Unorthodox TheologyA forum to discuss/debate theological doctrines not accepted by mainstream evangelical Christianity (eg. Full Preterism, Unitarianism)
I learned in 1st grade reading that plural personal pronouns "us", "our" refer to the main subject "God". Therefore, God is a plurality of persons. Too bad you want to throw out your 1st grade reading lessons.
[bible]Genesis 1:26[/bible] The plurality of persons represented by Gen. 1:26 does not represent the orthodox doctrine of Trinity. God is not speaking to Himself, but to those around Him - The Son and the Holy Spirit. These are distinct beings to whom The Father is speaking. As I said to my friends this weekend: Lets go play some ball at our usual spot. Fortunately everyone had made it out of the 1st grade, so there was no confusion that I was talking to myself or my imaginary friends.
Remembering the following points I think helps to understand what the Bible teaches is the relation ship between Jesus and His Father:
1) Jesus and His Father are separate individuals (Matt. 3: 16-17; John 20:17, 1 Cor 8:6, Rom 15:6). There is no Biblical indication that Jesus is the same Essence as or "one substance" with the Father. This notion comes entirely from man made creeds.
[bible]John 20:17[/bible]
[bible]Matthew 3:16-17[/bible]
2) God the Father made Jesus a God; (Acts 2:36, Heb 1:2, 8-9; 1 Cor 15:28, John 3:35, John 5:26, Rev 3:14).
[bible]Acts 2:36[/bible]
[bible]Revelation 3:14[/bible]
[bible]1 Corinthians 15:28[/bible]
1 Cor 15:28 is only one of several scriptures that indicate that Jesus received His power and authority over "all things,"both in heaven and in earth (i.e. not just those pertaining to His "manhood") from the Father. Jesus is not eternally co-equal to the Father, as the doctrine of the Trinity requires. To the contrary, He is eternally subordinate to the Father, even after He has received “all things” from Him, as 1 Cor 15:28 indicates. Rev. 5:12 shows that Jesus received "power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing" AFTER His resurrection.
The now orthodox notion of the "one substance" of the Trinity is not the work of inspiration, but has its roots in the enforcement of the use of the word “homoousius” by the Roman emperor Constantine in the Nicene Creed. This definition of orthodoxy was cemented when a later emperor Theodosius put to end by secular fiat all the division and argument surrounding the notion of Trinity by outlawing and persecuting all Christians who disagreed with the idea of what became Athanasian Trinitarianism. Is tradition really a good enough reason to accept without question the idea that the Trinity doctrine is infallible?
I learned in 1st grade reading that plural personal pronouns "us", "our" refer to the main subject "God". Therefore, God is a plurality of persons. Too bad you want to throw out your 1st grade reading lessons.
I have no problem with God or (gods) being plural which if you have read my multiple post on this area. My problem is people trying to tell me God is a person or personality. A person is human; God is Devine. God has many names which means natures to include Elohim
According to my search in Englishman’s concordance there are 2597 for the word Elohim which is Strong’s OT 430.
Strong’s OT:430
'elohiym (el-o-heem'); plural of OT:433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative:
KJV - angels, X exceeding, God (gods)- dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
Example:
Psalm 82
1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the (Elohim) gods (not a person).
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods (not a person).; and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.
[bible]Genesis 1:26[/bible]
The plurality of persons represented by Gen. 1:26 does not represent the orthodox doctrine of Trinity. God is not speaking to Himself, but to those around Him - The Son and the Holy Spirit. These are distinct beings to whom The Father is speaking.
The next verse V27 destroys your idea of three gods because it doesn't say: "And the Gods created man in their own image, in the image of Gods created they him; male and female created they them." Instead, the idea is clearly that of one God who is plurality of persons : " And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
There is no Biblical indication that Jesus is the same Essence as or "one substance" with the Father. This notion comes entirely from man made creeds.
Wrong. The Son's begottenness is preceded in Scripture by the predicate para in Jn 1:14 (the Word is the only begotten from the Father). indicating a sharing of the same eternal nature as God.
Last edited by DevotiontoBible; 19th June 2006 at 06:51 PM.
[bible]. There is no Biblical indication that Jesus is the same Essence as or "one substance" with the Father. This notion comes entirely from man made creeds.
John Chapter 1 1 12 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, andthe Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 3 All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be 4 through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; 5 4 the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it
Jesus was the Word, the Light and as you can see directly from the bible, the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
It doesn't say God made Jesus a God in Acts 2:36. Jesus laid aside His right to divine attributes when he became a man and then God appointed him by exaltining Him as Lord: "Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men;and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name;that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. "(ASV) Phil 2:5-11
"The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God." Isaiah 40:3
"For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." Matthew 3:3 "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14
"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." Matthew 1:23
The next verse V27 destroys your idea of three gods because it doesn't say: "And the Gods created man in their own image, in the image of Gods created they him; male and female created they them." Instead, the idea is clearly that of one God who is plurality of persons : " And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."
The notion that the text should refer to "Gods" is not my position. It is God the Father who is speaking. Jesus always made clear His own position relative to the Father: the Father is Jesus' God (John 20:17). God the Father is the ultimate source of creative force. By God's command and direction, Jesus - the first creation of God (Rev. 3:14) - carried out the rest of creation: “[God] created all things by Jesus Christ” (Eph 3:9). It is God the Father's image in which Jesus and the Holy Spirit also exist. It is His image in which we were formed.
It is clear from the passage that there is a plurality of persons involved in creation. The key difference between our positions is the notion of "one substance." I also believe that the Godhead is formed of three persons who acted together to cause creation to occur. Vs. 26 and 27 cannot distinguish between our positions, thus it provides no support to your position. Was God talking to himself, or to those who were present with Him? These verses do not of themselves elicit any conclusion that the Father is “one substance” with those to whom He is speaking.
Originally Posted by DevotiontoBible
Wrong. The Son's begottenness is preceded in Scripture by the predicate para in Jn 1:14 (the Word is the only botten from the Father). indicating a sharing of the same eternal nature as God.
First, para is not translated "from" in the KJV, WEB, BBE, DBY, WBS, WEB, and YLT; it is translated "of". para can mean, according to Strong's: 1) from, of at, by, besides, near.
Second, the context of v. 14 is in terms of Jesus' physical birth, not His Spiritual creation eons prior: "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." Jesus was the only human begotten of God in the Flesh. This is the context of "only begotten," and this is why "of" is used instead of "from."
Third, the verb beget is not used in the Bible to indicate “one substance.” It is used in the sense that one is born or formed. “only begotten” also conveys a special connotation, a birth that is “one of a kind.” for example, Isaac is the “only begotten” son of Abraham, despite Ishmael also being Abraham's son (Heb 11:17). Jesus is no more “one substance” with His Father than Isaac was with Abraham. The word “begotten” is used after the Nicene Creed differently from how it is used in the Bible. After the Nicene Creed, implications from Greek philosophy are added to the word such that the understanding of Jesus' relationship with the Father eventually became disfigured. All writings prior to 325 AD are subordinationist. Only after the word “homoousis” is used in the Nicene Creed do the idea and implications of “one substance” become widespread.
It doesn't say God made Jesus a God in Acts 2:36. Jesus laid aside His right to divine attributes when he became a man and then God appointed him by exaltining Him as Lord: "Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men;and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name;that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. "(ASV) Phil 2:5-11
[bible]Acts 2:36[/bible]
From creation to Judgment, the New Testament demonstrates that Jesus is separate from God the Father and that God the Father empowered, exalted, and gave authority to Jesus – and not only in those things pertaining to His “manhood” (for example, see 1 Cor 15:28). If Jesus was truly “one substance” with the Father, He would have no need of receiving these things. The Bible demonstrates clearly that Jesus is not eternally co-equal with the Father. Jesus received “all things” from the Father only AFTER His mortal life (Rom 8:32; Rev 3:21; Rev 5:12; Heb 5:9).
True, the scriptures I have provided in these posts don't say that The Father made Jesus a God. But they do indicate that He was the one who gave Jesus Godlike powers and authority before, during, and after His mortal life. If you believe Jesus to be God (not just god) as I do, then the Bible teaches that The Father made Him that way.
Note that “existing in the form of God” is expressly different from a) being God or b) being the same substance as God. The Greek word for “form” is morphe, which means: 1) the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision 2) external appearance. This is decidedly contrary to the connotation of “same/one substance.” The word that the scripture uses to say Jesus was like God purposefully draws a distinction between them.
From Phil. 2:5-11 you have: 1) Christ did not exist as the identical substance of God, and 2) God is the one that exalted Christ. These are the same two conclusions that are repeated throughout the Bible.
John
Chapter 1 1 1 2 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 3 All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be 4 through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; 5 4 the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it
Jesus was the Word, the Light and as you can see directly from the bible, the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
...
Divine Nature Of Jesus
"The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God." Isaiah 40:3
"For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." Matthew 3:3
"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." Isaiah 7:14
"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."
Matthew 1:23
Seems that He just plain is God.
The doctrinal implications of the Trinity being a flawed doctrine are far reaching. 1700 years of tradition are based on a doctrine that didn't exist until 300 years after Christ's death. To understand Mormon thinking on this matter, one must realize that LDS do teach that Jesus just plain is God: LDS theology states that Jehovah was none other than the premortal Jesus Christ. Any defining characteristic of God in the Bible is applicable to Jesus. We also teach (like you) that Jesus just plain is NOT The Father. Unlike what is now accepted as orthodox, we do not teach that The Father and Jesus Christ are the same Essence or Substance - and neither does the Bible. Do you see how in Mormon understanding Jesus was both with God and He was God?
In other words, the significant implication of Mormon doctrine is the existence of more than one being that is properly called God. Specifically, there are three persons who together form one Godhead, or one God. But their unity is one of purpose, will, and power, not substance. And there is a hierarchy within the Godhead: The Holy Spirit is subordinate to Christ, who is subordinate to the Father. For this reason Paul says: ”For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” (1 Tim 2:5). Undoubtedly it sounds strange to the modern Christian ear to speak of several gods in this way. However, such language was well understood by the early Christians. Several early Christian writers, including Paul, explained why it was OK to speak in the above sense of multiple Gods. But whenever the One God was mentioned, it was made clear (as Jesus always did) that the One being referenced was the Father, and Jesus subordinate to Him.
Linear Mode
