Trinity DebateTrinity debate
You should ask yourself that question. I noticed in your list of the attributes of God you left out the attribute of being "omnipresent". Again, you have side-stepped the defining issue of the fallacy of the trinity doctrine. You have plainly stated that an omnipresent Spirit Son lost or put aside that attribute to become a man which is an impossibility unless the Son was a pre-existent created being not co-equal with the Father. What you stated above plainly proves the Son did not pre-exist as the Son but the ONE omnipresent Spirit of God took on the form of a man thus the Son (human form of God) was made - came into existance - received being. The thing you keep mixing up is the distinction between the two forms of the ONE God. What we are discussing is simply the relationship between the Spirit form of God (Father) and the human form of God (Son). How can you say God the Father did not become flesh? Again the only distinction is God the Father (Spirit) defines His role as God manifest in the flesh - the human form of Himself, as the Son. That definition in itself tells us that the Father pre-existed the form of the Son. A "father" always pre-exists his "son". If God manifested Himself as "Angel of the Lord" as He did in the O.T. as in the case with Jacob; yes, the Jews would had seen a visible form but that form could not take on the atonement for sins since only a sinless sacrifice of a fully human man could do that. God did not change any of His attributes to manifest Himself from the invisible God to the visible God. He simply manifested Himself in a form of a fully human man and called that form the "Son". Just like when He manifested Himself in angelic form in the O.T. He called that form "Angel of the Lord". What you said here is completely irrelevent. Again, you have denied the attribute of "omnipresent". If that attribute is absent then a pre-existent Son does not remain God. The only way God can maintain His attribute of being omnipresent is if He remains existing as omnipresent Spirit while at the same time exists in human form, period. The only Divine Jesus that came down from heaven was the ONE omnipresent Spirit manifest as God in the flesh. Again what you stated here proves nothing of a trinity nor of a pre-existed Son. The ONE who was pre-existent was the ONE omnipresent Spirit of God. You must not read any of my posts for I have fully explained the issues over and over and over again. Jesus as a man (human form) had all the attributes of a man including: flesh, blood, bones, and a human spirit (soul). And if any of those human attributes are missing then He would not be a human. As a man Jesus was fully limited in that form. All the Divine attributes expressed in Jesus were those of the Father only. So what we have then is Jesus as a man but with a dual nature of God and man together. So whenever Jesus spoke He spoke out of either His Divine nature (Father) or out of His human nature (Son). There is no mention of a Divine Son nature. And for you to say, "I HUMAN JESUS came down from heaven..." makes no sense at all even from a trinity point of view. For here you said a human Jesus existed in heaven? The verse could read "I THE ONE OMNIPRESENT GOD came down from heaven, not to do mine own will [as the human form of the Son] but the will of [the ONE omnipresent Spirit God]..." Jesus as a man had a human will the same as any other human would. This simply states when God manifested as a man He did not come to earth in that form to be on a vacation to try out feeling human but came with a definite plan and purpose which was to become the "Lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the world". The human nature of Jesus was fully submitted to the Divine nature of the Father within and the omnipresent Spirit of the Father in heaven. The human spirit of Jesus was inherited from Mary - the Adam side, and His Divine nature was inherited from the ONE omnipresent Spirit God - Father. Thus God did not manifest in the flesh to do the will of Mary's human side but the will of the Father, His Divine side. "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." This verse agains proves that Jesus as man was fully limited as a man and knew only what the Father revealed to Him as a man. If the Son was a pre-existed omnipresent Spirit like the Father and co-equal in all attributes He would know the same things as the Father for the pre-existent Son would also be "All-Knowing" as co-equal. Again this proves the Son did not and could not pre-exist as a co-equal member of a trinity. God in being "All-Knowing" knows the begining and the ending. A pre-existed Son if co-equal would also have that same knowledge. So here is another Divine attribute that you ommitted from your list that further proves the fallacy of the trinity. So what the trinity claims is not only a pre-existed Son lost His Divine attribute of being omnipresent but also had His memories erased as well from being "All-Knowing". What is so insane is that you admitted that God cannot change and yet to make the trinity fit God must change His Divine attributes of being "omnipresent" and "all-knowing". Again, for God to manifest Himself from an invisible form to a reduced visible form is not changing any Divine attributes but maintains His Divine attributes. In the case of the Sonship, God the Father was still "all knowing" as He indwelt the human form and still "omnipresent" as He dwelt within that form and also co-existed outside that form in heaven. You cannot say that for a fabricated pre-existed Son. Jesus Himself said all the works He did - all the miracles, were the works of the Father within Him. The Son had no supernatural powers of His own. Because the Son is the human form of God who had a definite beginning in this world - not from outside this world. I had previously quoted from Hebrews 1:1-3 on this thread and what you quoted above is an extension of that same text. That whole text from verses 1-13 simply is explaining how God the ONE omnipresent Spirit has transfered all His power and authority to the reduced visible form of Himself which is the Son. Again this proves the Son did not have full power and authority previously which goes back to the fact if the Son if He pre-existed would already have all those attributes. I thought you said God does not change? Then why does God have to transfer all that power to a co-eternal and co-equal person in a trinity? Obviously, the Son did not share any of those attributes either. You really do not know who God is at all. You quoted a verse out of context without taking in account the full passage of Scriptures verses 1-13. Verse 2 states the subject of the whole text which is "[the Son]...whom He [the Father] hath appointed heir of all things...". An heir is someone who inherits something they did not previously have from someone else. In this case, the Son (visible form) is the heir of the power and authority transfered from the Father (invisible omnipresent Spirit form). Verse 4 states that the Son "being made so much better than the angels" which proves again the Son was a created manifest form of God not co-eternal. Anyone with adult level reading comprehension should be able to understand those Scriptures in the context they are meant to be understood. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame