• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.

Mystery of the most holy trinity!

Ironic. Telling me that I have no claims to logic is like telling a Greek Scholar, "You have no claims to Biblical Greek," when you are clueless about Biblical Greek. Anyways, the Hypostatic Union is a Divine Mystery or the Mystery of the Faith to the Church “the mystery of God, namely, Christ,” (Colossians 2:2, 9). This mystery is not an intellectual puzzle or a contradiction. Nor is it an outgrowth of speculation. But it’s a revelation that was made known unto the Church. There is no need to give a Scriptural list that: a). Equality with the Father demonstrates the Divine Nature. b). Divine titles/names and divine attributes ascribed to Christ. c). Certain things Christ said is according to the Divine Nature. d). And of course, the resurrection. The Lexicon definition for Spirit has a wide range of semantic meaning, which also can mean "the spiritual Divine Nature of Christ" according to these particular verses (1 Timothy 3:16, 1 Peter 3:18, Romans 1:3-4). You already know the Bible has the phrase "in the flesh" (human nature reference to the incarnation) and there is also antithesis expression "in the Spirit" (Divine Nature reference to the resurrection) in relation to Christ. I've already demonstrated that Jesus Christ is God Scripturally (1 John 5:20, Romans 9:5, Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, etc.) and you demonstrated a denial in this thread.

Besides, the logical conjunction isn't just limited to the phrase "both God and Man" when referring to Jesus Christ in Scriptures. There is also a structural pattern found in Scriptures of Jesus Christ's Divine attributes as God and Human attributes as Man. For example, this is evident from the fact that Jesus Christ has divine intelligence being omniscient and his human intelligence that increased. You can also say, "Jesus Christ is"... "both omniscient and ignorant," "both omnipresent and localized," and "both omnipotent and powerless". The list goes on and on. From a logical standpoint, a conjunction is most effective and better approach Scripturally. Because, again, the meaning of a certain phraseology is 'drawn out' from the whole of Scriptures exegetically. If we know "this" and we know "that" about Jesus Christ, then Scriptures as a whole don't contradict but harmonizes. I will demonstrate an example, while the Readers can see your denial of this example:

Jesus Christ is both Omniscient and Ignorant

Jesus Christ is Omniscient
Jesus Christ knows all things (1 John 3:20 i.e. John 16:30, John 21:17).​
Jesus Christ knows the Father (Matthew 11:27, John 7:29, 8:55, 10:15, 17:25).​
Jesus Christ knows all people (Psalm 139:1-4 i.e. John 2:24-25, Matthew 9:4, Mark 2:8, Luke 5:22, John 6:64).​
Jesus Christ knows where to catch fish, even a coin (Luke 5:4-6, Matthew 17:27).​

Jesus Christ is Ignorant
Jesus Christ grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52).​
Jesus Christ didn't know there was figs in the tree (Mark 11:12-13).​
Jesus Christ didn't know where they laid Lazarus (John 11:33-35).​
Jesus Christ didn't know who touched him (Luke 8:45-46).​



Messiah Complex. You are embarking on a selfless service to humanity by being obtuse and argumentative. And that somehow will rid the world of Trinitarians. Not only that... you are clueless when it comes to the most basics of logic. Or you would have demonstrated a negated conjunction for all readers in this thread. Your whole Unitarian argument was based on "Jesus Christ is a man negates him being God." I proved that faulty line of reasoning by pointing out the fallacy of Denying a Conjunct. Whoop! There just went your whole argument! That's a real refutation I've presented. Your Plan A has failed, it's time for you to come up with Plan B. And also, you are pointing out Scriptures that Jesus Christ is a man affirms the Hypostatic Union position. As I have said before,

Logically, they cannot argue from the Hypostatic Union doctrinal position that "Jesus Christ is Man." Because they would be affirming and adding support to what we already believe about Jesus Christ. The common theme is demonstrated by pointing out Bible verses that Jesus Christ has claimed to be "a man." Or pointing out attributes of his "humanity" like being hungry, weeping, and lacking knowledge, etc. Then make bare assertions that he never claims to be "God." From their mindset its assumed that Jesus Christ being a man negates over him being God. Unfortunately, there would be no argument between both Hypostatic Unionists and Man-Only advocates in that particular regard. Even at the most basic level fundamentally. Since ultimately there would be a passable or just good enough acceptable agreement about Jesus Christ's humanity.

I have no need to address your misinterpretation of Scriptures or give a rebuttal. I've refuted your presupposition (that underlying philosophy) or preconceived assumption "that Jesus Christ is man negates him being God," which has mold, shape, and fashion your beliefs of who is Jesus Christ. So, everytime you have a discussion with a Hypostatic Unionist, your under that assumption and it has influenced the way you interpret Scriptures and not from the author's original intent. That assumption has also caused you to discuss in a fallacious manner too. Your Unitarian's leaders didn't teach you that you would have to negate the whole conjunction G ^ M to ~(G ^ M). The negated conjunction as a whole "It is not the case that Jesus Christ is both God and Man" is something that most Man-Only advocates doesn't want to negate that the De Morgan Laws demands. If that was the case, then they would be negating that "Jesus Christ is man" too, otherwise, the logical conjunction that "Jesus Christ is both God and Man" stand as true.
Simply put, human nature and the divine nature are contradictory. If at any point Jesus has a nature that God does not have then he is not God. The greatest truths are simple in final analysis. Was Jesus ever tempted (to sin?) If the answer is yes, according to scripture, the temptation to sin is a spiritual condition, not a matter of the flesh, or else temptation would be irrelevant to sin which in turn leads to spiritual death.

Just was tempted to sin, in every way, as a regular human is. God cannot be tempted to sin. Simply put, your so-called logic is nonsense. Go back to the drawing board.

Hebrews 4
15For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who was tempted in every way that we are, yet was without sin.

James 1
13When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone. 14But each one is tempted when by his own evil desires he is lured away and enticed. 15Then after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.
 
Since the Albigenses heretics were Manichaens, for whom there were two ultimate sources of the universe, one a good principle and the other an evil one, apostolic Lateran council declared the absolute oneness of God, who is at the same time Triune:

We firmly believe and profess without qualification that there is only one true God, eternal, immense, unchangeable, incomprehensible, omnipotent, and indescribable, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; three persons but one essence and a substance or nature that is wholly simple.

The Father is from no one; the Son is from the Father only; and the Holy Spirit is from both the Father and the Son equally. God has no beginning; He always is, and always will be. The Father is the progenitor, the Son is the begotten, the Holy Spirit is proceeding. They are all one substance, equally great, equally all-powerful, equally eternal. They are the one and only principle of all things – Creator of all things visible and invisible, spiritual and corporeal, who, by His almighty power, from the very beginning of time has created both orders of creatures in the same way out of nothing, the spiritual or angelic worlds and the corporeal or visible universe.

Blessed forever be the most holy Trinity!
 
Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

How can a mere man born centuries later make such statements?

Was it not at mount Sinai that God gathered them?

Exodus 6:7
And I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the Lord yourGod, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.

Jesus Christ eternal God of our fathers!
 
1 Jn 1:2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

Only God existed in the beginning
 
Witnesses of Jesus Christ acts 1:8

Ignatius of Antioch
“[T]o the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God” (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]).

“For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit” (ibid., 18:2).

Justin Martyr
“We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein” (First Apology 13:5–6 [A.D. 151]).

Theophilus of Antioch
“It is the attribute of God, of the most high and almighty and of the living God, not only to be everywhere, but also to see and hear all; for he can in no way be contained in a place. . . . The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom” (To Autolycus 2:15 [A.D. 181]).

Irenaeus
“For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, the Father Almighty . . . and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit” (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]).

Tertullian
“We do indeed believe that there is only one God, but we believe that under this dispensation, or, as we say, oikonomia, there is also a Son of this one only God, his Word, who proceeded from him and through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made. . . . We believe he was sent down by the Father, in accord with his own promise, the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father and the Son, and in the Holy Spirit” (Against Praxeas 2 [A.D. 216]).

“And at the same time the mystery of the oikonomia is safeguarded, for the unity is distributed in a Trinity. Placed in order, the three are the Father, Son, and Spirit. They are three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in being, but in form; not in power, but in kind; of one being, however, and one condition and one power, because he is one God of whom degrees and forms and kinds are taken into account in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (ibid.).

“Keep always in mind the rule of faith which I profess and by which I bear witness that the Father and the Son and the Spirit are inseparable from each other, and then you will understand what is meant by it. Observe now that I say the Father is other [distinct], the Son is other, and the Spirit is other. This statement is wrongly understood by every uneducated or perversely disposed individual, as if it meant diversity and implied by that diversity a separation of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” (ibid., 9).

“Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent persons, who are yet distinct one from another. These three are, one essence, not one person, as it is said, ‘I and my Father are one’ [John 10:30], in respect of unity of being not singularity of number” (ibid., 25).

Origen
“For we do not hold that which the heretics imagine: that some part of the being of God was converted into the Son, or that the Son was procreated by the Father from non-existent substances, that is, from a being outside himself, so that there was a time when he [the Son] did not exist” (The Fundamental Doctrines 4:4:1 [A.D. 225]).

“For it is the Trinity alone which exceeds every sense in which not only temporal but even eternal may be understood. It is all other things, indeed, which are outside the Trinity, which are to be measured by time and ages” (ibid.).

Hippolytus
“The Word alone of this God is from God himself, wherefore also the Word is God, being the being of God” (Refutation of All Heresies 10:29 [A.D. 228]).

Pope Dionysius
“Next, then, I may properly turn to those who divide and cut apart and destroy the most sacred proclamation of the Church of God, making of it [the Trinity], as it were, three powers, distinct substances, and three godheads. . . . [Some heretics] proclaim that there are in some way three gods, when they divide the sacred unity into three substances foreign to each other and completely separate” (Letter to Dionysius of Alexandria 1 [A.D. 262]).

“Therefore, the divine Trinity must be gathered up and brought together in one, a summit, as it were, I mean the omnipotent God of the universe. . . . It is blasphemy, then, and not a common one but the worst, to say that the Son is in any way a handiwork [creature]. . . . But if the Son came into being [was created], there was a time when these attributes did not exist; and, consequently, there was a time when God was without them, which is utterly absurd” (ibid., 1–2).

“Neither, then, may we divide into three godheads the wonderful and divine unity. . . . Rather, we must believe in God, the Father Almighty; and in Christ Jesus, his Son; and in the Holy Spirit; and that the Word is united to the God of the universe. ‘For,’ he says, ‘The Father and I are one,’ and ‘I am in the Father, and the Father in me’” (ibid., 3).

Gregory the Wonderworker
“There is one God. . . . There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abides ever” (Declaration of Faith [A.D. 265]).

Sechnall of Ireland
“Hymns, with Revelation and the Psalms of God [Patrick] sings, and does expound the same for the edifying of God’s people. This law he holds in the Trinity of the sacred Name and teaches one being in three persons” (Hymn in Praise of St. Patrick 22 [A.D. 444]).

Patrick of Ireland
“I bind to myself today the strong power of an invocation of the Trinity—the faith of the Trinity in unity, the Creator of the universe” (The Breastplate of St. Patrick 1 [A.D. 447]).

“[T]here is no other God, nor has there been heretofore, nor will there be hereafter, except God the Father unbegotten, without beginning, from whom is all beginning, upholding all things, as we say, and his Son Jesus Christ, whom we likewise to confess to have always been with the Father—before the world’s beginning. . . . Jesus Christ is the Lord and God in whom we believe . . . and who has poured out on us abundantly the Holy Spirit . . . whom we confess and adore as one God in the Trinity of the sacred Name” (Confession of St. Patrick 4 [A.D. 452]).

Augustine
“All the Catholic interpreters of the divine books of the Old and New Testaments whom I have been able to read, who wrote before me about the Trinity, which is God, intended to teach in accord with the Scriptures that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are of one and the same substance constituting a divine unity with an inseparable equality; and therefore there are not three gods but one God, although the Father begot the Son, and therefore he who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, himself, too, coequal to the Father and to the Son and belonging to the unity of the Trinity” (The Trinity1:4:7 [A.D. 408]).

Fulgence of Ruspe
“See, in short you have it that the Father is one, the Son another, and the Holy Spirit another; in Person, each is other, but in nature they are not other. In this regard he says: ‘The Father and I, we are one’ (John 10:30). He teaches us that one refers to their nature, and we are to their Persons. In like manner it is said: ‘There are three who bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit; and these three are one’ (1 John 5:7)” (The Trinity 4:1–2 [c. A.D. 515]).

“But in the one true God and Trinity it is naturally true not only that God is one but also that he is a Trinity, for the reason that the true God himself is a Trinity of Persons and one in nature. Through this natural unity the whole Father is in the Son and in the Holy Spirit, and the whole Holy Spirit, too, is in the Father and in the Son. None of these is outside any of the others; because no one of them precedes any other of them in eternity or exceeds any other in greatness, or is superior to any other in power” (The Rule of Faith 4 [c. A.D. 523).
 
1 Jn 1:2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.
1 John 1:1,2 refers to what the disciples saw, heard, and touched. They weren't there at the literal beginning of creation to see or hear anything. This refers to the beginning of the church that began some ~2,000 or so years ago after Jesus was born, became a man, and received God's anointing; the disciples were there for the beginning of this:

Acts 10
37You yourselves know what has happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee with the baptism that John proclaimed: 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how Jesus went around doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, because God was with Him.
Only God existed in the beginning
Correct, but Jesus was not there. This is why there are no quotes by Jesus in the Old Testament or examples of him doing anything. Your premise does not support your conclusion.
 
1 John 1:1,2 refers to what the disciples saw, heard, and touched. They weren't there at the literal beginning of creation to see or hear anything. This refers to the beginning of the church that began some ~2,000 or so years ago after Jesus was born, became a man, and received God's anointing; the disciples were there for the beginning of this:

Acts 10
37You yourselves know what has happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee with the baptism that John proclaimed: 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how Jesus went around doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, because God was with Him.

Correct, but Jesus was not there. This is why there are no quotes by Jesus in the Old Testament or examples of him doing anything. Your premise does not support your conclusion.
Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

Only God existed in the beginning
Jesus is God

To reject the revelation of Jesus Christ (dogma, creeds, decree’s of apostolic councils) is to reject Christ!
 
You ignored this post? Wonder why?

Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

How can a mere man born centuries later make such statements?

Was it not at mount Sinai that God gathered them?

Exodus 6:7
And I will take you to me for a people, and Iwill be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the Lord yourGod, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.

Jesus Christ eternal God of our fathers!
 
Only Christ has authority to establish the church! Matt 16:18-19
One church! Jn 10:16 All others are sects “full of errors” “the tradition of men”! The new covenant Church is the eternal city of God! Household of faith! The pillar and ground of TRUTH! 1 Tim 3:15 Founded by Christ alone! Matt 16:18 on Peter and the apostles! Eph 2:20 Lk 22:29

The 30,000 sects (the tradition of men) having no authority at all! And holding and teaching contrary and new doctrines that oppose the Christian faith that was revealed by Christ and taught by holy mother church! Matt 28:19

The sects of the Arian heresy are rigorist fundamentalists not the one true church founded by Christ!
Jn 16:10 one flock! One shepherd!
 
Through my many years of Hypostatic Union discussions. The most famous of them all is a topic on contradictions. And the majority of them that bring up contradictions doesn't know what the Hypostatic Union doctrine actually teaches. Nor do they know how to define a negation or even know how to negate a logical conjunction. Its almost like they read a Wikipedia article online or some kind of anti-Trinity article, and then, automatically think they are masters in the discipline of logic.

Simply put, human nature and the divine nature are contradictory. If at any point Jesus has a nature that God does not have then he is not God.

Imagine that. You are still making the same fallacious argument that I've refuted. The only difference is that you reworded it, but it's the same concept, nevertheless. Your original fallacious argument "Jesus Christ is a man negates him being God." Now, instead of using "man negates God" you switch it to "human nature negates Divine Nature." You still haven't demonstrated a negated conjunction. Maybe you should simply admit that you don't know how.

The Hypostatic Union teaches a "union" of two natures by the Person of the Son. There is not an additional nature added to the Divine Nature. I'm assuming you want to represent the doctrine correctly regardless of what your Unitarian leaders told you. Anyways, It is correct to say that the "human nature" is not the "Divine Nature;" some Unitarians mistakenly assume that the "human nature" is a negation of the "Divine Nature," i.e. they erroneously make it mean "not God". They are applying the LNC (which is not how you negate a logical conjunction) from the phrase "both God and Man" and excluding out "man" and replacing it with "not God," the arriving at an invalid logical form and distorting the meaning and logical conjunction altogether. So, what they have done was restrict and isolate the conjunct G from the whole conjunction and simply ignore the conjunct M out of the equation.

The problem is that some Unitarians are committing the fallacy of equivocation by changing the phraseology's definition in the logical conjunction form, "both God and Man" with "God and not God" it creates ambiguity and vagueness from the original meaning and of the Hypostatic Union framework. Other Unitarians take it even further by replacing "man" or "not God" with some kind of synonymous words. This leads to the fallacy of accent by altering the meaning of a phrase/words, sentence, or the entire idea through a changed emphasis. That is how Unitarians are coming up with an invalid logical form, changing the syntax, and coming up with a whole different nuance, or a subtle distinction/variation of the original meaning in the phrase.

Just was tempted to sin, in every way, as a regular human is. God cannot be tempted to sin. Simply put, your so-called logic is nonsense. Go back to the drawing board.

This is very weak. Wayne Grudem, "Systematic Theology" which states: "Scriptures does not tell us that "Jesus was tempted" and that "Jesus was not tempted" ...The Bible tells us that "Jesus was tempted" and "Jesus was fully Man" and "Jesus was fully God" and "God cannot be tempted". This combination of teachings from Scriptures... he could be tempted in one sense and yet, in another sense, not be tempted" (p. 538). Because Jesus has two different distinctive natures that are not in the same sense. It would be a category mistake. Being tempted is not overlapping and concurring into the Divine Nature. Jesus as a man is tempted according to the human nature only, but he cannot be tempted by evil as God according to the Divine Nature too.

The idea of "in the same sense " would be like flipping a coin once and tails came out on the same side-of-heads. You say, "heads" and I say, "No, tails" when it's obviously it landed on the heads side. But can tails literally overlap and concur on the same side-of-heads? Of course not, its a category mistake, tails do not belong to the same side-of-heads, or it would be against the natural structural framework of the coin itself, and a flat-out contradiction. Both heads and tails have their own respective sides and not the same sense, nor are they concurring and overlapping on each other side. So, a coin, cannot be both heads, not heads in the same sense.
 
Last edited:
Simply put, human nature and the divine nature are contradictory. If at any point Jesus has a nature that God does not have then he is not God. The greatest truths are simple in final analysis. Was Jesus ever tempted (to sin?) If the answer is yes, according to scripture, the temptation to sin is a spiritual condition, not a matter of the flesh, or else temptation would be irrelevant to sin which in turn leads to spiritual death.

Just was tempted to sin, in every way, as a regular human is. God cannot be tempted to sin. Simply put, your so-called logic is nonsense. Go back to the drawing board.

Hebrews 4
15For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who was tempted in every way that we are, yet was without sin.

James 1
13When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone. 14But each one is tempted when by his own evil desires he is lured away and enticed. 15Then after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.
Again you ignor Christ is true God and true man

Tempted in his human nature
 
Again, you ignore Christ is true God and true man

Tempted in his human nature

That's what most Unitarians do. The poster is superimposing Unitarianism into the Trinity and Hypostatic Union frameworks.
 
Still ignored?

Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

How can a mere man born centuries later make such statements?

Was it not at mount Sinai that God gathered them?

Exodus 6:7
And I will take you to me for a people, and Iwill be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the Lord yourGod, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.

Jesus Christ eternal God of our fathers!
 
Again you ignor Christ is true God and true man

Tempted in his human nature
True God and True Man? Can they be separated from one another with God being a man independent of being God? Curious what your perspective is here.
 
Last edited:
Still ignored?

Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

How can a mere man born centuries later make such statements?

Was it not at mount Sinai that God gathered them?
Almost all of the Old Testament prophets were martyred, including Jesus, John the Bapist, most of the original disciples, Stephen, many of the early church fathers and writers, and too many to count from the rank-and-file church of history. Some of it's scripture and some of it is passed down by tradition. Everyone who has looked into it knows this.
Exodus 6:7
And I will take you to me for a people, and Iwill be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the Lord yourGod, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.

Jesus Christ eternal God of our fathers!
Can you exegete that for me please. If you do that, I want to show you something about the "God of our fathers."
 
Last edited:
True God and True Man? Can they be separated from one another with God being a man independent of being God? Curious what your perspective is here.
No they are united in one divine person
 
Again you ignor Christ is true God and true man

Tempted in his human nature
Well, one way to look at it is they didn't record something like "Jesus was tempted in every way as we are, but don't worry he's God so he can't sin." It would have paid tremendously to be explicit and direct about this.

They did say Jesus has a divine nature and that he was filled with the Deity therefore (most) Unitarians agree.

Then on the other hand, I am probably paraphrasing slightly, but Peter said "You may become partakers of the divine nature..." and Paul said "You may be filled with the fullness of God..." That doesn't isolate something about Jesus that makes him God if others can have it.
 
Well, one way to look at it is they didn't record something like "Jesus was tempted in every way as we are, but don't worry he's God so he can't sin." It would have paid tremendously to be explicit and direct about this.

They did say Jesus has a divine nature and that he was filled with the fullness of God therefore (most) Unitarians agree.

Then on the other hand, I am probably paraphrasing slightly, but Peter said "You may become partakers of the divine nature..." and Paul said "You may be filled with the fullness of God..." That doesn't isolate something about Jesus that makes him God if others can have it.
You already debunked their triune god doctrine over and over yet they keep repeating the same thing over and over.
 
Back
Top