I am a Christian who does not accept or follow Christianity.

[PaulThomson]

That is certainly not what the Bible reveals.

How can anyone believe that the finished work of Christ in His death, burial, resurrection, and ascension is true (and applicable to himself), yet not believe that the Lamb of God, the Savior of the world, was not (and is not) the God-Man -- fully God and fully sinless Man? This is exactly what "faith in Christ" means. Indeed the account of the birth of Christ says that it is Immanuel (Emmanuel) -- GOD WITH US -- who was born in a manger.

How can anyone believe that the blood of Christ was shed for the remission and ongoing cleansing of his or her sins, and not believe that it is THE BLOOD OF GOD. Indeed that is exactly what the Bible says (Acts 20:28): Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Since it was not God the Father but God the Son who was sacrificed on the cross, this clearly tells anyone that in order to be saved they must believe that JESUS IS GOD.

[/QUOTE]

This rather conforms to what I was saying. Paul here is addressing elders of the church, not fresh converts, and is alluding to doctrines that are meat, learned after conversion. All the new about-to-be convert was taught to be saved was that Jesus was a sinless sacrifice for sins, diwho was raised from the dead and made both Lord and Christ by God. Looking to Christ with faith saved them. They did not get told Jesus was God, but that His acceptance as an unblemished sacrifice for sins was attested to by God raising Him up from death. Teaching about the divine nature of Jesus seems to have come later.

7 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.

18 And when they were come to him, he said unto them, Ye know, from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons,

19 Serving the Lord with all humility of mind, and with many tears, and temptations, which befell me by the lying in wait of the Jews:

20 And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publicly, and from house to house,

21 Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

22 And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there:

23 Save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me.

24 But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

25 And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.

26 Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men.

27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.

28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

 

[stilllearning]

The requirement to believe Jesus is God is noticeably absent from the book of Acts as something sinners were told they needed to believe to become baptised believers.

I find it would be quite the opposite. Just a basic understanding of the Greco-Roman culture and their pantheon and worship. In fact it was on display at the trial of Christ. The Jews said he needs to die because he made himself equal to God. Pilot was troubled to hear that.

Reason being from the start you can take Cronus or Saturn. They had children and both ate them to keep them from overthrowing him. Then Zeus or Jupiter of course was saved when the stone was eaten. Which then depending if we are looking at Greek mythology or Roman Zeus or Jupiter overthrew to become the king of the gods.

We also know that in the Greco-Roman religion that their gods could and would take on human form. So I find that is why gentiles converted in the numbers they did. Because God having a son and that son coming in the flesh was in no way at odds with their belief system.

In fact we find that was the problem in some of the cities Paul was preaching a different God he was preaching Jesus and him crucified. When they were jailed and the jailor converted. Acts 16:31 says, And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 16:34 says, And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

They were preaching Jesus was God and that belief in him was essential for salvation. It would not have been a difficult message for them. They could preach the very words of Christ and say he is the way the truth and life and no man comes to the father but by him.
In fact they called themselves followers of the way.

This would be familiar as Janus the god of doors and time and gates. He Janus was recognized as the god you had to go through to get access to the other gods. So having to go through Christ to access the Father would be a message they could understand.

So whether preaching that the unknown God was Christ or preaching a message that all the Godhead was summed up in Christ, so their was no need to worship all these separate gods of idolatry. They could preach Christ and he was God and he contained all the attributes of the separate gods they worshipped he was the fullness of the Godhead and he was God and this is the belief they preached unto them.

So again they had no problem with it being in conflict with their belief system and their understanding. Why we see they were perceived as Zeus and Hermes. So seeing Paul and Barnabas as gods in the flesh as Acts 12 shows this was not in conflict, as they believed the gods had children, and the gods came in the flesh.

When the centurion came for healing for his servant. I find knowing the duties of centurion in that they were responsible in occupied lands to also be the intel and police force. They were expected to become familiar with the culture of the occupied so they could diplomatically diffuse situations that could be problematic.

Why the bible mentions the centurion building a synagogue. That fell under their mandate to embed and understand the local culture so they could do acts that would grant them favor with the locals.

So when Christ says greater faith he has not found in all Israel it is just more than the centurion saying just say the word. The centurion would have been aware that the message of Christ was he came in his Fathers name and that Father was God. So when the centurion recognizes Christ is in authority and has the authority to merely say the word as one under the authority of God.

One of the reasons Christ says what he did about that kind of faith is you have the Jews saying daily to Christ by what authority do you do these things and here the gentile says I recognize your authority. Why his faith was great because he understood the message and had faith in the message and the messenger.

So again why I believe the gentiles converted in such numbers and the message was heard because the message was no different from what they believed except for the matter that all the Godhead and fullness of God was in Christ and belief in him as God was the essential first step.

 

[PaulThomson]

stilllearning You wrote:
"In fact we find that was the problem in some of the cities Paul was preaching a different God he was preaching Jesus and him crucified. When they were jailed and the jailor converted. Acts 16:31 says, And they said, believe on and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 16:34 says, And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

They were preaching Jesus was God and that belief in him was essential for salvation. It would not have been a difficult message for them. They could preach the very words of Christ and say he is the way the truth and life and no man comes to the father but by him.
In fact they called themselves followers of the way."

Acts 16:31 says, And they said, Believe onto the Lord Jesus Christ, (pisteuson epi ton Kurion Iesoun Christon) and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 16:34 says, And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, having believed God (piepisteukOs tOi TheOi) with all his house.

The object of the greek verb "I believe" (pisteuO) takes the dative case.
For "I transfer my trust onto someone/something" greek uses epi + the accusative case.

So verse 16:31 says that the jailor transferred his trust onto Jesus, presumably as his risen Saviour and Lord/King.
Verse 16:34 says that he had believed and was continuing to believe God. That is the jailor was believing God's testimony about His Son as far as the jailor had been taught about who Jesus was. It is moot whether that teaching had included Jesus' co-equal deity., since no other Acts sermon included His co-equal deity. It may have included it, but I see nothing in Acts to indicate so.

 

[Lanolin]

God the Father and the Son of God can be confusing for some people

Those who dont accept the trinity include many Jews and of course, Muslims. For muslims, they believe something else about Jesus, as do Mormons, jehovahs witnesses and oneness pentecostals.

I think would help to clarify what the Holy Spirit is to those who dont understand as He is like the third person in the trinity, and what the word LORD means, as well as what God means.

 

[Lanolin]

Catholics like to include Mary in their pantheon though many protestents or non catholics ignore her role.

And what about John the Baptist and the apostles? Everyone has their part to play. Its just that its only by Jesus name anyone is saved. You cant be saved by Mary.

 

[stilllearning]

stilllearning You wrote:
"In fact we find that was the problem in some of the cities Paul was preaching a different God he was preaching Jesus and him crucified. When they were jailed and the jailor converted. Acts 16:31 says, And they said, believe on and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 16:34 says, And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

They were preaching Jesus was God and that belief in him was essential for salvation. It would not have been a difficult message for them. They could preach the very words of Christ and say he is the way the truth and life and no man comes to the father but by him.
In fact they called themselves followers of the way."

Acts 16:31 says, And they said, Believe onto the Lord Jesus Christ, (pisteuson epi ton Kurion Iesoun Christon) and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 16:34 says, And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, having believed God (piepisteukOs tOi TheOi) with all his house.

The object of the greek verb "I believe" (pisteuO) takes the dative case.
For "I transfer my trust onto someone/something" greek uses epi + the accusative case.

So verse 16:31 says that the jailor transferred his trust onto Jesus, presumably as his risen Saviour and Lord/King.
Verse 16:34 says that he had believed and was continuing to believe God. That is the jailor was believing God's testimony about His Son as far as the jailor had been taught about who Jesus was. It is moot whether that teaching had included Jesus' co-equal deity., since no other Acts sermon included His co-equal deity. It may have included it, but I see nothing in Acts to indicate so.

Oh the point is not moot at all. Our faith is one that is to be lived, be doers of the word, not just hearers of the word. We are to learn line upon line and precept upon precept. The marching orders for going forth and preaching the gospel, what we call the book of Acts.

Those where given in the gospels by none other than Christ himself. He set the message. Why I pointed out the understanding of Christ as God by both the gentiles and Jews at the trial of Christ and also the centurion and the over all religious system.

Understanding who Christ is and that he is God is so important, when he was training his disciple's to carry the message. He made sure to emphasis this understanding of him. He asked who do men say I am.

So your premises is incorrect because you are trying to find the marching orders that Christ gave the Apostles in the book of Acts when you in fact should be looking in the gospels when he described who he was and how they were to carry the message. So understanding that Christ is God is fundamental to becoming a believer. Who do men say I am, so just who is Christ has to be answered.

So if you want to understand the message that was being preached in the book of Acts you have to read about how the message was given to them in the gospels. Christ said the will of the Father was to believe on the son. Why I pointed out Acts 16, I was showing how they were carrying the message that was passed on to the disciples from none other than Christ. So this is why it is not moot as you are seeking to separate the marching orders from the way the carried them out. You are hypothesizing by separating the book of Acts and the gospels which go hand in hand to be able to fully understand.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

You are hypothesizing by separating the book of Acts and the gospels which go hand in hand to be able to fully understand.

Yes, the four gospels, Under Law, not separated from the beginning of Acts - Ch 8.
And then beginning with Acts 9, we then begin to find a New And Different
Message and 'marching' orders (Romans - Philemon), Under Grace. Amen?:

I have decided to follow Jesus?

 

[Nehemiah6]

Yes, the four gospels, Under Law, not separated from the beginning of Acts - Ch 8. And then beginning with Acts 9, we then begin to find a New And Different Message and 'marching' orders (Romans - Philemon), Under Grace. Amen?:

This is just more hyper-Dispensational NONSENSE.

 

[PaulThomson]

Oh the point is not moot at all. Our faith is one that is to be lived, be doers of the word, not just hearers of the word. We are to learn line upon line and precept upon precept. The marching orders for going forth and preaching the gospel, what we call the book of Acts.

Those where given in the gospels by none other than Christ himself. He set the message. Why I pointed out the understanding of Christ as God by both the gentiles and Jews at the trial of Christ and also the centurion and the over all religious system.

Understanding who Christ is and that he is God is so important, when he was training his disciple's to carry the message. He made sure to emphasis this understanding of him. He asked who do men say I am.

So your premises is incorrect because you are trying to find the marching orders that Christ gave the Apostles in the book of Acts when you in fact should be looking in the gospels when he described who he was and how they were to carry the message. So understanding that Christ is God is fundamental to becoming a believer. Who do men say I am, so just who is Christ has to be answered.

So if you want to understand the message that was being preached in the book of Acts you have to read about how the message was given to them in the gospels. Christ said the will of the Father was to believe on the son. Why I pointed out Acts 16, I was showing how they were carrying the message that was passed on to the disciples from none other than Christ. So this is why it is not moot as you are seeking to separate the marching orders from the way the carried them out. You are hypothesizing by separating the book of Acts and the gospels which go hand in hand to be able to fully understand.

Does the deity of Christ appear in these lists of the foundational teachings of the Way?
Hebrews 6:1-2 which lists repentance from dead works, and faith toward God, doctrine of baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and aeonous judgment.
1 Cor. 5:3- 11 which lists that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; he was buried; He rose again on the third day according to the scriptures; He was seen by Cephas and then the twelve; he was later seen by 500 at one time; He was later seen by James; He was later seen of all the apostles; and lastly He was seen by Paul.
Do you have any other list of entry level doctrines that scripture provides which includes the deity of Christ? According to church history, the deity of Christ was not believed by all in the church and this informal diversity of belief only became a problem when those who disagreed over their privately held opinions on this issue chose to make it a public debate that needed an arbitrated winner.

The earliest Church creeds did not include the deity of Christ. The appostle's creed says,
The Apostles' Creed

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic (i.e. universal) Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
Amen.

This appears to be ambiguous and undogmatic on the specific of Christ's deity.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Does the deity of Christ appear in these lists of the foundational teachings of the Way?

Are you disputing the deity of Christ or have you already rejected that and are just trying to be provocative?

Let's just take one FACT and examine it. "Christ died for our sins". That presumes that Christ paid the PENALTY for the sins of the whole world. Since all human being are sinners, could any human being pay the penalty for the sins of the whole world? So how is it that Christ could accomplish what no other man could? So that statement in quotes already accepts the fact that Christ was (and is) the God-Man who died for the sins of the whole world. And if you do not believe this you cannot be saved.

 

[PaulThomson]

Are you disputing the deity of Christ or have you already rejected that and are just trying to be provocative?

Let's just take one FACT and examine it. "Christ died for our sins". That presumes that Christ paid the PENALTY for the sins of the whole world. Since all human being are sinners, could any human being pay the penalty for the sins of the whole world? So how is it that Christ could accomplish what no other man could? So that statement in quotes already accepts the fact that Christ was (and is) the God-Man who died for the sins of the whole world. And if you do not believe this you cannot be saved.

I have already stated that I am myself trinitarian in my Christology. What I am disputing is the assertion that belief in the deity of Christ is something one must believe to be born again and become a disciple of Jesus.

Trinitarianism is doctrinal meat that one learns by revelation and growing insight as one reads scripture and puts two and two together. It is not something that unbelievers should be forced to confess under threat of damnation to endless burning in hell, as many dogmatic trinitarians present it. People should be persuaded by reason into believing it is in scripture, not bullied into confessing that it's there.

 

[Steve777]

I have considered it. I may be able to just ask Him if He can hear me, such that it would not be prayer. For He taught us (the disciples) to pray to the Father, God. Or, His Father, God.

Banned means?

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

I have already stated that I am myself trinitarian in my Christology. What I am disputing is the assertion that belief in the deity of Christ is something one must believe to be born again and become a disciple of Jesus.

Trinitarianism is doctrinal meat that one learns by revelation and growing insight as one reads scripture and puts two and two together. It is not something that unbelievers should be forced to confess under threat of damnation to endless burning in hell, as many dogmatic trinitarians present it. People should be persuaded by reason into believing it is in scripture, not bullied into confessing that it's there.

Precious friend, just one question - what does this verse mean?:

2Co_11:4 "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom​

we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye​

have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted,​

ye might well bear with him."​

​

Amen.

 

[PaulThomson]

Precious friend, just one question - what does this verse mean?:

2Co_11:4 "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom​

we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye​

have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted,​

ye might well bear with him."​

​

Amen.

Well, that would need to be assessed by context. Paul is defending his ministry and authority among the Corinthians from the claims of teachers who are coming into the Corinthian church planting weird ideas that contradict Pauls' teaching into their minds about Jesus, the Holy Spirit and the gospel. They seem to be claiming superior way and more clever ways to unpack the new covenant that had been hidden within the old testament. The Corinthians seem to have been far too ready to uncritically hear and accept these contradicting versions of Paul's New covenant revelation. 1Cor. 11:3-6

To determine which descriptions of Jesus , the Spirit and the gospel are eccentric by Paul's standards, we need to consider the gospel and the account of Jesus that Paul actually gave to churches he planted and compare that to what seems to have been on offer by the super-apostles. For instance Paul clearly taught that Jesus died and rose back physically from death, but some teachers were denying Jesus' resurrection and our future resurrection 1 Cor:15:12-28. Some teachers did not love Jesus as their risen Lord. 1 Cor. 16:22. Some were denying that Christ really suffered in His trials, and through Him we have been granted escape from tribulation and suffering in this life, but Paul taught to embrace suffering for Christ's sake. 1 Cor. 1:5-10. Some were saying that Jesus became poor so that we can enjoy affluence, but Paul taught to live simply in order to finance the gospel workers who were bearing persecution and want in order to take the gospel further into the world 1 Cor. 1:12-13. Some were committing to come to churches to minister and backing out when it b3came inconvenient, nut Paul taught that Christians should keep their word to their own hurt. 1 Cor. 16-22

Some were peddling their interpretations of the Torah and the New Covenant for personal gain, but Paul had freely received and freely gave 1 Cor. 2:14-17. Some were ministering by merely giving discourses on what they drew from scripture, but Paul taught that the Spirit confirms the true gospel meassage with signs following 1 Cor. 3;1-6. Some operated by a spirit that produced no Christlike character, but Paul taught that the presence of the Spirit of God should sanctify believers. 1Cor. 3:7-18. Some used sophisticated rationalisations to support their doctrines, but Paul expected ministers to make their case plainly and forthrightly 1 Cor. 4:1-6. Some were claiming to minister the benefits of Christ without dying to themselves, but Paul imparted Christ's life by living in self-denial 1 Cor. 7-14.

Some denied the resurrection of the saints, but Paul affirmed it 1 Cor. 1-5. Some boasted of their outward show of prosperity to validate their claims to being in God's blessing. and His ministers, but Paul trusted in his Christ-like love and concern for all people, and his universal outreach to all to be reconciled to God as proof of his authentic service to God 1 Cor.4:11-20. Some taught that righteousness ans salvation came by obeying a legal code, but Paul taught that Jesus' death and resurrection that justifies and saves 1Cor. 4:21.

Some tqught that the possession of spiritual treasures brought prosperity, but Paul taught that our spiritual state was not dependent on our physical circumstances 1 Cor.6:1-10. Some taught that the gnosis of the gospel allowed us to engage in worldly sin with impunity, but Paul taught that we should shun sin 1 Cor. 14- 7:1

The Christology Paul taught when he presented the gospel in His letters and in Acts falls short of any clear command that one needs to believe that Jesus is God to be saved. He presented Jesus as God's Son, God's express image , the likeness of God's glory, our Saviour and Lord, being filled with all the fulness of God, our atonement, the one through whom God created, and =the one under whom God would subject all things, but who would Himself be in subjection to God. These claims are compatible with Trinitarianism but fall short of proving it philosophically. Only a growing relationship with Jesus Christ can ultimately prove to the believer in Jesus that He is truly a divine Person who has co-existed from everlasting to everlasting with the other two divine members of the divine community called "God."

 

[PaulThomson]

Precious friend, just one question - what does this verse mean?:

2Co_11:4 "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom​

we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye​

have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted,​

ye might well bear with him."​

​

Amen.

It means that the Corinthians had shown themselves to be too ready to uncritically accept teachers and teaching that conflicted with the information Paul had himself given them regarding Jesus, the Spirit and the gospel.

 

[stilllearning]

Does the deity of Christ appear in these lists of the foundational teachings of the Way?
Hebrews 6:1-2 which lists repentance from dead works, and faith toward God, doctrine of baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and aeonous judgment.
1 Cor. 5:3- 11 which lists that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; he was buried; He rose again on the third day according to the scriptures; He was seen by Cephas and then the twelve; he was later seen by 500 at one time; He was later seen by James; He was later seen of all the apostles; and lastly He was seen by Paul.
Do you have any other list of entry level doctrines that scripture provides which includes the deity of Christ? According to church history, the deity of Christ was not believed by all in the church and this informal diversity of belief only became a problem when those who disagreed over their privately held opinions on this issue chose to make it a public debate that needed an arbitrated winner.

The earliest Church creeds did not include the deity of Christ. The appostle's creed says,
The Apostles' Creed

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic (i.e. universal) Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
Amen.

This appears to be ambiguous and undogmatic on the specific of Christ's deity.

And earlier medical journals do not claim that men can have babies. An absence of something does not mean it was not already self evident. We only have a debate about men being women now because some are quite deceived. So just because in some creed it made no mention of Christs deity and only later a debate arose about it does not mean that it was not already self evident to true believers.

However, like I said earlier you don't understand the history or culture of the Greco-Roman world and that Paul was preaching Christ is God to them. However, don't take my word for it they said so themselves this is what Paul was doing.

Acts 17:18 Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.

They knew Paul was preaching Christ was deity or God.

 

[The_old_guy]

I am a Christian. I do not follow Christianity. This means that I accept the Bible but I do not accept Christian doctrines that are not found in the Bible.

NASB20

Christian
Acts 26:28 NASB20 - Agrippa [replied] to Paul, "In a short [time] you [are going to] persuade me to make a Christian [of myself.]"
1 Peter 4:16 NASB20 - but if [anyone suffers] as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but is to glorify God in this name.

Christians
Acts 11:26 NASB20 - and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. And for an entire year they met with the church and taught considerable numbers of people; and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.

I am open to discussion of matters of this concern. If you think that I am out to lunch let me know. Otherwise I would just say I am a Christian and an adherent of Christianity.

For example, I am not Trinitarian. I don't know what else. That would probably come out in conversation. Some things I have uncertainty about.

Some day, sit down and read the Gospel of John straight through and see whether John believed in the Trinity, as a liberal scholar said about that book. If he presents the truth that God is three Persons in one God, a Mystery, as I believe it, we need to accept that mystery without analyzing it further. We need to submit our reasoning powers to his, for his thinking is far above ours. That's also true about Jesus being fully God and fully human, another mystery which Mark presents in Jesus' actions and intuition.

My main point is that we can't figure everything in the Bible out rationally but must submit our reasoning to God's thoughts.

 

[PaulThomson]

And earlier medical journals do not claim that men can have babies. An absence of something does not mean it was not already self evident. We only have a debate about men being women now because some are quite deceived. So just because in some creed it made no mention of Christs deity and only later a debate arose about it does not mean that it was not already self evident to true believers.

However, like I said earlier you don't understand the history or culture of the Greco-Roman world and that Paul was preaching Christ is God to them. However, don't take my word for it they said so themselves this is what Paul was doing.

Acts 17:18 Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.

They knew Paul was preaching Christ was deity or God.

That men can have babies is not self-evident.

That scripture doesn't show that they believed Paul was preaching Jesus as the supreme God who created all other gods. It shows they thought Paul was teaching that Jesus was a new god he was trying to add to their pantheon of gods.

 

[PaulThomson]

Some day, sit down and read the Gospel of John straight through and see whether John believed in the Trinity, as a liberal scholar said about that book. If he presents the truth that God is three Persons in one God, a Mystery, as I believe it, we need to accept that mystery without analyzing it further. We need to submit our reasoning powers to his, for his thinking is far above ours. That's also true about Jesus being fully God and fully human, another mystery which Mark presents in Jesus' actions and intuition.

My main point is that we can't figure everything in the Bible out rationally but must submit our reasoning to God's thoughts.

Do you apply the same sense-making to all scripture?
"If he presents the truth that God is three Persons in one God, a Mystery, as I believe it, we need to accept that mystery without analyzing it further. We need to submit our reasoning powers to his, for his thinking is far above ours."

Do you apply it to the mystery of this text?
Mark 11:23-24 King James Version

"23 For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.
24 Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them."
Do you accept this mystery without analysing it further and submit your reasoning powers to His, for His thinking is far above ours?

 

[Johann]

John 17:5 NASB20 - "And now You, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world existed.

This verse seems to say that God did not come to earth. And the Son of God is not God.

May I suggest that you don't understand this verse?

John 17:5 is a powerful verse that speaks to the pre-existence of Jesus Christ and His divine nature. Let's examine the verse in its original language and context to gain a deeper understanding of its meaning.

The Greek text of John 17:5 reads as follows:
Καὶ νῦν δόξασόν με σύ, πάτερ, παρὰ σεαυτῷ τῇ δόξῃ ᾗ εἶχον πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι παρὰ σοί.

Breaking down the verse, we see that "glorify Me" is translated as "δόξασόν με" (doxason me), which means "make Me glorious" or "honor Me." "Together with Yourself" is translated as "παρὰ σεαυτῷ" (para seautō), which means "alongside Yourself" or "in Your presence." "With the glory" is translated as "τῇ δόξῃ" (tē doxē), which means "the glory." "Which I had" is translated as "ᾗ εἶχον" (hē eichon), which means "which I possessed." "Before the world existed" is translated as "πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι" (pro tou ton kosmon einai), which means "before the world was."

In this verse, Jesus is praying to the Father, asking Him to glorify Him with the glory that He possessed before the world was created.

This statement affirms the pre-existence of Jesus and His divine nature. The phrase "with Yourself" emphasizes the unity between the Father and the Son, indicating that Jesus is not a separate entity from God but is one with Him.

It's important to note that this verse does not suggest that Jesus is not God. In fact, the opposite is true. The verse affirms the deity of Jesus Christ and His eternal existence alongside the Father.

This is consistent with other passages in the New Testament that speak to the divinity of Jesus, such as John 1:1, which states, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
In summary, John 17:5 affirms the pre-existence and divine nature of Jesus Christ, emphasizing His unity with the Father. The verse does not suggest that Jesus is not God, but rather affirms His deity and eternal existence alongside the Father.

Your assertion thoroughly being debunked-but I have this nagging feeling you are a Christian.
J.