resl...@yahoo.com
2022-07-23 17:04:32 UTC
Matthew 16:16 - Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Matthew 16:16 is sometimes given as proof of the trinity doctrine. Evidently what is being imagined, assumed, added to and read into what Peter said is that Jesus' being Son of the living God means that for God to have a son, that son must also be God in the same manner that when a human being has a son, the son is also a human being. Since the son of a human being is not the same human being as beget the son, they would to imagine and assume that when God has a son, it is NOT the same as when as when a human being has a son, since, according to what they imagine and assume, both the Father and the Son are one God, one Supreme Being, not two Gods, two Supreme Beings. In reality, there is nothing in the Bible that limits God so that if he begets a son, the son begotten has to be the Supreme Being.
Actually, it should be obvious that Peter spoke of "God" as only one person, and he spoke of Jesus as being the son of that one person. He did not, in any sense, claim that Jesus is Jehovah, and/or that Jesus is a person of Jehovah, etc.
For more related to this:
https://reslight.boards.net/post/11/thread
Matthew 16:16 is sometimes given as proof of the trinity doctrine. Evidently what is being imagined, assumed, added to and read into what Peter said is that Jesus' being Son of the living God means that for God to have a son, that son must also be God in the same manner that when a human being has a son, the son is also a human being. Since the son of a human being is not the same human being as beget the son, they would to imagine and assume that when God has a son, it is NOT the same as when as when a human being has a son, since, according to what they imagine and assume, both the Father and the Son are one God, one Supreme Being, not two Gods, two Supreme Beings. In reality, there is nothing in the Bible that limits God so that if he begets a son, the son begotten has to be the Supreme Being.
Actually, it should be obvious that Peter spoke of "God" as only one person, and he spoke of Jesus as being the son of that one person. He did not, in any sense, claim that Jesus is Jehovah, and/or that Jesus is a person of Jehovah, etc.
For more related to this:
https://reslight.boards.net/post/11/thread