Unitarianism (Anti-Trinity)

[zackabba]

So, I was listening to a small debate between Dr. Michael Brown and Sir Anthony Buzzard
Search Results anthony buzzard : Line of Fire

My question is, how is unitarianism, stating that there is one being and person in God (the Father),
wrong?

 

[Scotth1960]

So, I was listening to a small debate between Dr. Michael Brown and Sir Anthony Buzzard
Search Results anthony buzzard : Line of Fire

My question is, how is unitarianism, stating that there is one being and person in God (the Father),
wrong?

Matthew 28:19 states that Christians are to be baptized in the name (singular) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (plural). Thus we have in this verse one God "the name" in three persons (the Trinity) "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit". God is not only the Father, or the Father alone. God is the Father, is the Son, and is the Holy Spirit. Unitarianism is heresy and is an attempt at a return to Judaism by people who still want to consider Christ to be their prophet and teacher in the NT. Judaism rejects the whole NT anyway. Unitarianism at least theoretically uses the NT, although it doesn't believe what the NT says when the NT says that "Jesus is LORD". Go figure!

 

[Crazy4GODword]

I do not know that sounds like a different belief....which it is

Trinity is one God being three beings, God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

the jewish religion believe that God is one being and is one God at the sometime....such as just FATHER by itself

Shalom

 

[DanuckInUSA]

It denies the existence of the Son and Spirit as individual identities.

 

[Scotth1960]

I do not know that sounds like a different belief....which it is

Trinity is one God being three beings, God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

the jewish religion believe that God is one being and is one God at the sometime....such as just FATHER by itself

Shalom

The Trinity is One God, One Being, in Three Persons. Three Persons. Not three beings. That would be tritheism, "three gods". There is only one God. But God exists in three distinct persons: Thus, "Let us make man in Our image, after our likeness ..." GENESIS 1:26, THE TRINITY IS THERE IN GENESIS. See also Genesis chapter 18. God bless you. God is one Divine Essence, one Divine Being, in Three Divine Persons. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[zackabba]

Matthew 28:19 was a later addition to the text, I believe (no scholar like James White or Michael Brown cite this in debate, nor anywhere else), Just as Mark 16:9-20.

This doesn't defeat the concept of the Trinity, but just wanted to point that out.

 

[Crazy4GODword]

The Trinity is One God, One Being, in Three Persons. Three Persons. Not three beings. That would be tritheism, "three gods". There is only one God. But God exists in three distinct persons: Thus, "Let us make man in Our image, after our likeness ..." GENESIS 1:26, THE TRINITY IS THERE IN GENESIS. See also Genesis chapter 18. God bless you. God is one Divine Essence, one Divine Being, in Three Divine Persons. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

you misunderstood me i meant HE IS ONE GOD IN THREE.....

 

[Pinemeadowsgeorge]

the trinity is a mystical thing that we would have no hope understanding without the Holy Spirit

 

[zackabba]

GENESIS 1:26, THE TRINITY IS THERE IN GENESIS. See also Genesis chapter 18. God bless you. God is one Divine Essence, one Divine Being, in Three Divine Persons. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

The Trinity isn't really mentioned in chapter 18 (the Lord is there, but the other two persons are angels)

Genesis 1:26 could be a reference to it, possibly.

 

[Scotth1960]

Matthew 28:19 was a later addition to the text, I believe (no scholar like James White or Michael Brown cite this in debate, nor anywhere else), Just as Mark 16:9-20.

This doesn't defeat the concept of the Trinity, but just wanted to point that out.

Wrong. Matthew 28:19 was in the original NT Bible. I BELIEVE the only clear case of addition to the NT is 1 John 5:7. The earliest Greek Byzantine manuscripts of the Greek NT do not have this verse, called the Joahnnine Comma. But maybe the verse is inspired: I can detect no heresy in the teaching, and it could be added to the NT without contradicting the inerrancy of the OT and NT Scriptures. It just ISN'T IN EVERY GREEK NT MANUSCRIPT. But as far as my knowledge of these matters goes, I have not heard any Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox scholar ever tell us that Matthew 28:19 was not in the original NT. That is liberal PROTESTANT BIAS and reflects SKEPTICISM that we have an INFALLIBLE, INERRANT NT BIBLE. We do have the inspired, holy Scriptures. We do know the truth. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[zackabba]

Wrong. Matthew 28:19 was in the original NT Bible. I BELIEVE the only clear case of addition to the NT is 1 John 5:7. The earliest Greek Byzantine manuscripts of the Greek NT do not have this verse, called the Joahnnine Comma. But maybe the verse is inspired: I can detect no heresy in the teaching, and it could be added to the NT without contradicting the inerrancy of the OT and NT Scriptures. It just ISN'T IN EVERY GREEK NT MANUSCRIPT. But as far as my knowledge of these matters goes, I have not heard any Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox scholar ever tell us that Matthew 28:19 was not in the original NT. That is liberal PROTESTANT BIAS and reflects SKEPTICISM that we have an INFALLIBLE, INERRANT NT BIBLE. We do have the inspired, holy Scriptures. We do know the truth. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

Um, how do you know that it was in the original NT Bible? Do you have the original manuscripts somewhere?

"That is liberal PROTESTANT BIAS and reflects SKEPTICISM that we have an INFALLIBLE, INERRANT NT BIBLE."

First of all, I'm conservative, just to clear that up.
Second, you yourself just said that 1 john 5:7 may have been added in.
Mark 16:9-20 definately was.
And I believe the end of John 7 was also.

Do we have an infallible, inerrant Bible?

Yes. The originals are perfect. The one we have now is the Word of God, but is not free from some additions.

These additions don't destroy any basic doctrines.

 

[zackabba]

And I'm trying to ask a question about Unitarianism, so please refrain from attacks on my Protestant faith.

Focus on the topic at hand.

 

[zackabba]

you misunderstood me i meant HE IS ONE GOD IN THREE.....

Hey, for future reference, let me just correct this for you.

He is One God, one being, in three persons. Three persons, one being. NOT One God in three. That makes it sound like "One God out of three,"
which I know you're not trying to say...well, I HOPE you're not trying to say!

God Bless

 

[Scotth1960]

And I'm trying to ask a question about Unitarianism, so please refrain from attacks on my Protestant faith.

Focus on the topic at hand.
Not all Protestants believe what Luther believed. But since all forms of Protestantism exist only because of what Martin Luther and John Calvin and the other key Protestant reformers did, we may question their faith if it is not the same faith as the "faith once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). Not all Protestants agree with this, but Luther had doubts about James, 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. We would have a shorter NT if Luther had been followed in this. Is it Protestant faith that the Spirit proceeds also "from the Son"? Sometimes, not all Protestants believe this, but MOST DO, PROBABLY. So, on the basis of Scripture, I reject this aspect of Protestantism based on John 15:26. Most Protestants get their interpretations of St. Paul from Martin Luther, John Calvin, or John Wesley, and Luther and Calvin especially got many of their wrong views from the WRONG VIEWS of AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. Thus much of Protestantism is just AUGUSTINIAN ERROR, and not the teaching of the NT! Take care! Anyway, why would any Protestant care about Unitarianism? I was a Protestant for many years, and I was never tempted to reject the Trinity. So Unitarianism is something you and I surely reject, YES? Protestantism is good in that it ACCEPTS THE TRINITY. It is wrong if it ACCEPTS THE FILIOQUE, and falls into the Augustinian error of SEMI-SABELLIANISM.

 

[Scotth1960]

Um, how do you know that it was in the original NT Bible? Do you have the original manuscripts somewhere?

"That is liberal PROTESTANT BIAS and reflects SKEPTICISM that we have an INFALLIBLE, INERRANT NT BIBLE."

First of all, I'm conservative, just to clear that up.
Second, you yourself just said that 1 john 5:7 may have been added in.
Mark 16:9-20 definately was.
And I believe the end of John 7 was also.

Do we have an infallible, inerrant Bible?

Yes. The originals are perfect. The one we have now is the Word of God, but is not free from some additions.

These additions don't destroy any basic doctrines.

I KNOW IT [MATTHEW 28:19] WAS IN THE ORIGINAL NT BIBLE BECAUSE THE GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH SAYS THAT IT WAS. THE CHURCH IS "THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF THE TRUTH" (I TIMOTHY 3:15), SO I LISTEN TO HER. THE ORIGINALS ARE NOT LOST. WE HAVE PERFECT COPIES OF THE ORIGINALS, SO WE HAVE THE ORIGINALS IN MANY COPIES OF THE GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH. SHE, SPEAKING GREEK, KNOWS WHAT GREEK MEANS AND WHAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL BIBLE. THE CHURCH FATHERS ALL HAD THE ORIGINAL TEXTS.

 

[wakeup]

Matthew 28:19 states that Christians are to be baptized in the name (singular) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (plural). Thus we have in this verse one God "the name" in three persons (the Trinity) "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit". God is not only the Father, or the Father alone. God is the Father, is the Son, and is the Holy Spirit. Unitarianism is heresy and is an attempt at a return to Judaism by people who still want to consider Christ to be their prophet and teacher in the NT. Judaism rejects the whole NT anyway. Unitarianism at least theoretically uses the NT, although it doesn't believe what the NT says when the NT says that "Jesus is LORD". Go figure!

1 JOHN5:7 FOR THERE ARE THREE THAT BEAR RECORD IN HEAVEN,THE FATHER , THE WORD AND
THE HOLY GHOST. GOD HAS HIS WORD LIKE WE HAVE OUR WORD. IN GODS WORD IS TRUTH.
THE HOLY SPIRIT( SPIRIT OF TRUTH ) SO THERE IS GOD, HIS WORD, AND TRUTH.
ONE GOD. I AM HE ,BESIDE ME THERE IS NO SAVIOUR. ISIAH 43:11.
.

 

[zackabba]

I KNOW IT [MATTHEW 28:19] WAS IN THE ORIGINAL NT BIBLE BECAUSE THE GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH SAYS THAT IT WAS. THE CHURCH IS "THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF THE TRUTH" (I TIMOTHY 3:15), SO I LISTEN TO HER. THE ORIGINALS ARE NOT LOST. WE HAVE PERFECT COPIES OF THE ORIGINALS, SO WE HAVE THE ORIGINALS IN MANY COPIES OF THE GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH. SHE, SPEAKING GREEK, KNOWS WHAT GREEK MEANS AND WHAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL BIBLE. THE CHURCH FATHERS ALL HAD THE ORIGINAL TEXTS.

I'm sorry to say, no, we don't have the original manuscripts. I go off what the Lord says, not what a church says.


Let me ask you a question, a serious one; why is the Father called Jesus's God?

 

[Crazy4GODword]

Hey, for future reference, let me just correct this for you.

He is One God, one being, in three persons. Three persons, one being. NOT One God in three. That makes it sound like "One God out of three,"
which I know you're not trying to say...well, I HOPE you're not trying to say!

God Bless

you also misunderstood me as well.....I was stating God is one being, in three persons....not three gods

 

[Scotth1960]

I'm sorry to say, no, we don't have the original manuscripts. I go off what the Lord says, not what a church says.


Let me ask you a question, a serious one; why is the Father called Jesus's God?

What the LORD says comes from the Church. Do you think the LORD sat down and wrote the Bible? No. His Church wrote the Bible. The Bible did not come down MAGICALLY FROM HEAVEN, and then was mysteriously deposited in your personal library. You got it from SOMEONE, and they got it from someone. Who were the original SOMEONES? The 12 Apostles? Who were their successors? The bishops of the post-NT Church. What was their language? Greek. And a few of them, in Latin, Syriac, and other ancient languages. You would not know what the Lord says without going by what some church says. Don't you understand that? The NT comes from the pillar and ground of the truth, the Church (1 TIMOTHY 3:15)? WHAT DO YOU DO WITH 1 TIMOTHY 3:15? DID THE NT WRITE ITSELF? OR WAS THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITTEN BY THE GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH? Peter, Paul, John, Andrew, and James, and all the other apostles of Christ were GREEK SPEAKING JEWS. Most of the apostles were Jews. They were orthodox (Orthodox), that is, they taught true faith. They were Greek-speakers, and thus the term "Greek Orthodox Church".

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

So, I was listening to a small debate between Dr. Michael Brown and Sir Anthony Buzzard
Search Results anthony buzzard : Line of Fire

My question is, how is unitarianism, stating that there is one being and person in God (the Father),
wrong?

It's not. All the original God-models were formulated with variations of maintaining Monotheism while including the Lord Jesus Christ. This was a long and varied process that was largely to refute and contrast against various forms of Gnosticism and both ancient and newer forms of Polytheism and Henotheism, as well as Pantheism and Panentheism.

Unitarianism, Binitarianism, Trinitarianism, Tritheism, Arianism, and Sabellianism were all well-developed conceptual understandings of the Hebrew Echad in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. By the 3rd century, there was conflict that ultimately led to the First Ecumenical Council in the eatly 4th century in Nicea (325AD). Some held to the Deity of Christ as a procreative act within the Virgin, differing on various issues regarding such as the nature of each "person's" substance. Others considered the overshadowing by the Holy Ghost to be a creative act similar to Adam in Eden, making Jesus fully man as non-ontological Deity by identity rather than by nature. Unitarianism is one of the latter, obviously.

Unis believe the Holy Spirit is simply the Spirit of God, since they hold that God is a singular entity. Jesus is a special-creation man by Virgin Birth, and His identity perfectly represents God; but He is not Deity by any sharing of Divine substance in His nature. Jesus was born as a man and died as a man; and He is now transended to heaven in a glorified body, delegated all Divine authority by God. But He is not God.

That's why Unis refer to "Jesus' God". He is a (glorified) man, and God is His God.

(Modern American Unis are predominantly NOT what I described above. They are Universalists who believe in Conditional Immortality, Annihilationism, and many varied other non-biblical teachings. Many are very New Age and even Occultish. The above would be describing "Biblical" Unitarianism.)