ECT Our triune God

[Arsenios]

One Hundred Scriptural Arguments for the Unitarian Faith

Unitarian Christians believe Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and the Saviour of men. They believe in the divinity of his mission and in the divinity of his doctrines. They believe that the Gospel which he proclaimed came from God; that the knowledge it imparts, the morality it enjoins, the spirit it breathes, the acceptance it provides, the promises it makes, the prospects it exhibits, the rewards it proposes, the punishments it threatens, all proceed from the Great Jehovah. But they do not believe that Jesus Christ is the Supreme God. They believe that, though exalted far above all other created intelligences, he is a being distinct from, inferior to, and dependent upon, the Father Almighty. For this belief they urge, among other reasons, the following arguments from the Scriptures.

1. Because Jesus Christ is represented by the sacred writers to be as distinct a being from God the Father as one man is distinct from another. “It is written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one who bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me,” John 8:17, 18.

2. Because he not only never said that himself was God, but, on the contrary, spoke of the Father, who sent him, as God, and as the only God. “This is life eternal, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent,” John 17:3. This language our Saviour used in solemn prayer to “his Father and our Father.”

3. Because he is declared, in unnumbered instances, to be the Son of God. “And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” Matt. 3:17. Can a son be coeval and the same with his father?

4. Because he is styled the Christ, or the anointed of God. “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power,” Acts 10:38. Is he who anoints the same with him who is anointed?

5. Because he is represented as a Priest. “Consider the ….High-Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus,” Heb. 3:1. The office of a priest is to minister to God. Christ, then, as a priest, cannot be God.

6. Because Christ is Mediator between the “One God,” and “men.” “For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,” 1 Tim. 2:5.

7. Because, as the Saviour of men, he was sent by the Father. “And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. 1 John 4:14.

8. Because he is an Apostle appointed by God. “Consider the Apostle,…Christ Jesus, who was faithful to him that appointed him,” Heb. 3:1, 2.

9. Because Christ is represented as our intercessor with God. “It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us,” Rom. 8:34.

10. Because the head of Christ is God. “I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of every woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God,” 1 Cor. 11:3.

11. Because, in the same sense in which we are said to belong to Christ, Christ is said to belong to God. “And ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s,” 1 Cor. 3:23.

12. Because Christ says, “My father is greater than all,” John 10:29. Is not the father, then greater than the son?

13. Because he affirms, in another connection, and without the least qualification, “My Father is greater than I,” John 14:28

14. Because he virtually denies that he is God, when he exclaims, “Why callest thou me Good? There is none good but one, that is God,” Matt. 19:17.

15. Because our Saviour, after having said, “I and my Father are one,” gives his disciples distinctly to understand that he did not mean one substance, equal in power and glory, but one only in affection and design, &c; as clearly appears from the prayer he offers to his Father in their behalf, –“that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us,” John 17:21

16. Because the Father is called the God of Christ as he is the God of Christians. “Jesus saith unto her, ….Go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to my God and your God,” John 20:17.

17. Because an Apostle says of God, in distinction from the “Lord Jesus Christ,” that He is the “only Potentate,” and that He “only hath immortality,” 1 Tim. 6:15, 16.

18. Because it is the express declaration of the same Apostle, that the Father is the one God, and there is none other. “Though there be that are called Gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things,” 1 Cor. 8:5, 6.

19. Because the power which Christ possessed was, as he affirmed, given to him. “All power is given unto me,” &c., Matt. 28:18.

20. Because he positively denies himself to be the author of his miraculous works, but refers them to the Father, or the holy spirit of God. “The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works,” John 14:10. “If I cast out devils by the spirit of God,” &c., Matt. 12:28.

21. Because he distinctly states, that these works bear witness, not to his own power, but that the Father had sent him, John 5:36.

22. Because he expressly affirms that the works were done, not in his own, but in his Father’s name, John 10:25.

23. Because he asserts, that “him hath God the Father sealed,” i.e. to God the Father he was indebted for his credentials, John 6:27.

24. Because he declares that he is not the author of his own doctrine. “My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me,” John 7:16, 17.

25. Because he represents himself as having been instructed by the Father. “As my Father hath taught me, I speak these things,” John 8:28.

26. Because he refers invariablly to the Father as the origin of the authority by which he spoke and acted. “The Father hath given to the Son authority,” & c., John 5:26, 27.

27. Because he acknowledges his dependence on his Heavenly Father for example and direction in all his doings. “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do,” John 5:19. “The Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth” John 5:20.

28. Because he says “I seek not mine own glory; but I honor my Father,” John 8:49, 50.

29. Because he declares, “If I honor myself, my honor is nothing: it is my Father that honoreth me,” John 8:54.

30. Because an Apostle declares, that in Christ dwelt all fullness, because it so pleased the Father, Col. 1:19.


Read on --http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/100-scriptural-arguments-for-the-unitarian-faith

Proving Son of God without Mother,
and son of man without father...

Fully human...
Disregarding (kenosis) the fact that He is also...
Fully God...

No small matter...

Arsenios

 

[patrick jane]

I'm kinda jumping into this conversation, but you appear to suffer from the same spirit of the western concept you write about. You appear to also be reading out of the Prophets and into Plato.

As the Greek understanding of hypostasis has no meaning or bearing what so ever in the Hebraic culture that Jesus and his followers lived and taught in. The Greek and Hebrew cultures did not share belief systems. They are not compatible! The further away from the Hebrew culture Christianity spread the more world views of the new believers came into being confusing the original message meant to be taught. By infusing Greek thought into Hebrew scripture, you get a false belief system that lacks Hebraic truth.

I apologize if I'm not understanding you.

Paul

what is your basis of faith ? what are you actually saying, for dummies like me ? -


View attachment 19491

 

[Arsenios]

I'm kinda jumping into this conversation, but you appear to suffer from the same spirit of the western concept you write about. You appear to also be reading out of the Prophets and into Plato.

As the Greek understanding of hypostasis has no meaning or bearing what so ever in the Hebraic culture that Jesus and his followers lived and taught in. The Greek and Hebrew cultures did not share belief systems. They are not compatible! The further away from the Hebrew culture Christianity spread the more world views of the new believers came into being confusing the original message meant to be taught. By infusing Greek thought into Hebrew scripture, you get a false belief system that lacks Hebraic truth.

I apologize if I'm not understanding you.

Paul

That was a thoughtful response, Paul - Thank you...

The simple fact is that the OT had been translated already into the world-language of the Greek Speaking Roman Empire in the wake of Alexander the Great, and was in use by the Jews, both in Jerusalem and in the diaspora and throughout... So that when the Jewish originated Christianity arose and translated the work into Greek, they did so because the Greek terms were the ones most closely adapted to their Christian experience... That is why the prosopon-face and the hypostasis-person from the neo-Platonic Greek culture were employed - They did, in the common simplified terms of the Greek language then employed throughout the Empire, best DESCRIBE the facts of the experience of the Faith which those who were mature in it possessed...

Theology to these folks was not systematic and logically derived according to a thought process, but was instead descriptive of the Spiritual lives being lived in Christ... So that we can say that our salvation is totally up to us, and that we have no power whatsoever to attain it... We are but describing the struggle and its rewards and its pitfalls which we have experienced in common...

And it goes on and on... But the Greek Theater is the ancient source of meaning for the terms chosen to describe theological empirical reality of mask and person... And PPS is right that the hypostasis as person is radically more fundamental in this Greek usage than the shallow western usage of person to mean our fallen personalities...

Arsenios

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Thanks, PPS -

I keep looking for a some secure place to set an anchor, and perhaps a discussion of creation and time would help...

That would be edifying for all.

Have you digested the Hierotheos book yet?

I read slowly and comprehensively, so it began as I was reading; but it will, of course, be a lifetime of said digestion. It's in my mind, constantly being submersed into my heart. Changing me. As it should.

You are right to note that the western concept of person is shallow and weak compared to that of the Greek hypostasis/person...

Yes, this is what has so grieved me for lo these last 17 years after being lost without Christ because of it. So terrible was it, that I had spent my entire under-pew up-bringing with the engrained conceptual English shallow understanding that person = being, and thus the Son was indeed divine, but discrete from the Father as (a) God. A functional Tritheist, whose hope and faith was misplaced and tenuous at best; not holding fast the rejoicing in that hope, and with false faith from hearing another rhema.

Pistis, as a hypostasis, underlies trust/hope (elpis - the expectation of obtaining something promised in the future). Faith, which cometh by hearing the Rhema as the resulting flow of God speaking His pre-creational substance for existence (hypostasis), is the only thing that can break the hold of our created prosopon (with sin in its members, and in-worked into our hypostasis to determine the quality of the physis of our ousia) "having" our hypostasis, enabling us to reckon ourselves crucified with Christ and our hypostasis translated to be resurrected into His glorified prosopon, accomplishing our hypostatic union with the ascended hypostasis of the Son (with the sin-ridden prosopon and physis as our being (ousia) is left here in this grave of the cosmos as we yet physically live).

It is an irreducible primary in the Greek, and ultimately knowable only to God Who created us, whereas in the West, we understand it to only mean the mask of fallen personal emotional constructure we have become as we develop from childhood...

EXACTLY. And... with most also making the prosopon into an ousia, never distinguishing them; and thus in danger of not discerning the body and blood of our Lord. Once one is oblivious to the hypostasis as underlying substantial objective reality for subsistence as existence, the homogeneity of the whole man is sealed off from the renewing of the mind by other perceptions as the devices Satan. Everything becomes a soulical phenomenon of shallow prosopicism, with no "real substance". The hypostasis never becomes transformed, just manipulated by the "mask" for adapted appearance instead of actual regeneration from within.

For the Greeks, this mask is the prosopon, and referred to the large masks used by actors on ancient Greek stages where the great tragedies and comedies were enacted with great voices at great visual distances from large audiences...

In cognitive therapy terms for behavior modification... a protective personality. Scripturally... a whited sepulchure.

The idea was that the closer you got, the less believable the character being portrayed became... Modern HD does much the same - In movies, the slight blurring of the images produced by slower frames is an essential part of telling the story...

So that the Attic Greeks, in their plays, portrayed characters who were projected by images in masks, and the mask is the prosopon, and the actor is the hypostasis wearing the mask... The hypostasis is the person wearing the mask... The reality beneath the image being projected in the words and actions of the play...

This is the pre-Christian understanding of hypostasis, eikon, prosopon, and logoi... Derived from telling Homeric stories on grand stages...

Yes.

A Christian, of course, unites the face projected with the face of the actor in the genuine hypostasis of God's Image in Which He originally created us... And this is restored and then surpassed in the conjoining of the person being entered into Christ with the Person of Christ Himself...

Yes, again.

We regain the Garden, and then being joined with the One Who ascended the wood of the Cross, we now can safely as mature adults in Christ approach the Tree from which we were formerly banned... But we have to be baptized into the death of Christ and then make ourselves dead to temptations... And only then, as dead men walking, are we free from death in Him Who overcame the power of Death...

Yes, yes, yes. THIS.

And all this, of course, entails us being a New Creation IN Christ... And in becoming one with the One Who created time, and thereby living as co-creators of time... Which means that time is malleable, and creation ongoing with time as one of its created features...

So true. Our communion is with Him in trans-creational timelessness, bringing forth the highest blessedness of the creature (zoe life) that is His mind and will for us as we're IN His personified Logos as the functionality of the eternal and immutable faculty of His mind.

Foreknown "before" creation as we're communing "from" creation. Being thus predestinated to be conformed to the image of His dear Son. (Both Calvinists and Arminians representing but facets of this entire diamond.)

So there should be much worth discussing...

Arsenios

Indeed.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Question........

Was Christ in this body(form) when he created the heavens in which he resides, before or after he created them?

Genesis 2:7 KJV

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Daniel 3:25 KJV

25 He answered and said , Lo, I see four men loose , walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Question........

Was Christ in this body(form) when he created the heavens in which he resides, before or after he created them?

No. It was God's Logos that created, which proceeded forth (exerchomai) as the Son in created sempiternal heaven.

Genesis 2:7 KJV

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

This the individual account of creating the first man Adam, prior to subsequently recounting the generations of creation.

Daniel 3:25 KJV

25 He answered and said , Lo, I see four men loose , walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

This is the prosopon of the sempiternal Son, manifested in temporality but not Incarnate AS humanity.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

No. It was God's Logos that created, which proceeded forth (exerchomai) as the Son in created sempiternal heaven.

What do you mean by proceeded forth?

Poof or what?

Sorry if I seem stupid here.

This the individual account of creating the first man Adam, prior to subsequently recounting the generations of creation.

Yes I know.

I was using this as showing that the son must have had some bodily form to actually blow into Adam's nostrils.

Unless you believe God did it and not the Lord.

This is the prosopon of the sempiternal son, manifested in temporality but not Incarnate AS humanity.

Same as above.

I know.

I can hardly believe you of all people here felt the need to reiterate this to me.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

What do you mean by proceeded forth?

Poof or what?

Sorry if I seem stupid here.

Since Rhema is the substance of thought and speech as subject matter content, the thing thought and spoken about... and there was nothing (no thing) else but God, whose underlying reality of existence is His hypostasis... and the Rhema is the sword of the Spirit, with the Logos being the thrusting of that sword... then the Rhema is God's (singular) hypostasis, and the Logos thrust forth God's own hypostasis (when/as creation was instantiated into existence) as the Son... the express image of His hypostasis.

God is Self-phenomenological and Self-noumenological existence, with creation being noumenon as potentiality of existence. His Logos is both phenomenological and noumenological, and He exists AS phenomenogical and noumenological Spirit. This is His transcendent uncreated Self-Conscious Self-Existence.

When God spoke at the divine utterance, He expressed His Logos and exhaled His Breath (Spirit). This economy of action instantiated creation forth and God's phenomenological existence gave the noumenon of all creation phenomenological existence when/as His Logos and Pneuma proceeded forth/proceedeth (exerchomai/ekporeuomai) into creation "external" from God (though He pervades it by His Spirit).

The internal Logos is both phenomenological and noumenolgical; so in the noumenon of created sempiternity, the external Son is the noumenon of the Logos as the express image of God's hypostasis. The Holy Spirit is the noumenon of God's own Self as Spirit, pierced and divided asunder by the Logos out from His phenomenologicality.

This LOOKS like three hypostases if one doesn't account for the creation of heavenly sempiternity and begins post-procession and post-creation to represent procession and creation. But the Son is the processed Logos.

The procession can also LOOK like a creative act, which is the Arian misunderstanding for the same reason (not accounting for the created heavenly sempiternity). And the conception can LOOK like a creative act as well. But neither procession nor conception are inception. Each is a different manner of hypostasization while being outwardly represented in the distinctions of phenomenal existence while NOT being any form of Modalism.

Yes I know.

I was using this as showing that the son must have had some bodily form to actually blow into Adam's nostrils.

Unless you believe God did it and not the Lord.

Same as above.

I know.

I can hardly believe you of all people here felt the need to reiterate this to me.

Ha. I was surprised and confused at you asking. Now I think I understand why.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Since Rhema is the substance of thought and speech as subject matter content, the thing thought and spoken about... and there was nothing (no thing) else but God, whose underlying reality of existence is His hypostasis... and the Rhema is the sword of the Spirit, with the Logos being the thrusting of that sword... then the Rhema is God's (singular) hypostasis, and the Logos thrust forth God's own hypostasis (when/as creation was instantiated into existence) as the Son... the express image of His hypostasis.

God is Self-phenomenological and Self-noumenological existence, with creation being noumenon as potentiality of existence. His Logos is both phenomenological and noumenological, and He exists AS phenomenogical and noumenological Spirit. This is His transcendent uncreated Self-Conscious Self-Existence.

When God spoke at the divine utterance, He expressed His Logos and exhaled His Breath (Spirit). This economy of action instantiated creation forth and God's phenomenological existence gave the noumenon of all creation phenomenological existence when/as His Logos and Pneuma proceeded forth/proceedeth (exerchomai/ekporeuomai) into creation "external" from God (though He pervades it by His Spirit).

The internal Logos is both phenomenological and noumenolgical; so in the noumenon of created sempiternity, the external Son is the noumenon of the Logos as the express image of God's hypostasis. The Holy Spirit is the noumenon of God's own Self as Spirit, pierced and divided asunder by the Logos out from His phenomenologicality.

This LOOKS like three hypostases if one doesn't account for the creation of heavenly sempiternity and begins post-procession and post-creation to represent procession and creation. But the Son is the processed Logos.

The procession can also LOOK like a creative act, which is the Arian misunderstanding for the same reason (not accounting for the created heavenly sempiternity). And the conception can LOOK like a creative act as well. But neither procession nor conception are inception. Each is a different manner of hypostasization while being outwardly represented in the distinctions of phenomenal existence while NOT being any form of Modalism.



Ha. I was surprised and confused at you asking. Now I think I understand why.

I'll be back later, gotta go turn some wrenches on an an ol 73 ford truck I just about have road ready.

Peace.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Ha. I was surprised and confused at you asking. Now I think I understand why.

This.........

Epignosis

My favorite greek word....... Epignosis

Jesus he's my friend.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

ALL isms suck hind tit, including any form of trinitarianism.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Emphasis also on hind.

It releases milk, just not so much.

Peace.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

ALL isms suck hind tit, including any form of trinitarianism.

Virtually every belief or view is (or can be) an ism, though.

My concern is ascribing God more than one eternal divine sentient volitional consciousness (especially the Holy Spirit), regardless of labels.

Binitarianism is closer than mainline Trinitarianism.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Virtually every belief or view is (or can be) an ism, though.

My concern is ascribing God more than one eternal divine sentient volitional consciousness (especially the Holy Spirit), regardless of labels.

Binitarianism is closer than mainline Trinitarianism.

Okay.

I know we have to start working with something in these days.

But hey, let us..........

2 Peter 3:18 KJV

18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever . Amen.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Virtually every belief or view is (or can be) an ism, though.

My concern is ascribing God more than one eternal divine sentient volitional consciousness (especially the Holy Spirit), regardless of labels.

Binitarianism is closer than mainline Trinitarianism.

Yes, to get back on track of this thread, God uses more than one mode of communicating to us.

No hint of Modalism intended.:doh: lol

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Just caught yer rep.

Like I said.....

Peace Bro.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

I''m in a dang good mood tonight so let me end with this.......

Light 'n up

Last lyric of this song.


We got it easy, we oughta take it easy.

 

[patrick jane]

What do you mean by proceeded forth?

Poof or what?

Sorry if I seem stupid here.







Yes I know.

I was using this as showing that the son must have had some bodily form to actually blow into Adam's nostrils.

Unless you believe God did it and not the Lord.






Same as above.

I know.

I can hardly believe you of all people here felt the need to reiterate this to me.

not necessarily, you are limiting God's Power, Capability and Perfect Will. why would you assume that a "bodily" form (?) is required for "breathing" life into Adam's "nostrils" ? are you that dense ? pardon me, but that is kinda dumb - :help:


View attachment 19510

 

[Lon]

ALL isms suck hind tit, including any form of trinitarianism.

It is crude farm talk probably not appropriate for TOL. I really don't want this thread that uplifts our God and His Character to get basal either. Please refrain. Thank you.

I have appreciated your questions and open-ness to discussion, not derailing the thread up until this.

 

[Arsenios]

It is crude farm talk probably not appropriate for TOL. I really don't want this thread that uplifts our God and His Character to get basal either. Please refrain. Thank you.

I have appreciated your questions and open-ness to discussion, not derailing the thread up until this.

I don't think he meant anything CRUDE about it... Just descriptive... Cows have 4 udders which are milked, and the two in front give 3/4 of the milk, and the back two still give milk, but not very much... So when a calf gives suck, he feasts on the front teats, and only gets a little when suckling those in the back... 1'n'1 is a farmer/rancher, where "sucking hind tit" is a common emphatic way of saying "forsaking what is better or more for the sake of that which is less or worse"...

Now that he knows you were offended by it, I doubt you will hear it from him again...

Arsenios