I am not denying that. By “raw data” I mean that Scripture is a collection of primary source material. Very little of it is organized to teach theology. There are different statements and claims all over the place, and some of them seem contradictory until someone works out an explanation of how they all fit together.
The entire Bible is ‘organized to teach about God and his purposes’; = “theology”. (The study of God; 2 Tim 3:16) In most cases the Bible explains itself, as I have found from personal study.
They are all equally omniscient, co-eternal, etc. etc. I do not see where I said differently.
Not referring to your sayings, but God’s word:
“But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” Mr 13:32 Not omniscient.
"So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, “Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee”. So St Paul teaches upon Ps 2:7; also Acts 13:33 and Heb 1:5. As in John’s Gospel, ‘the devil is in the details’- of all those prepositional phrases.
Not co-eternal.
“Then I [John] looked, and lo, a white cloud, and seated on the cloud one like a son of man, with a golden crown on his head, and a sharp sickle in his hand. And another angel came out of the temple, calling with a loud voice to him who sat upon the cloud, “Put in your sickle, and reap, for the hour to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is fully ripe.” So he who sat upon the cloud swung his sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.” Rev 14:14-16 Jesus, waiting outside God’s heavenly temple, obeys the command of a mere messenger [Gk angel]
from Jehovah. Not co-powerful.
“He who conquers, I [Jesus] will make him a pillar in the temple of my God; never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name.”
When I ask at this point, ‘Who is that God whom Jesus has?’ I’m usually told, ‘Oh, that’s God the Father; Jesus is God the Son.’ But you’re Catholic, of course; you won’t claim that.
Therefore, your answer is ______________ ?
Your explanation leaves out the Personhood of the Holy Spirit. He is a He, not an it. It is possible to blaspheme Him (Jesus’ famous passage about the unforgivable sin) and to lie to Him (Ananias and Saphira) – the latter of which is equated with lying to God.
… which is equated with lying to Peter (and the apostles!). Acts 5:2,3 Therefore, by your reasoning, Peter is the Holy Spirit, and God … And the Gk word for Spirit is sometimes masculine and sometimes neuter, as your teachers should have told you. (English is not gendered.)
Trinitarians would tentatively agree with Jesus as “firstborn Son,” but what we mean and what you mean by that are probably very different things.
I mean what God’s word says. I go to
blueletterbible.org and search on “firstborn son” and find many ordinary humans in that position. No mystery.
What do you think that Scripture means when it calls Jesus “capital-G God”?
On any search engine, enter “define: uncial” and read. Any upper/lower case is at the option of a later translator or copyist.
Is He a separate God from the Father? Is God not one (and in more than the sense of being a group that all agree in teaching)? Are we not monotheists?
As I have said often, “A trinitarian is someone who can’t count to three without getting himself in trouble.”
“… thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven…”
What do you think of that? Is that prayer ever to be answered? What sort of earth would we have if it were answered? Would you likie to be a subject in such a kingdom?
