The Unitarian Problem

[Terrywoodenpic]

Now it might be a good time for you to explain what you think a Christian is. Thank you.

The definition of a Christian has constantly changed over time.

There were Christians long before the bible was compiled
There were Christians long before there were any formal priests or churches.
There were Christians long before the Trinity was proposed
There were Christians long before the Virgin birth was was added to the faith
There were Christians long before any one thought that Jesus was God.
There were Christians long before the Creed was written.
There were Christians before the Catholics and Orthodox split. largely over the addition of the Filioque.
There were Christians long before the Romans changed the perception of Jesus, from the servant shepherd to a God in majesty and power.( The evidence is still visible in the Roman catacombs.)

So do you suggest that no one in the early church including the apostles were true Christians.
Do you believe that people who believe differently to your self can not be Christian.

On that basis even Jesus would not be a Christian. He saw himself as a son of God, and a servant and teacher to all., especially sinners. Not a God in majesty and power.

There is only one God, and Jesus worshipped him alone.
As Christians, We should do the same.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

What I am asking you, is what the water confers on a person. I know that when a person is born again of the Holy Spirit they receive the Holy Spirit. Do you think that water washes away sin?

I accept all that you say elsewhere, but this does not make you a Unitarian. A Christian Unitarian does not, according to definition, believe in the deity of Christ.

The other point worth considering, is whether or not Jesus had a soul, and whether his soul is part of God now that he is raised and on the throne.

Using the name in water baptism is where the blood is applied - and you obtain forgiveness of your sins. It is not the water itself. It is thru the power of the name. But that is where your sins are washed away. See Acts 22:16 - Where Paul was told to arise and be baptized and wash away your sins. Calling on (or you could say invoking) the name.

I am not sure what a technical definition of a Unitarian is. I am not claiming to be one. I just know I believe in one God and not a Trinity. The one God that I believe in took on a fleshly body, and shed his blood for our sins.

Your last point doesn't really make sense to me. Because what essentially happened, is the one and only God wrapped himself in flesh, and shed his blood for us. Then he raised the body up a glorified eternal spiritual body, and ascended and took the throne.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

God is a trinity, the father... the son... and the holy spirit. In three, there is one. He is in the father and the father is in him, the holy spirit descends from the father to the son. So yes, God is one.... in three.

If you believe in 3 separate distinct persons that are each God, then you are believing in 3 Gods whether you realize it or not. The Holy Spirit IS the Father. They are not 2 different individuals. Look at Matthew 1:18 and Matthew 1:20 to see who the Father is. Mary was found with child of the Holy Spirit.

 

[YoursTrue]

The definition of a Christian has constantly changed over time.

There were Christians long before the bible was compiled
There were Christians long before there were any formal priests or churches.
There were Christians long before the Trinity was proposed
There were Christians long before the Virgin birth was was added to the faith
There were Christians long before any one thought that Jesus was God.
There were Christians long before the Creed was written.
There were Christians before the Catholics and Orthodox split. largely over the addition of the Filioque.
There were Christians long before the Romans changed the perception of Jesus, from the servant shepherd to a God in majesty and power.( The evidence is still visible in the Roman catacombs.)

So do you suggest that no one in the early church including the apostles were true Christians.
Do you believe that people who believe differently to your self can not be Christian.

On that basis even Jesus would not be a Christian. He saw himself as a son of God, and a servant and teacher to all., especially sinners. Not a God in majesty and power.

There is only one God, and Jesus worshipped him alone.
As Christians, We should do the same.

Would you say there are those who do not do as Jesus did yet call themselves Christian?

 

[YoursTrue]

The definition of a Christian has constantly changed over time...

And here I thought we should follow in Jesus' footsteps. And accept the Bible as God's instructions for mankind, to live as Jesus did and later recognize and follow the wisdom that the holy spirit conferred on the apostles. Remember when many, many during the middle ages were forbidden to read the Bible?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Using the name in water baptism is where the blood is applied - and you obtain forgiveness of your sins. It is not the water itself. It is thru the power of the name. But that is where your sins are washed away. See Acts 22:16 - Where Paul was told to arise and be baptized and wash away your sins. Calling on (or you could say invoking) the name.

I am not sure what a technical definition of a Unitarian is. I am not claiming to be one. I just know I believe in one God and not a Trinity. The one God that I believe in took on a fleshly body, and shed his blood for our sins.

Your last point doesn't really make sense to me. Because what essentially happened, is the one and only God wrapped himself in flesh, and shed his blood for us. Then he raised the body up a glorified eternal spiritual body, and ascended and took the throne.

If the power of water baptism comes from using the name of Christ, then why place such emphasis on a ritual using water. All you have done is confirm that water is an outward symbol. It is not water that washes away sin; it's the Holy Spirit. But for the Holy Spirit to come there must be repentance and belief in Jesus Christ. That's where the name is used.

I also believe in one God. So, rather than argue about the theologian terms, it's better to prove a point using scripture alone. That's why l ask those that claim to believe in one God whether they believe Jesus Christ is worthy of our service. It saves having to talk theology.

The final point is important because there has to be a clear distinction between what is 'man' and what is 'God'. Numbers tells us that God is not a man. God tells us that He is Spirit. Paul tells us that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. So, what are we to think about the soul? Is it of the Spirit, or is it of the flesh?

In the story of Jonah, which Jesus refers to, Jonah descends into the grave (sheol), meaning that he dies. Thereafter, his soul communicates and prays to God. When he is finally spewed up on dry land, his soul is back in a living body.

Jesus' soul descended into the grave at death. He is said to have made himself known to all souls that had died up until that moment. His soul was in the grave for three days and nights before being raised in a new incorruptible body. It was God's Spirit that raised the soul of Jesus from the grave and gave it an incorruptible body.

At the ascension, Jesus' body and soul, now united with the Holy Spirit, ascended to heaven.

If Jesus pre-existed in heaven with God, which part pre-existed? Did the soul of Jesus pre-exist in God, or was the soul a part of the body born to Mary? If the soul did pre-exist, why is God described as Spirit, and not as Spirit and Soul?

 

[shunyadragon]

And here I thought we should follow in Jesus' footsteps. And accept the Bible as God's instructions for mankind, to live as Jesus did and later recognize and follow the wisdom that the holy spirit conferred on the apostles. Remember when many, many during the middle ages were forbidden to read the Bible?

Many diverse and conflicting different beliefs will agree with the above and some will not call you a Christian.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Would you say there are those who do not do as Jesus did yet call themselves Christian?

Of course... the churches are full of them

And here I thought we should follow in Jesus' footsteps. And accept the Bible as God's instructions for mankind, to live as Jesus did and later recognize and follow the wisdom that the holy spirit conferred on the apostles. Remember when many, many during the middle ages were forbidden to read the Bible?

Jesus never saw anything resembling a Bible
though he was well versed in Jewish Scripture
It is impossible to know what he would think of our selections put in the various bibles.
Only a proportion of Christians ever get round to reading any version of the bible, even to day.
They still rely on the few verses used to preach at them.
The Holy spirit is a whole other issue, who I would suggest has always been our personal contact with God.
Jesus I would suggest is still our main source of instruction.

 

[Muffled]

John 3:33 says, 'for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him'. I do agree, however, that having the Spirit without measure must also mean that Jesus Christ consistently speaks the words of God.

I believe having Jesus in me I also speak the words of God but not without measure. I am capable of throwing in my two cents on occasion.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

If the power of water baptism comes from using the name of Christ, then why place such emphasis on a ritual using water. All you have done is confirm that water is an outward symbol. It is not water that washes away sin; it's the Holy Spirit. But for the Holy Spirit to come there must be repentance and belief in Jesus Christ. That's where the name is used.

I also believe in one God. So, rather than argue about the theologian terms, it's better to prove a point using scripture alone. That's why l ask those that claim to believe in one God whether they believe Jesus Christ is worthy of our service. It saves having to talk theology.

The final point is important because there has to be a clear distinction between what is 'man' and what is 'God'. Numbers tells us that God is not a man. God tells us that He is Spirit. Paul tells us that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. So, what are we to think about the soul? Is it of the Spirit, or is it of the flesh?

In the story of Jonah, which Jesus refers to, Jonah descends into the grave (sheol), meaning that he dies. Thereafter, his soul communicates and prays to God. When he is finally spewed up on dry land, his soul is back in a living body.

Jesus' soul descended into the grave at death. He is said to have made himself known to all souls that had died up until that moment. His soul was in the grave for three days and nights before being raised in a new incorruptible body. It was God's Spirit that raised the soul of Jesus from the grave and gave it an incorruptible body.

At the ascension, Jesus' body and soul, now united with the Holy Spirit, ascended to heaven.

If Jesus pre-existed in heaven with God, which part pre-existed? Did the soul of Jesus pre-exist in God, or was the soul a part of the body born to Mary? If the soul did pre-exist, why is God described as Spirit, and not as Spirit and Soul?

You say it's better to prove a point using scripture. That's what I did. I presented Acts 2:38 & Acts 22:16 - Which even says "arise and be baptized and wash away your sins". Yet you choose not to accept it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Of course... the churches are full of them



Jesus never saw anything resembling a Bible
though he was well versed in Jewish Scripture
It is impossible to know what he would think of our selections put in the various bibles.
Only a proportion of Christians ever get round to reading any version of the bible, even to day.
They still rely on the few verses used to preach at them.
The Holy spirit is a whole other issue, who I would suggest has always been our personal contact with God.
Jesus I would suggest is still our main source of instruction.

The Bible was not put in its present state as many know until a few centuries ago. We know Jesus did quote from the scriptures and also read aloud. I agree that in most cases in religious places of worship few scriptures are read aloud.

 

[Redemptionsong]

You say it's better to prove a point using scripture. That's what I did. I presented Acts 2:38 & Acts 22:16 - Which even says "arise and be baptized and wash away your sins". Yet you choose not to accept it.

I accept all the scriptures, but I was asking you about the meaning. I was asking whether water baptism meant that water washed away sin. Clearly water does nothing of the sort. When John baptised with water, he said that it was a baptism of repentance. Repentance is of the heart, and has nothing to do with water. Water is used as an outward symbol because it shows a desire to be washed clean on the inside. It demonstrates to others that there has been a change of heart and of direction. Repentance is, therefore, a demonstration of man's intention and of his new direction, in the face of God's love.

When God sees faith (which involves repentance), he responds to faith by sending the promise of the Holy Spirit. It's the Holy Spirit that provides inner cleansing from sin, because the Holy Spirit is the righteousness of Christ.

We know that Peter was, at least for a time, unsure as how to respond to the first Gentile believers (Cornelius and family). They had clearly received the Holy Spirit through faith, but had not been baptised in water. So he commanded that they be baptised with water to ensure the baptism of John, together with the baptism of Jesus.

On the day of Pentecost, 120 Jewish disciples were baptised in the Holy Spirit but there is no indication that they were then baptised in water. Can you provide a scripture to show that they were? It's my belief that all had already been baptised in water, according to John's baptism, a baptism of repentance. After John would come one greater, who would baptise in the Holy Spirit. This is what happened at Pentecost.

I have nothing against water baptism as a demonstration to the community of believers that a person is choosing to repent and follow Christ. I was baptised with water as a baby and as an adult, but what really changed my life was repentance and baptism in the Holy Spirit.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I accept all the scriptures, but I was asking you about the meaning. I was asking whether water baptism meant that water washed away sin. Clearly water does nothing of the sort. When John baptised with water, he said that it was a baptism of repentance. Repentance is of the heart, and has nothing to do with water. Water is used as an outward symbol because it shows a desire to be washed clean on the inside. It demonstrates to others that there has been a change of heart and of direction. Repentance is, therefore, a demonstration of man's intention and of his new direction, in the face of God's love.

When God sees faith (which involves repentance), he responds to faith by sending the promise of the Holy Spirit. It's the Holy Spirit that provides inner cleansing from sin, because the Holy Spirit is the righteousness of Christ.

We know that Peter was, at least for a time, unsure as how to respond to the first Gentile believers (Cornelius and family). They had clearly received the Holy Spirit through faith, but had not been baptised in water. So he commanded that they be baptised with water to ensure the baptism of John, together with the baptism of Jesus.

On the day of Pentecost, 120 Jewish disciples were baptised in the Holy Spirit but there is no indication that they were then baptised in water. Can you provide a scripture to show that they were? It's my belief that all had already been baptised in water, according to John's baptism, a baptism of repentance. After John would come one greater, who would baptise in the Holy Spirit. This is what happened at Pentecost.

I have nothing against water baptism as a demonstration to the community of believers that a person is choosing to repent and follow Christ. I was baptised with water as a baby and as an adult, but what really changed my life was repentance and baptism in the Holy Spirit.

You either accept that your sins are forgiven when you are baptized in his name or you don't. Acts 2:38

 

[Redemptionsong]

You either accept that your sins are forgiven when you are baptized in his name or you don't. Acts 2:38

So, you agree that it is God, as Spirit, who forgives sins, and that water is not the agent of cleansing?
Do you think Cornelius was not forgiven his sin when he was baptised in the Holy Spirit?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

'Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy Holy Spirit from me.' [Psalm 51:11]

Did the Psalmist get it wrong? Or is it possible for God to be absent when God chooses?

Yeah the psalmist didn’t think it through.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

So, you agree that it is God, as Spirit, who forgives sins, and that water is not the agent of cleansing?
Do you think Cornelius was not forgiven his sin when he was baptised in the Holy Spirit?

I agree with what the word of God actually says:

Acts 2:38 - be baptized in the name for the remission of sins...

Acts 22:16 - be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name...

1 Peter 3:21 - whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...

Mark 16:16 - He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved...

Cornelius was told in Acts 10:43-48 - through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell on the Gentiles and they received the Holy Spirit. (Your Question: Were his sins forgiven at this point? Answer: No) Why were they commanded to be baptized in the name, after receiving the Holy Spirit if baptism isn't necessary? Acts 10:48

No, it's just as the Messiah said in John 3:5 - you must be born of water and of the Spirit to enter the kingdom.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yeah the psalmist didn’t think it through.

So you think an all-powerful God cannot choose to not know something, is that right? Just checking...:

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I accept all the scriptures, but I was asking you about the meaning. I was asking whether water baptism meant that water washed away sin. Clearly water does nothing of the sort. When John baptised with water, he said that it was a baptism of repentance. Repentance is of the heart, and has nothing to do with water. Water is used as an outward symbol because it shows a desire to be washed clean on the inside. It demonstrates to others that there has been a change of heart and of direction. Repentance is, therefore, a demonstration of man's intention and of his new direction, in the face of God's love.

When God sees faith (which involves repentance), he responds to faith by sending the promise of the Holy Spirit. It's the Holy Spirit that provides inner cleansing from sin, because the Holy Spirit is the righteousness of Christ.

We know that Peter was, at least for a time, unsure as how to respond to the first Gentile believers (Cornelius and family). They had clearly received the Holy Spirit through faith, but had not been baptised in water. So he commanded that they be baptised with water to ensure the baptism of John, together with the baptism of Jesus.

On the day of Pentecost, 120 Jewish disciples were baptised in the Holy Spirit but there is no indication that they were then baptised in water. Can you provide a scripture to show that they were? It's my belief that all had already been baptised in water, according to John's baptism, a baptism of repentance. After John would come one greater, who would baptise in the Holy Spirit. This is what happened at Pentecost.

I have nothing against water baptism as a demonstration to the community of believers that a person is choosing to repent and follow Christ. I was baptised with water as a baby and as an adult, but what really changed my life was repentance and baptism in the Holy Spirit.

John's baptism was a baptism unto repentance. The Messiah had not shed his blood at that point, so it couldn't be for forgiveness of sins. But once he shed his blood, and the new testament came into effect, then it became necessary to be baptized in his name for forgiveness of sins. That is why in Acts 19:1-5, when Paul found some disciples who didn't know about the Holy Spirit, and had only been baptized unto John's baptism. He taught them, and they were baptized in the name, and they also were filled with the Spirit. Acts 19:1-5

(Notice how they were born of water and of the Spirit. Just as the Messiah said was necessary in John 3:5)

My question to you is: If water baptism wasn't necessary, why were they baptized again?

 

[Redemptionsong]

John's baptism was a baptism unto repentance. The Messiah had not shed his blood at that point, so it couldn't be for forgiveness of sins. But once he shed his blood, and the new testament came into effect, then it became necessary to be baptized in his name for forgiveness of sins. That is why in Acts 19:1-5, when Paul found some disciples who didn't know about the Holy Spirit, and had only been baptized unto John's baptism. He taught them, and they were baptized in the name, and they also were filled with the Spirit. Acts 19:1-5

(Notice how they were born of water and of the Spirit. Just as the Messiah said was necessary in John 3:5)

My question to you is: If water baptism wasn't necessary, why were they baptized again?

I have no desire to argue against water baptism. I believe it has value as a show of intention, and as an initiation into the Church. But if water baptism is seen as the only means by which sins are forgiven, then I wonder at all those who have been given infant baptism. Were the sins of babes forgiven when they were washed in water, even in the absence of faith?

If water and the Spirit go together to form one baptism [Ephesians 4:5], then repentance and faith in Christ is man's part of the equation. God's part is to supply the power for change, IMO.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I have no desire to argue against water baptism. I believe it has value as a show of intention, and as an initiation into the Church. But if water baptism is seen as the only means by which sins are forgiven, then I wonder at all those who have been given infant baptism. Were the sins of babes forgiven when they were washed in water, even in the absence of faith?

If water and the Spirit go together to form one baptism [Ephesians 4:5], then repentance and faith in Christ is man's part of the equation. God's part is to supply the power for change, IMO.

But you are arguing against what the scripture says about water baptism. Please show me scripture saying baptism is a show of intention, or initiation into the church. Show me a scripture where they ever baptized a baby. A baby doesn't know right from wrong. A baby can't repent. So why should a baby be baptized?

It doesn't say water and the Spirit go together to form one baptism. Ephesians 4:5 is referring to their only being one water baptism. (It was probably mentioned here in the book of Ephesians, because the disciples who were baptized a 2nd time in Acts 19:1-5 were from Ephesus.)

There is a water baptism, and there is a baptism of the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 6:1-2 refers to the doctrine of baptisms (plural). Even John the baptist had said I indeed baptize with water, but one comes after me who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.

You didn't answer my question to you - If water baptism wasn't necessary, why were they baptized again in Acts 19:1-5?