• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trinitarian? Sure, sort of

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Like James wrote : 24*for once he has looked at himself and gone away, he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was."
Yes, and therefore we read the Scripture as written from a perspective. I'm talking about Theism, God belief, who God is.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
In the beginning the Word was with God and the Word was God. The Word became flesh and dwelt among men. The Word in human form was Jesus. The Word was God. Jesus was God.
 

leov

Well-Known Member
In the beginning the Word was with God and the Word was God. The Word became flesh and dwelt among men. The Word in human form was Jesus. The Word was God. Jesus was God.
Did you hear about hierarchy of angels. Greek word for God can apply to many of those.
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
Hananim is Greek.
22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23 For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you. Acts 17:22
 
Last edited:

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
This
I understand it better than you, otherwise you could have refuted my factual NT citations proving that Jesus explicitly excludes himself from the Godhead in John 17:3 where he calls the Father "you, the only true God".

You failed to answer how God can pray to God (Jesus prayed to God) and why NT prayer is never addressed to Jesus as God.

Until you can refute those points, you're the one who doesn't understand scripture.
Doesn't match

Yes, because the Savior of the Epistles is a wholly transcendental spirit entity. Only the later-written Gospels claim that Jesus was a man who had lived on earth. The original Christian experience of Jesus was of a heavenly spirit, not the resuscitated corpse of a mortal man.
This
 

steveb1

Member
So far, your argument has gone from saying Jesus isn't [g-d, to saying anyone can be called g-d. You don't understand how the word is used, which is why what you're saying makes no sense.

I know exactly what John's Jesus means when he says in John 17:3:

"You [Father] are the only true God".

"Only" means only;
"True" means true;
"God" means God.

It's you who don't understand how the word is used, which is why what you're saying makes no sense.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
If saying Jesus is not God is a lie, then the NT is a lie because, as I've shown but you've ignored, it never thinks of Jesus as God. Son of God, yes. God the Son, never.
What? Your argument is saying two different things
• not real yeshua, angel or something
• real yeshua saying he isn't g-d

Which is it?
Thry contradict each other
 

steveb1

Member
What? Your argument is saying two different things
• not real yeshua, angel or something
• real yeshua saying he isn't g-d

Which is it?
Thry contradict each other

No contradiction.

The Epistles treat Jesus as a great archangelic being, not God.

The Gospels treat Jesus as a human being - not God - who was spirit-filled and rewarded with resurrection.

Simple. And neither the Gospels nor the Epistles identify Jesus as God. I don't understand what is confusing you.
 

steveb1

Member
If saying Jesus is not God is a lie, then the NT is a lie because, as I've shown but you've ignored, it never thinks of Jesus as God. Son of God, yes. God the Son, never.
Then why would your argument be about a real yeshua, saying he isn't g-d?

You're confusing the Gospel Jesus with a "real" Jesus. The Gospel Jesus is a literary invention, and only "real" in the sense that Captain Ahab is real.

The Epistles believe in a real Jesus, but that Jesus was only a heavenly being who never lived on earth.

The Epistles believed in a celestial but real Jesus.
The Gospels invented an earthly but mythical Jesus.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
No contradiction.

The Epistles treat Jesus as a great archangelic being, not God.

The Gospels treat Jesus as a human being - not God - who was spirit-filled and rewarded with resurrection.

Simple. And neither the Gospels nor the Epistles identify Jesus as God. I don't understand what is confusing you.
You also said the word 'g-d' contextually would be non specific, so yes there is a problem with your contradiction.
Besides just being contradictions, [not how to argue that.

You have a vague deity, also, as you've added gnosticism into the hodge podge of statements concerning this.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
You're confusing the Gospel Jesus with a "real" Jesus. The Gospel Jesus is a literary invention, and only "real" in the sense that Captain Ahab is real.

The Epistles believe in a real Jesus, but that Jesus was only a heavenly being who never lived on earth.

The Epistles believed in a celestial but real Jesus.
The Gospels invented an earthly but mythical Jesus.

Celestial what? You said 'not g-d'.
 

steveb1

Member
'Celestial', yet 'not g-d'

Ok, what then?

As I said, an angelic being like Paul's self-emptying "Son", the Gospels' Son of Man who lives in the clouds, a godlike (not God) being like Philo of Alexandria's "Logos", a God-representative angel like the Angel of the Lord, the Angel of the Presence, Yahoel, Metatron and any number of other celestial but not divine figures.
 
Top