Yuku free message boards
Username or E-mail:
Password:
Forgot
Password?
Sign Up
Grab the Yuku app
Search:
RSS
Email
Virtual Yeshiva Discussion Forums
>
Counter-Missionary Forum
>
TRINITARIAN challenge to Protestant Christians
0 Points
Search this Topic:
«Prev
1
2
3
4
5
…
16
17
Next»
Jump
Add Reply
Forum Jump
Counter-Missionary Forum
Counter-Missionary Education
Hebrew Language Education
Noahide Forum - בני נח
Ask The Rabbi
Knowing Your Orchard
Weekly Parsha Discussion
General Judaism Forum
Responding to Islam Forum
<< Previous Topic
Next Topic >>
Re: TRINITARIAN challenge to Protestant Christians
Author
Comment
MalachiII
Re: Re: trinitarian challenge
#1
[-]
Posts
: 507
Tue, 4-Dec-07 11:43:52
Reply
Quote
More
My Recent Posts
ezAad wrote: ow IMV this is also the problem in your explanation of texts like Col.1, Rev. 3, John 17:3; from christian perspective Jesus is 'something completely new' (Jer.43:19; Jer.31:31;Isa.65:17).
Therefore he is called the 'firstborn of creation'; or 'the beginning'; and therefore Scripture does not say: Jesus is God (as like 'John Doe is God'); those Jewish writers Scripture knew better of course, they knew the first Commandment/Word of God. But he is the union of God and man, the beginning and the firstfruit of the New Creation, where justice rules, and where heaven and earth, Jew and gentile, God and man are united, and 'all things are gathered together in one' (Eph.1:10).
Malachi's response: Aad let's focus on "Firstborn of" and how the Church Father's understood it, because this is what this thread is about anyway.
I issue this challenge to you and to all the Trinitarians on this forum:
To attempt to defend your doctrine without the usage of your Biblically unprecedented definitions and philosophical ideas. Unitarians can defend their position and explantions every step of the way with the Hebrew Bible or GT, using its natural language and precedented meanings, Trinitarians simply can't, even to the extent of denying that the Son is an actual, literal son of G-d.
Let me demonstrate how one Trinitarian uses the definition of the Trinity to prove the Trinity in the light of concret proof otherwise:
Daniel Wallace, in his very theological grammar book, "Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics," admits that "first-born of all creation" is a legitimate rendering, but does not favor it because "the idea would be that Jesus was part of creation, i.e., a created being. But Paul makes it clear throughout this epistle that Jesus Christ is the supreme Creator, God in the flesh." (page 12
Therefore, rather than accepting what Colossians 1:15 literally says and building his theology on that, Wallace (and Trinitarians in general) force the conclusions of their theology upon Colossians 1:15. Just like you are doing Aad.
As they see it, even though Colossians 1:15 plainly says that Jesus is the firstborn *OF* G-d's creations, for them it can't possibly mean that, because they have determined already that Jesus is G-d. That is exactly what you are doing Aad.
First of all you listed several unconnected scriptures and then gave YOUR interpretation of them not the Hebrew scriptures nor the GT's.
If we allow scripture to interpret scripture and scripture to add to scripture before venturing outside the scriptural record to determine the meaning of a word or phrase or particular syntax, then we are in effect allowing the word of G-d to interpret the word of G-d, since scripture is the word of G-d. Whenever we can rely upon the inspired record to determine the meaning of a word or the intent of a certain phrase or syntax, we are allowing the the word of G-d to interpret itself, rather than being unduly influenced by the thoughts of men.
Aad please read this carefully:
There are no examples of where prototokos followed by a genitive was NOT part of the same class or group in the genitive.
And the "hoti" clause that follows naturally provides the reason why he was the FIRSTBORN creation, because all other creation came AFTER him by means of the fact that they came THROUGH him. Fits like a glove!!
Therefore to believe that Col. 1:15,16 shows the Son to the first creation of G-d is entirely contextual and grammatically and denotionally precedented with a huge number of database examples to support it, in fact, none to the contrary found within the Bible.
That coupled with the same scenario in regard to "arche" in Revelation and "qanah" in Proverbs, I personally feel that a Trinitarian should feel extreme guilt in trying to overturn such outstanding evidence.
That threefold witness to the creation of the Son should stand as the ABSOLUTE to clean up any ambiguity presented in the scriptures as to the relationship between the Father and the Son because they stand natural and precented statements fully consistent and comliant with what is revealed in the scriptural record.
It is interesting that only the Unitarian understaning of G-d finds this natural and precedented harmony within the Bible, without the need to pull in extra-Biblical philosophy and terminilogy found in Greek and pagan systems of belief. Trinitarians can't read it literally because it destroys your man made doctrine Aad.
No Aad, the early Church, which started out Jewish did NOT believe that Jesus was G-d or part of a Trinity. The Jewish people did not have a belief that the Messiah was G-d at all. It's time to put that man made doctrine to rest.
Regards,
Malachi
<< Previous Topic
Next Topic >>
Add Reply
Forum Jump
Counter-Missionary Forum
Counter-Missionary Education
Hebrew Language Education
Noahide Forum - בני נח
Ask The Rabbi
Knowing Your Orchard
Weekly Parsha Discussion
General Judaism Forum
Responding to Islam Forum
Share This
Email to Friend
del.icio.us
Digg it
Facebook
Blogger
Yahoo MyWeb
«Prev
1
2
3
4
5
…
16
17
Next»
Jump
Virtual Yeshiva Discussion Forums
>
Counter-Missionary Forum
>
TRINITARIAN challenge to Protestant Christians
Click to subscribe by RSS
Click to receive E-mail notifications of replies