Trinity haters on CC

Jesus, as a man, was alienated from the Father because he took upon Himself man's sin burden at that moment. He suffered the abandonment that all sinners suffer from God.

YHVH was not changed through this experience, though.

Again, we get into the nature of the hypostatic union. Jesus is truly God and truly man. Jesus took on an ADDITIONAL nature. He didn't cease to be God. Otherwise, this Scripture is in error:

Mal 3: 6 “For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.

You don't define the rules of engagement

Who says that believers must experience the same kind of union with God that Jesus experienced since eternity?

Believers are joined with Jesus in a legal and vital sense, much like a branch from a grape vine enjoys the benefits of being joined to the vine.

However, the believer is not the vine itself.

In the case of the Triune God, the Persons are all God by nature.

Now, the believer does enjoy fellowship with the Triune God, but he is not God. He partakes of the energies of the vine, but he is not the vine.

Read Romans 15.

There are some cults that claim they will become God. Perhaps you'd like to join them. However, the believer partakes of the "energies" of their union with Christ, in terms of his holiness and being transformed into his image, but not in terms of godhood.

I would like to see a reference that ancient Babylonians worshiped a triad of gods called Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz. This is something that is made up by cultists and weird Christians like Alexander Hislop. Nimrod and Semiramis didn't even exist in the same century, let alone have a child, Tammuz, together.

Buy yourself a copy of Alexander Hislop's book "Two Babylons" and you will see where Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Herbert Armstrong's followers, and some Hebrew Roots Movement guys got their fables.

Read this website..Semiramis was not Nimrod's wife and to claim so is a foolish teaching related to Alexander Hislop.

https://www.ancient.eu/Semiramis/

It is similar to the Jewish myths and fables that the NT says for believers to avoid.

Quote from site:

She (Semiramis) remains, therefore, one of the more controversial figures from ancient history and has become more so since the 19th century CE when the Christian minister Alexander Hislop published his book The Two Babylons (1858 CE), linking Semiramis with the whore of Babylon from the biblical Book of Revelation, Chapter 17. Even though The Two Babylons is clearly anti-Catholic propaganda and has no claim to biblical or historical accuracy, it is still cited by certain protestant Christian works as an authority on the subject, and the book therefore contributes to the controversy surrounding Semiramis. The book claims, to cite only two examples of biblical inaccuracy, that Semiramis was Nimrod’s wife, whereas Chapter 10 of Genesis says no such thing, and famously insists that Semiramis is the whore of Babylon when her name is nowhere mentioned in the Bible. The historical inaccuracies in the work are too numerous to mention. Even so, the book continues to exert a powerful influence over certain readers and their understanding of ancient history in general and Semiramis specifically. Whether Sammu-Ramat was the model for Semiramis continues to be argued by modern historians, who often cite the same ancient inscriptions for their conflicting arguments, and it does not seem to be a debate that will be settled anytime soon. Based simply on the evidence of Sammu-Ramat being able to erect her own stele at the prestigious city of Ashur, however, it would appear she was a very impressive and very powerful Assyrian queen who was known to later generations as Semiramis.

The author is kind and says "certain readers"...I would use the word "nuts".

Some might say, I didn't learn this from Hislop, but they are getting their information third and fourth hand from guys who read Hislop's materials.

Are not these people who according to Christ are following their father, the devil? Because the serpent devil that beguiled Adam and Eve says the same thing?

Genesis 3:5 King James Version (KJV)
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

God is savior. The Son of man jesus is not God, he is corrupted man .God has no beginning. he not a man as us.

For he is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment. Neither is there any daysman betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both.Job 32-33

The father was with the Son of man just as he is with us .Working in Jesus to both will and do his good pleasure .God alone unseen is good.

Two attributes one God.

Are you joking Garee?

Luke 19:10 King James Version (KJV)
10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

Yes that's what the father sent him to do. As many as the father gave to the Son they alone will come. God is not served by the corrupted hands of mankind. He can move a unbeliever to bring his gospel messages as well as one that does have the faith which alone comes by hearing the messages (Gospel)

I have no problem with that verse .The Son of man always does the will of the father that dwelt in Him. . . . working with the Son of man to both will and do the good pleasure of the father.

We simply do not know God after the flesh .the one time outward demonstration is over, the veil is rent.

God is Spirit and not a man as us.

What was meant by you offering it now that you know I was not joking ?

Does God have a beginning?

Again, you are defeating your own claims. You tried to defend trinity by claiming Jesus is one with the Father and i'm simply pointing out that in the same manner, Jesus is also one with the believers.

John 17:21that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May theyalso be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

So believers are one with God too

And:

2 Pet 1:4Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Believers are also partakers in the divine nature too.

Now, if you really know how to count, how many distinct persons do we end up with?

Ok, you can define the rules but please leave your sister out of this.

It is very difficult to follow your line of thought.

You said, Jesus is never God by Himself

You are now saying, Jesus being alienated from the Father, was still God.

How many Gods do you have?

One God, three persons.

One person, Jesus, has two natures, God and man, joined in a hypostatic union.

Jesus, in his humanity, was alienated from the Father on the Cross. In his humanity, he experienced life just like any other man.

All I said is my sister denied Jesus' deity, then she was saved, and she proclaimed it.

The inference is important. Perhaps those who deny Jesus is God are not saved. In fact, that's what I think.

Nope. You need to refresh your doctrine.

You say Jesus has two natures
You also say, Jesus is eternal, before the beginning
You also say, God doesn't change

When did Jesus change? Did He have two natures eternally, before the beginning?

That's not for you to decide.

Rom 10: 6But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’b (that is, to bring Christ down) 7or, ‘Who will descend into the Abyss?’c (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).”

YHVH, the one true God is one in terms of essence, three in terms of Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Jesus, the second Person of the Triune God, acquired humanity in the incarnation. He didn't "change" as YHVH, but he acquired humanity.

YHVH didn't change, as he is eternally the same. However, Jesus acquired humanity at the incarnation. Jesus' in his humanity is a new creation. Jesus, in his deity, has always existed and has never changed.

Jesus' deity and humanity are joined through the hypostatic union.

Study the creeds and you will see that my explanations are in alignment with them. They make perfect sense to me.

However, if you continue to put Jesus in your box, based on human experiences, he will never make sense to you.

You don't seem to understand the difference between assessing actions in this life and answering to God for your actions at the end of it.

That's hogwash. The gospel is hidden from unbelievers, not from believers.

Again, hogwash. You've lost the script and you're making things up.

You have crossed the line into actual heresy.

What's not for me to decide?

In regards to salvation, you are right..I don't decide who is saved and who is not. That is why I said, that is what I think. I don't think someone who denies the deity of Christ is saved.

I don't see how they can confess Jesus as Lord if they don't believe he is God. They have no reasonable basis for understanding his sinlessness, either.