Thanks, I’m glad you’ve given it some thought. If you are a reader, try the other thread I started. There is a 20-30 minute written sermonby Channing I have linked to and also posted (long). It is not hard reading, but he makes and develops a case that is important and worth the time. Comments are welcomed after you’ve read it, if you do.
Thanks Dave - so I gave it a read/skim through some things and thought it was quite interesting. Would agree with a lot of what he was saying and for the most part I think it agrees with what I previously posted. Still need to do a lot more research though.
I think this is such an important topic to get right, cuz what if we are worshiping someone who we shouldn’t give worship to. That would be quite the good job on Satan’s part in providing delusion to the masses. That’s why Im so adamant about properly interpreting scripture and testing EVERYTHING. If someone is confident on a topic in the bible and pushing that on me - Im way more skeptical about the issue. Having a background in the catholic faith and in evangelicalism turned out to help me in the end. Who would have thought 
Just out of curiosity and for the desire to find Truth, what are the reasons people have for saying that Jesus is God? Trying to look at it through a different way.
Well, other religions have various perspectives on Jesus. Look at how Islam, the Baha’i faith, Hinduism and Buddhist - view Jesus. And if you like one of their perspectives better, then feel free to join them. I have no issue with that.
Whether or not Jesus is God is contingent on what is meant by “God.”
Clearly Jesus is not the only true God, since in His prayer to God, He addressed His Father as “the only true God.” But He is God in the generic sense of the word and is thus fully divine, since He was begotten by God before all ages as God’s first act (as the early Christians taught). You are man because you were begotten by man; Jesus is God because He was begotten by God.
Both senses of “God” occur in John 1:1. In the beginning (of time), the Logos (who is Jesus) existed, and was with the God (true God) and was God in the generic sense as God’s only-begotten Son.
I found a interesting article today…from the Patheos’ Evangelical newsletter:
Again, regarding the idea of God as a Trinity:
Matthew 28:19
”Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,"2 Cor. 13:14
“The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.”
And as to what the early Christians believed about the co-eternal divinity of Jesus…
It is debatable what viewpoint was dominant regarding the Trinity before the first ecumenical council of the Church in 325 AD; but since that time, as far as I know, the predominant position among Christians has been that the Son is 'of the essence of the Father, God of God…very God of very God.’
Like Gregory of Nyssa (335-395), a universalist, I too believe God the Son is uncreated and eternal, as is God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit.
Jesus was “begotten” by God in the sense that the Father sent the Holy Spirit to impregnate the Virgin Mary, in order that the co-eternal Son could visit Creation in human form–so this was not “before all ages.”
Regarding Jesus being the co-eternal God the Son :
Isaiah 9:6 “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And He will be called …Mighty God….”
John 8:58-59 "‘I tell you the truth,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I AM!’ At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.”
John 10:30-33 "'I and the Father are one.’ Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, ‘I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?’ ‘We are not stoning you for any of these,’ replied the Jews, ‘but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.’”
John 20:27-29 “Then He said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.’ Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my GOD.’ Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’"
Romans 9:5 “…Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.” (ESV)
Romans 9:5 “…Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. (NKJV)
Those translations - and I wish we did not have to even have to worry about it - are not the benchmark. If they were ‘the’ translation, there would be no argument. But the fact is that they are nowhere near being unambiguous, and that, mixed with the many other big problems with the trin theories, makes the matter much less than transparent.
AS for big problems, just thought I’d mention that the OP points to them. I mean what the heck, noone will read it, but there it is anyway. 
A great question Paidion.
JOH 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
I am going to bring a whole new perspective to this age old subject. It’s a perspective I’ve come to over the years. I’d like others to just consider it as another opinion.
God is spirit according to John. That was His image/substance/form.
And when God created man ‘the Father’ was spirit, ‘the WORD’ was spirit and ‘the Holy Spirit’ was spirit. The WORD was not Jesus because the ‘body/flesh’ of Jesus was “***the WORD become flesh.***” If an apple became an orange we would never think of saying that the orange is an apple. The apple gave up being an apple to become an orange. And in this case “spirit” gave up being “spirit” to become “flesh” and flesh only.
Joh 1:14 "the WORD become flesh and dwelt among us."
The WORD/spirit gave up His ‘spirit form’ or His “equality with God” to become flesh like as a man…like Adam. The invisible WORD/spirit became the visible flesh/body of the triune man Jesus.
COL 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation;
Now Jesus, as a triune man, also had ‘a spirit’ dwelling within him FROM the Holy Spirit. And ‘that spirit’ was the holy spirit of CHRIST. It was the spirit which Jesus yielded back to the Father from the cross. He did not say "into thy hands I commit… ‘the Holy Spirit’, ‘Our Spirit’, or ‘Your Spirit’…but “my spirit”.
And the spirit of Christ which was in Jesus is what made Him “Jesus the Christ”. And it is the same holy spirit we receive when our spirit is “born anew” or “born from above”. When our spirit was born/regenerated into the spirit of Christ in us, scripture says our spirit joined to the Lord became “one spirit”.
1CO 6:17 But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.
I believe that it is when we become born again, that we become ‘after the flesh’ and ‘after spirit’ “brethren” of Christ.
HEB 2:17 Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect…,
The thing that made Jesus ‘son of man’ was 'the WORD made “sinful flesh” just like we His “brethren” have “in every respect” just like Jesus.
ROM 8:3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh,
And the thing that made Jesus the ‘son of God’ was the spirit of Christ. And it is that same spirit which makes us ‘sons of God’. It is also the same spirit which makes Jesus the spiritual head and us the many membered spiritual body of Christ on earth.
I’ll just stop here for feedback.
1 Like
Here’s a little nugget from early Christian apostles and believers:
We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.
Of course they did not have the advantage of of politically driven rhetoric a hundred years later, that had to invent words to convey almost unintelligible concepts.
(clip from the Nicene Creed. The Apostles creed is even ‘worse’:
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
Waaaay too simple, right?)
Dave, me no understand. I thought this 37 minute podcast you linked back in October 2015—
“podcast 108 – Dr. Robert M. Bowman Jr. on triadic New Testament passages – part 2”
—was the focus of your original post? I listened to it, and I certainly think that the Trinitarian guest, Dr. Bowman, went virtually unchallenged by the gracious Unitarian host. 
Also, regarding the various Bible verses offered to you that arguably reference a Trinity, you dismiss them by saying things like,
So what would be 'the’ definitive translation for you then, brother?
Forget it Hermano. Stay with what you’ve got. You haven’t listened enough to the host to even make that decision yet. I posted that as part of a fair and balanced debate; it’s not like I avoid the ‘other side’.
Do we have to battle on here? Are you offended?
I’m not really asking. You and I have agreed on many things in the past, I’m not going to let my interest in a fairly interesting subject come between us.
AS I’ve said maybe 50 times, I don’t think the answer to this is even that important to Christian bonds, Christian love or Christian witness.
Oh I see Bob is teed up with a comment…I’m gonna skeedaddle and not look back!!
I read it and I responded to your request to evaluate it, arguing it’s big problem is that the main basis evangelicals present is that Bible texts require it, but Channing engages none of them. Your response to the Biblical difficulties with Channing I presented was to skeedaddle and say, “I want to respond to you but I had other aims here completely.”
I respect you Dave, but I have just never really struggled with recognizing and accepting the Trinity–although I certainly don’t claim to understand it! 
As with my other disagreements with people on many different questions in this forum–tempers notwithstanding–I always benefit from reinvestigating why I believe what I believe, and being challenged by alternative viewpoints. So thank you.
This is the last I will post in this thread as I can foresee nothing but hurt feelings ahead. I’ve stated my case and I can’t really say anything else. I can poke holes in trin theory - and there are a number of them, not just yours, ok? - but we’ll end up in a stalemate with bad feelings. Don’t want that.
I wrote this to a friend concerning the matter:
" I have no desire to get into a squabble with you - I happen to like you and I happen to think you have sound instincts and good insights in most things.
Fighting over what will not be solved is, I have found, useless.
My hope was, in the thread with the long OP from Channing’s sermon, to lay a foundation from which we could have a basis for conversation. That was not to be; people won’t read a page of close reasoning, in general, especially if they have a tightly-held belief that they have inherited. Most trins have never even read a book on the Trinity, let alone opinions by their opponents. But they will defend it in soundbytes till the day they die. And between you and me, it does not matter.
The Father is infinite in wisdom, in power, in knowledge - I barely think we need two more persons in there, separate personalities , but maybe it doesn’t hurt to think in that manner either. There certainly is no lack in the Father, maker of heaven and earth. Is there?
Blessings on you brother, let’s go higher!
Dave"
For those folks here, who don’t like the historical creeds. How about trying your hand, at putting some creeds together - expressing YOUR Christian beliefs. It should be fun! 
Perhaps when the zombies of Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) finally arrive…I’ll ask them to do, the same thing.
Perhaps when folks were putting the creeds together…they were considering, the lowest common denominator of human intelligence…including the zombies, when they arrive!
As an aside…this article from today’s Guideposts newsletter, was interesting!
Dear Hillsage: from one of the newer kids on the block>>>>
Welcome!
I have traveled a few blocks now in the world of One who still manages to leave me with staggering breath and a mind (what is left) of little of Him I comprehend!
I seek to find the last digit of Pi, but alas, like His mighty Being there are more digits to discover.
I think the Hebrew echad has the meaning of compound unity. There is a union of glory associated within His Being that I believe cannot be articulated but in tidbits, very small tidbits!
Again, welcome to this wee corner of our Father’s world!
Ignatius (A.D. 30-107), a contemporary of Jesus, wrote the following near the end of chapter XI in his letter to the Magnesians:
These things [I address to you], my beloved, not that I know any of you to be in such a state
but, as less than any of you, I desire to guard you beforehand, that ye fall not upon the hooks of
vain doctrine, but that you may rather attain to a full assurance in Christ, who was begotten by the
Father before all ages, but was afterwards born of the Virgin Mary without any intercourse with
man.
Paidion, the idea of the Father begetting the Son in his divine nature enjoys no clear scriptural support. I affirm the Trinity as co-eternal—with no beginning, each Person underived, and co-equal.
I suggest that the subordination of one eternal person of the Trinity to another—as the incarnate Son to the Father, and the Spirit willing to be sent by them to continue the ministry of the Son on earth—is only seen in relation to the Creation and the divine plan of salvation, but not in the relationships within the Godhead alone. That is, the Trinity decided who would submit to whom, with those rôles of leader and follower only necessary for our sake.
(I hope that makes some kind of sense, even if you don’t agree with it 
)
Well, I…along with the historical creeds…The RC, EO and Protestant churches…and perhaps even, the up and coming zombies - of Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) - would agree with you.
Of course, I realize some here…would entertain “non-traditional, minority viewpoints” - regarding this very topic! I would welcome their vote and opinion!
