You said no one said he descended from the sky, but Jesus said he both ascended and descended from heaven. Heaven literally translates to sky.
I said the Bible does not say He descended from the sky. It says heaven. Sky does not mean heaven in a biblical way. It is often referred to as the heavens, which is different from when it uses heaven. Sky (heavens) is where the sun, moon. planets etc, are. It is what is above us, in our perspective. Heaven in the Bible, is where God dwells. That is where Jesus descended from, and where He returned to.
I said "perfect" because if you have finally ceded Jesus didn't literally pre-exist his birth then that would be valid. Since you have clarified you have ceded nothing then what do you make of what Jesus said in John 3:13?
No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. (John 3:13)
I don't "make" anything of it. I submit to what it says. Jesus came down from God and He will/has ascended back to where He was before He descended in order to conquer sin and death. (John 17:1-5
When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, "Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. And now, Father,glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed."
What in the world do you think John 3:13 means? Or should I ask, "What do you make of it?"
No your argument is about your disrespectful representation of my words, saying they were "word salad" among other things. That's not true.
It indeed was word salad. It made no point, proved nothing, and meandered about as it avoided addressing something headon.
I actually love talking about this verse. Let's begin with the fact that Jesus isn't the Everlasting Father. Son is not the Father in Trinitarianism. What's your work around for this?
I don't try to work around what the Scripture says. I go by what it says. If something at first seems contradictory or confusing I try and FIND OUT what is wrong in the way
I am seeing it, since the thing I know for sure is that there are no contradictions in God, therefore none in His word. I search the word itself, to find solve the paradox (not a contradiction.)
The translation of Isaiah 9:6, as it is translated in what you provided above, contradicts Trinitarianism, i.e., the Son is not the Father.
No it doesn't. The triangle of the Trinity that you refer to is dealing with the relationship within the Trinity to clarify it to sceptics. Is 9 is declaring that the child to be born is God, come to US as the Son of Man.
Revelation 1:4-8 shows Jesus isn't the Almighty.
No it doesn't. It speaks of the incarnate (Son of Man) Jesus as the faithful witness, who is also the ruler of the kings of the earth. God declares Himself often in the OT as the ruler of the kings of the earth---sovereign over all His creation iow---qand there is only one sovereign.
Verse 8 " I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and was and who is to come, the Almighty."
Rev 22:12-13 "Behold, I a coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." 16. "I Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the morning star."
Revelation 21:22
22And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
Well, you either have two God's here, (your view of the creatureliness of Jesus) or Jesus is God, always was God, came from God as the sacrificial Lamb in the flesh, and returned to heaven as the conquering King, in His glorified flesh.
It has to be one or the other. There is no spin or word salad that will explain it away. So, take your pick.
What's the gospel then? Does it say anything about needing to believe in the Trinity or that Jesus is God? Verses please.
Do I really need to give you the hundreds verses, or even one, that say we must believe Jesus, who He is and what He did, for eternal life. That is the gospel in a nutshell. "By grace you are saved, through faith, and that is not of yourself, but is the gift of God, that no one should boast.
Since even the demons know who He is, though they are beyond saving---God saves humans, not spirits---it stands to reason that believing Him and trusting in Him unto salvation, would require us to know who He is. Do we have to be aware of the triune nature of God and Christ's deity to be saved? No. Hardly anyone does in the beginning. And many Christian churches to not discuss it, but then they don't discuss most of the doctrines in Christianity. And even those who avoid the difficult discussion of the Trinity, treat Him as divine, (assume it). He is never considered a created being in traditional Christianity. And we have the Book, and a Christian has the Holy Spirit to shed light on His word, first to the mind from there into the heart.
Having been shown and told, over and over again, and still insist that it is not so, to fight tooth and nail with scriptural contradictions, and through only random texts removed from all context, imo is a different story. But that is just my opinion. I am not God.
