would have taken a different tack.

Take care...

Well. Im not one for not throwing pearls among swine. Since this is a religious forum, I thought that I can speak with anyone regardless their background, motive, and religious affiliation. Not everyone is a seeker; and, not all of us want to talk about religion to be converted.

I have no issues talking with any person of any religion. My experiences are not horrible; and, I have no qualms about religious people... so, Im sure your religion wouldnt limit you from talking to others unless they want to be converted? Is it only religious topics or all topics?

It would have been more helpful if you have asked.

 

[rrobs]

Scripture says it very clearly in more than one passage:

“but of the Son he says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom' “ (Heb. 1:8)​

“… as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13)​

Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours (2 Peter 1:1)​

So is Jesus God? The answer is yes.

I thought I already covered this, but maybe it was with somebody else. We in the modern world have a concept of the word "god" that is not the same as the concept the ancient Hebrew had of the word. To them it was a term applied to anybody with supreme authority. Moses was called a god to Pharaoh (Ex 7:1). The judges were called gods (Ex 22:28). Because they possessed the words of God, the Israelites were called gods (Ps 82:6, John 10:35). Even Satan is called a god because he presently rules over the earth (2 Cor 4:4). That is why Thomas called Jesus, "my Lord and my god."

Hypostatic union are words used to describe concepts that are in the scriptures. They are man-made and based in scripture itself

As you probably know, anybody can make the scriptures say anything they want. Hypostatic union is such a case.

Let me ask you a question: Does your church throw out “man made” terms like Exegesis, Eisegesis, Christology, Soteriology, Hermeneutics, Pneumatology, and Theology for the exact same reason?

We certainly don't build a doctrine on any of those words.

No one claims He does. Man worships God and Christ was fully man. It just so happens that scripture tells us he was also fully God.

Where does it say, "Jesus is fully God?" If the trinity was so important, you'd think God would have said so in plain language. But it isn't. We have to invent terms such as hypostatic union, which really mean nothing at all in and of themselves. The word is only found in reference to a trinity.

When the people worshiped Caesar and Caesar worshiped Zeus, was Caesar one person or two?

People's actions do not determine truth.

If you do not give the same honor to the Son that you give the Father, you are honoring neither, and the highest honor we can give the Father is worship!

“…so that all people will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.” John 5:23​

We do not give one honor to the Son and a higher honor to the Father. We give the Son the same high honor we give the Father.

I think if you read my posts you would see I certainly give honor to Jesus, much more than trinitarians actually. For God to obey Himself and believe He would raise Himself from the dead is no big deal. After all, He's God. He's not going to doubt Himself. But for a man to obey, despite experiencing the same temptations as the rest of us is another story altogether. Jesus didn't want to die on the cross. He asked God to take the cup away from him. But he ended up saying, "not my will, but thine be done." Making him God cheapens his accomplishment to the max.

If anybody doesn't honor Jesus it would be trinitarians, but I don't want to judge anybody. I'm just saying.

The son of God is God, just as the Son of Man is man.

As born again believers, you and I are sons of God (1 John 3:2). I don't think of myself as God and I trust you concur.

It works the same everywhere else…the son of frog is frog, and the son of dog will always be dog. The son of God is not man any more than the son of frog is a dog. The Son of Man is man precisely because he is Son of Man and the Son of God is God precisely because he is Son of God.

So all frogs are really one frog?

Jesus is called Son of God and Son of Man because he has a dual nature. A dual nature does not mean he is two people…no more than Caesar is two in the example I gave above.

So do we. We came into this world with a flesh nature. At our new birth we received a divine nature (2 Pet 1:4). We now have two natures. I trust you understand none of us are God.

One person can have a dual major in physics and biology. The idea that a dual nature necessitates two people is not impossible but ludicrous.

A dual degreed person doesn't make them God.

 

[rrobs]

It would have been more helpful if you have asked.

I suppose you are right on that. Clearly I made an assumption that I should not have made. In any case, thanks for the clarification.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I suppose you are right on that. Clearly I made an assumption that I should not have made. In any case, thanks for the clarification.

Sure. I usually don't say unless asked because it throws the conversation off. I know a lot of christians who rather converse with like minded or potentially like minded people. Makes it very hard to talk without my being dishonest but withholding my beliefs (unless part of the conversation) as well. Huge pet peeve of mine.

 

[rrobs]

Any “a god” is a false God. There is only one true God and anyone called “a god” ain't it.

That's not how the ancient Hebrew saw it. To them a god was anybody with supreme authority. The Bible was written a long time ago to a culture much different than our modern West. We need to understand things they way they saw them. Please do some of your own research on what the ancient Hebrew considered a god to be. Just use Google. Maybe you'll believe somebody else besides me.

These judges of Israel were corrupt individuals, those who had neither knowledge or understanding, made false gods by the Israelites and judged by the true God. Let's read Psalm 82:5-7:

The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken

I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
nevertheless, like men you shall die,
and fall like any prince.”​

Here is a question for you: What if God had called these men “despicable” instead of "gods"? Would anyone claim it was God that made them despicable? So why would anyone claim it is God who makes men gods?

Despicable or not, God nonetheless called them gods. He called Satan a god (2 Cor 4:4). They don't come much more despicable than Satan! There have been and still are many despicable people who nonetheless posses great authority. To the ancient Hebrew that person would be a god because of the authority they held.

It is not God who makes other gods, It is always men. They made men gods just as they made sticks and stones the same. God calls them both gods, but they are false gods.

As you said, their is only one supreme God who created the heavens and the earth. He is the father of our Lord and savior Jesus Christ.

Jesus is both Son of God and Son of Man. That is his dual nature.

I already showed you every born again believer also has a dual nature. See post #92.

Claiming Jesus is not God because he is never called “God the Son” is like claiming Jesus is not man because he is never called “Man the Son”. Let’s be consistent with our assertions

Simply calling someone something doesn't make them that something. They are what they are by nature, not by names.

 

[rrobs]

Sure. I usually don't say unless asked because it throws the conversation off. I know a lot of christians who rather converse with like minded or potentially like minded people. Makes it very hard to talk without my being dishonest but withholding my beliefs (unless part of the conversation) as well. Huge pet peeve of mine.

It's not that I don't want to converse with non-christians. I just don't want to talk to them about the scriptures. I would not keep asking you questions about something knowing ahead of time that I won't believe anything you say. It seems a bit disingenuous to me. I hope you understand.

 

[RabbiO]

It's not that I don't want to converse with non-christians. I just don't want to talk to them about the scriptures. I would not keep asking you quest.

If you don't want to converse with non-Christians about scripture then you need to post scripture related posts somewhere else on the forum, Same Faith Debates or somewhere in the Christianity DIR.

Anywhere else and all members, no matter their belief or non-belief, are entitled to participate and you have no right to limit their particpation and comments. You've been here long enough to know that.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's not that I don't want to converse with non-christians. I just don't want to talk to them about the scriptures. I would not keep asking you questions about something knowing ahead of time that I won't believe anything you say. It seems a bit disingenuous to me. I hope you understand.

Yeah. I always found that odd. In bible study or church I can understand it. Scripture isn't an isolated text. Non christians have been studying and looking up and researching about scripture for years. Non christians can appreciate scripture like believers. Non scriptures are theist and polytheist and....as well.

I understand personal preference as most, but as a whole that doesn't make sense..even especially on a religious forum. If not to help seekers or talk to christians, what other topics can you discuss scripturally without, I guess being too spiritual? ??

 

[rrobs]

Genesis 12:

10 Now there was a famine in the land, and Abram went down to Egypt to live there for a while because the famine was severe. 11 As he was about to enter Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai, “I know what a beautiful woman you are. 12 When the Egyptians see you, they will say, ‘This is his wife.’ Then they will kill me but will let you live. 13 Say you are my sister,so that I will be treated well for your sake and my life will be spared because of you.”​

Where is Abraham praying to his sister?

Here's KJV on verse 13:

Gen 12:13,

Say, I pray thee, thou [art] my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.​

I admit I've not done much research on the word pray in the scriptures. I, like all of us, have my own idea, but I can't honestly say I know exactly what God means when he uses that word.

I did a quick Strong's Concordance search and saw that the word pray is used many times of one man praying to another. It just seems to be a way of asking for something. But, like I said, I'd have to do more research before saying definitively what it means to pray. I guess it's funny to say I don't really know th depth of the word "pray" since we use it so often. It's better to admit we don't know something instead of coming up with erroneous ideas. It is important that we don't read into the scriptures our own preconceived ideas.

Correct! Jesus as God cannot be tempted. Jesus as God could not be tempted, but Jesus as man certainly could be.

By saying that the man Jesus is also God you say that God is also a man.

Num 23:19(a),

God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?​

1Sam 15:29,

And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he [is] not a man, that he should repent.​

That is the nature of dual. Dual does not mean mutually exclusive.

If you are a plumber you are not an electrician. If you are an electrician you are not a plumber. But when you are both…

I've covered dual natures before. Born again believers have a dual nature (flesh and spirit), Jesus has a dual nature (flesh and spirit). God does not have a dual nature. He is spirit, period.

John 4:24,

God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.
​

Deut 6:4,

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God [is] one LORD:
​

While Jesus and all born again believers have a dual nature, there is no hint of a duality in God.

Peter, addressing Jesus said "Lord, you know all things. You know I love you." (John 21:17) Since Jesus knows all things he can hardly grow in wisdom.
Yet the same person who knows all things did exactly that...he grew in wisdom (Luke 2:15) and didn't know the time of the end (Mark 13:32).

Not everything Peter said was true. If he was correct in his assertion, then God was wrong to say Jesus grew in wisdom.

If Peter was right then Jesus also got it wrong in Matthew:

Matt 24:36,

But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
​

As you pointed out, Jesus said the same thing in Mark 13:32.

If language means anything at all, the same person can't know everything and yet grow in wisdom. It's one or the other. It can't be both. I think that belief in the trinity requires that a person accept many contradictory concepts.

As a Unitarian, you downplay any verse where "Jesus knows all things" and you play up any verse where he "grows in wisdom".
As a Christian Scientist, you downplay any verse where he grows in wisdom, and you play up any verse where he "knows all things".

I'm not a Christian Scientist nor am I downplaying anything. The scriptures can not contradict themselves. If they seem to do that, then it is either in our understanding or translation. Do you downplay the the fact that Jesus grew in wisdom, that only his Father knew the time of restoration? You have to make them all fit somehow.

No, man died! Remember God took the form of man. You have to be able to reconcile rather than ignore certain verses and not interject preconceived notions into them:

Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross.… Philippians 2:6-8​

You can’t get much more direct than that.

It says Jesus was in the form of God. It doesn't say he was God. Jesus did have the spirit of God upon him. That's what happened when he was baptized by John.

The words "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped" do not mean Jesus thought he was God. Quite the opposite really. He didn't think that equality with God was something he ought not to go for, to grasp. Adam made the mistake of grasping equality with God and that went nowhere. Jesus was a bit smarter than that. Jesus thought of himself as a servant, not as God.

Read the next few verses and you will see that because he did that and obeyed even to the death of the cross, God exulted him. God needs to be exalted? That doesn't make sense.

While a popular "proof" of the trinity, this section in Philippians does not prove the trinity in any way, shape, or form.

Now let's look at the verses I quoted you for any evidence of a dual nature again:

and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. (John 10:28)​

The "I" in this verse is Jesus, not the Father. It is Jesus that gives eternal life, yet he cannot save himself on the cross and dies! Remember those guards and scribes taunting Jesus earlier?

John 17:1-3,

1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
2 As thou (God) hast given him (Jesus) power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.​

Jesus was given that authority by God. It was not something he possessed on his own.

Verse three clearly says that there is only one True God and that that God sent Jesus Christ. God didn't come down Himself. I would think this verse should get the attention of all who would make that one true God into three gods on one. Study the Greek and Roman mystery religions. You will find most had their own trinity.

There is no mention of a trinity until many, many years after the death of Jesus. That is simply because Christianity was unique, like Israel, in believing in one God and one God only. But, little by little the pagans from the mystery religions brought their perverted concept of three gods in one into the Christian doctrine. Little by little the leaders of the now perverted church accepted the beliefs of these pagans in order to increase membership. I suppose it greatly enhanced the balance of their coffers, but that is just my supposition. I do know the love of money is the root of all evil. The worship of a pagan trinity is certainly considered an evil to God, so I'm just putting 2 and 2 together.

For the life of me, I don't understand how anybody could accept the authority of an organization that brutally killed untold number of simple folks who simply disagreed with their devilish doctrine. I was once Roman Catholic, 12 years in Catholic school, 1 hour of religion, 5 days a week. I know the verbiage, but I have long since abandoned it for the truth of God's wonderful matchless word.

 

[rrobs]

If you don't want to converse with non-Christians about scripture then you need to post scripture related posts somewhere else on the forum, Same Faith Debates or somewhere in the Christianity DIR.

Anywhere else and all members, no matter their belief or non-belief, are entitled to participate and you have no right to limit their particpation and comments. You've been here long enough to know that.

I would do that, but they kicked me off for not believing in the trinity.

How would you feel if I kept asking you to prove that the New Testament is not part of the scriptures, knowing ahead of time I'm not going to believe a thing you said? I could see doing that for a few posts, but to go on and on asking questions with the sole purpose of showing you that you are wrong is, as I said, disingenuous. I would certainly have treated the whole matter differently had I known her true sentiment. I would have said, "OK, I respect your belief and I've enjoyed our conversation." Is that not permitted here?

Unveiled artist never once said she disagreed with anything I said. They just said they didn't understand and wanted more information. I was sincerely trying to answer her questions when they knew ahead of time they were not going to believe. What is that if not disingenuous?

I've not limited peoples comments. They can say what they want. Conversely, I can engage or not engage whoever I want. Interestingly enough, you yourself appear be limiting my comments. You don't like it, so you tell me what I can and what I can't do. I don't think addressing someone or not is a matter of "rights." I can do and say whatever I chose. I don't need a "right" to do that.

As a final note, your post is off topic.