Why the Trinity is a False Doctrine

[7xlightray]

Never mind “I AM” Jesus is called Yhvh, but he is not Yhvh.

 

[Imagican]

You gave me opinion. I provided ample evidence of the use of Deity or Godhead and how it is only used for Jesus Christ in the NT. Contrasted to how the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit. The words selected in the Greek by Paul are not a mistake.

Elsewhere in the NT the use of divine is used to describe heavenly attributes. However we have Deity or Godhead for use to describe the Nature of Christ Jesus.

You wrote that off as a post resurrection attribute of Jesus Christ. So I ask again, what was the Nature of Jesus Christ at His Crucifixion when He was reconciling us to The Father.

I did answer your question. But since you don't seem to understand it, I'll offer it again:

Jesus Christ has 'always' been the Son of God. From the moment He was 'begotten', to the time of 'creation', to being 'born in the flesh', to dying on the cross, and now sitting at the 'right hand of God', He has been, was, is and will always be the Son of God. The very nature and essence of Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God. He is the mediator, the conduit, the lifeline between God and man. He is the means, chosen by God, for our Salvation.

I have never once in my life denied the deity that dwells within Christ. He is most certainly worthy of our worship. But I do not nor have I 'ever' worshiped Christ as God. There is only one God and that God is 'the' God of Christ as well as our God. And there has been nor will there ever be any other entity worthy of our worship 'as' God.

I worship the Son as the Son of God. And He has proven Himself worthy of that worship.

No man has ever seen God at any time, the Only begotten Son has 'declared Him'. That means that the Only Begotten Son has revealed God to us. The Spirit of God dwelling within the Son has been revealed in power and word through the Son. The Son is in the bosom of the Father: God.

Paul makes this perfectly clear in just about every epistle recorded in the Bible. He opens just about every letter in the same manner:

Ephesians 1 (KJV)
1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

These words make it perfectly clear that God and His Son are 'not' two persons that are 'one' God. It states clearly that God is 'the' God and Father of Jesus Christ. This makes it perfectly clear that the Father 'is' God.

The distinction is clearly shown that Paul refers to 'two separate' entities: God........and...........His Son. 'No' God 'the' Son. But God 'and' The Son. God, The Father, and Christ, His Son.

I find it difficult to fathom how anyone could read these words and still maintain that 'trinity' has any validity whatsoever. They are offered plainly and clearly and done so in a manner that shows utter distinction between 'God' and "His Son". They are 'not' the 'same'. They are not equal. They are not 'two persons' of any sort of 'trinity'. God is God. Christ is God's Son. God is the Father. The Father is God. The Son is not the Father. The Son is not God. God is 'the' God of Christ as well as our God.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Harfelugan,

I would respond to each of your responses but it's pretty clear that whatever I might offer would be pretty much a 'waste of time'.

I will offer this though:

You indicate that you believe that 'trinity' explains Godhead. Yet I posted scripture that basically warns us against 'creating our own design' of Godhead.

Godhead is not a 'mystery' to those God has chosen to reveal it's meaning. But 'trinity' remains a mystery no matter what. Even when 'supposedly' divinely revealed, it still remains a 'mystery'.

So what's the point? Only one that I can fathom. Those that 'created trinity' did so in order to be justified in worshiping the Son as the Father: God. That is the only thing that 'trinity' really 'changed. Justification for worshiping the Son 'as' the Father: God.

But in their attempt, they created a 'mystery' never offered in the Bible. The Bible does 'not' teach us that one plus one plus one equals 'one'. Any first grader 'knows' that one plus one plus one equals 'three'. So no matter what attempts one makes to try and 'trick' someone into believing otherwise, one plus one plus one equals 'three'.

You can 'say' three equals one till doomsday. But the truth is that there is no such thing. Three equals three and that is the reason that so many others view the 'trinity' as polytheistic. It is. Three persons do not a 'God' make. Three persons would be 'three persons'.

God is not a 'person'. God is God. There is nothing on earth or in the heavens or in the seas that can be used to compare to God. God is God. There is nothing else 'like' God except God. He is 'one' and uncompounded. There is no other like Him in existence. Not even the Son.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[nomadictheist]

Harfelugan,

While I appreciate you comments, it is you that has chosen a path beyond ignorance in my opinion. For you have attempted to indicate that you believe that 'trinity' existed from the 'beginning' of Christianity.

The Catholic Church, those responsible for the creation and introduction of 'trinity' even openly admit that the word 'trinity' wasn't even 'mentioned' in regards to Christianity until long after the death of Christ. That means that it was impossible for the apostles to teach something that hadn't even been 'dreamed up' yet.

If you choose to go to "New Advent", The Catholic Encyclopedia, you'll find that even the earliest mentions of the word were 'not' about the trinity, but a completely different 'triune nature' of God. It was not a formula involving 'three persons' in one God, but more along the lines of the three characteristics of God. The Son wasn't even a part of it.

It took hundreds of years for this doctrine to become the 'doctrine' that it is today. And even among those that have accepted it today, if you ask 100 different 'trinitarians' what 'trinity' is, you'll get 100 'different' definitions.

Is that really the method that God has shared revelation in 'truth'? Everyone inspired to believe in 'something different'?

And then there is this:

Acts 17:29
Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

I don't know what these words mean to you, but I certainly understand what they mean as offered.

They mean that Godhead is not something that we can 'create' of our own device. That we shouldn't even 'think' upon those lines.

Yet all one needs to do is google 'trinity', (an obvious attempt to define Godhead), and then click 'images', to find hundreds upon hundreds of 'graven images' of 'trinity'. And those that profess to believe in and follow 'trinity' treat it as if it is more valuable than gold or silver. Most 'act' like it's the most important doctrine in Christianity. Yet it's not even mentioned in the Bible.

Formed by men intent upon the use of philosophy and mythology and everything else that went into it's formation. While those in the beginning most likely professed it to be divinely inspired, I can honestly offer that what has been revealed to me is exactly what I offer in utter disagreement with the doctrine. God has 'only' revealed Himself to me as Himself. And the Son of God has never revealed Himself to me to be God. He is the Son of God. Exactly who He stated He was/is two thousand years ago. He is the same today as He was then only possessing more 'glory' upon His resurrection by His Father: God.

And look at what 'trinity' has introduced into Christianity. The Jews, the Arabs, almost every other group of people on the planet consider it to bring 'Polytheism' into Christianity. When God, from the very beginning, revealed Himself to be 'one'. Uncompounded, no 'other' God like Him.

Yet most other gods throughout history have been 'multi part gods'. You know, like three in one or many in one. A 'head god' and then 'all others'.

The Bible tells us that God is 'the' God of Christ. Not once does it offer: "Christ is God". The feeble attempt to use John 1 as evidence of 'trinity' doesn't add up. Too much other scripture plainly points to a different concept than the one 'trinitarians' attempt to use to 'prove trinity'. John 1 does no such thing. No mention of 'three in one' in John 1. No matter how hard one attempts to stretch it, skew it, twist it or bend it, there is 'no trinity' in John 1.

But if you read the 'rest' of John 1, you will find that there are many passages that speak directly in opposition to such a doctrine.

'Trinitarians' try and use "I and the Father are one" as some sort of evidence of 'trinity'. But if you read the Book of John, you'll find that more than once are we offered that Christ's greatest wish is for 'us' to be one with both Him and His Father: God.

So from the 'trinitarian' position of 'one', that would make 'us' God as well. Then that would destroy the idea of 'trinity'. For then there would be millions of persons in 'one God'.

Anyone that tries to attempt to indicate that 'trinity' existed in the 'beginning of Christianity' destroys any sense of credibility in their words. Even those that created the idea and introduced it into Christianity openly admit that it did 'not' exist in the minds or hearts of those 'in the beginning'. It couldn't have. For it took hundreds of years for it to be formed and then 'tweeked out' to it's present state.

Yet what I offer is straight out the Bible. No twisting, no bending, no alteration whatsoever. For I have no desire to 'create a religion'. I am but a simple man with simple understanding. And 'trinity' ain't a part of anything I have found or been offered conviction of through all the years I've been reading God's Word. In fact, upon praying and studying, it has been revealed to me that there is no such thing as 'trinity' except in the minds and hearts of those who have come to believe in it. It certainly doesn't exist in the Bible.

Blessings,

MEC

This is only true if you take the position that God absolutely CANNOT exist as both the Father and the Son. However, scripture is clear that this is not the case, as has already been shown.

Here is another example of a very direct statement that Jesus is God:

Hebrews 1:8-9
But to the Son He [God] says:

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

And here is yet another:

Acts 20:25-31

25 “And indeed, now I know that you all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more. 26 Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. 27 For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God. 28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29 For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. 31 Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.

(God purchased the church with His own blood... Jesus purchased the church with His blood. Therefore Jesus' blood is God's blood).

Consider also the prophecy of Isaiah 9:

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

And then there's this, from John 20:
26 And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” 27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your handhere, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.”

28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

All these are taken with the evidence already presented in John 1, which specifically says that Jesus is God, as shown and presented before. And there are more in other places in scripture.

 

[redleghunter]

I did answer your question. But since you don't seem to understand it, I'll offer it again:

Jesus Christ has 'always' been the Son of God. From the moment He was 'begotten', to the time of 'creation', to being 'born in the flesh', to dying on the cross, and now sitting at the 'right hand of God', He has been, was, is and will always be the Son of God. The very nature and essence of Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God. He is the mediator, the conduit, the lifeline between God and man. He is the means, chosen by God, for our Salvation.

I have never once in my life denied the deity that dwells within Christ. He is most certainly worthy of our worship. But I do not nor have I 'ever' worshiped Christ as God. There is only one God and that God is 'the' God of Christ as well as our God. And there has been nor will there ever be any other entity worthy of our worship 'as' God.

I worship the Son as the Son of God. And He has proven Himself worthy of that worship.

No man has ever seen God at any time, the Only begotten Son has 'declared Him'. That means that the Only Begotten Son has revealed God to us. The Spirit of God dwelling within the Son has been revealed in power and word through the Son. The Son is in the bosom of the Father: God.

Paul makes this perfectly clear in just about every epistle recorded in the Bible. He opens just about every letter in the same manner:

Ephesians 1 (KJV)
1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

These words make it perfectly clear that God and His Son are 'not' two persons that are 'one' God. It states clearly that God is 'the' God and Father of Jesus Christ. This makes it perfectly clear that the Father 'is' God.

The distinction is clearly shown that Paul refers to 'two separate' entities: God........and...........His Son. 'No' God 'the' Son. But God 'and' The Son. God, The Father, and Christ, His Son.

I find it difficult to fathom how anyone could read these words and still maintain that 'trinity' has any validity whatsoever. They are offered plainly and clearly and done so in a manner that shows utter distinction between 'God' and "His Son". They are 'not' the 'same'. They are not equal. They are not 'two persons' of any sort of 'trinity'. God is God. Christ is God's Son. God is the Father. The Father is God. The Son is not the Father. The Son is not God. God is 'the' God of Christ as well as our God.

Blessings,

MEC

None of what you quoted above and opined on gives evidence Jesus Christ is a sub divine or lesser deity.

That was my original question.

If Jesus Christ is not full Deity then what is His nature? Is He a god? An angel? Special god? Highest angel? Highest created being?

What exact qualities make up Yeshua Messiah? Yes He is the Son of God but what does that mean exactly?

There is an easy way to track The Nature of the Son of God by looking at revealed attributes of Christ and then compare that of YHWH in the TaNaKh.

 

[Imagican]

None of what you quoted above and opined on gives evidence Jesus Christ is a sub divine or lesser deity.

That was my original question.

If Jesus Christ is not full Deity then what is His nature? Is He a god? An angel? Special god? Highest angel? Highest created being?

What exact qualities make up Yeshua Messiah? Yes He is the Son of God but what does that mean exactly?

There is an easy way to track The Nature of the Son of God by looking at revealed attributes of Christ and then compare that of YHWH in the TaNaKh.

I get it now. You are so steeped in the theology you've been taught that you don't understand my answer.

It is exactly what it is: Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I don't 'need' to place a 'man made label' on Him. I do not worship Him as God. I worship Him as the Son of God.

You have a hard time understanding because of what you have been taught to believe. I don't have such preconceived notions guiding my understanding. I don't 'need' to define deity or demi or anything else.

I know "one" God. And I know 'one' Begotten Son of God. And i have never been led through The Spirit to define what is obvious. Nor to limit my understanding by setting 'rules' about God or His Son. I accept what the Bible offers without the need for 'men' to define it for me.

And I have found that quite often those that 'need' someone else to 'guide' then in 'their understanding' resent the freedom that I exhibit. I don't only 'not need' someone to 'tell me what to believe', but have experienced a relationship with God through His Son that most that I witness to or offer testimony of find utterly foreign. Most don't believe me.

So that merely strengthens what i already know. I know God and I know His Son. That's enough for me and has been enough. I have never received conviction of the Holy Spirit that I am wrong in my understanding or that my relationship would be enhanced by following 'men' and their 'teachings'.

So when I discuss things with those that insist upon the 'creations' of men in the theology they have chosen to follow, when someone tries to tell me what I 'need' to know or 'need' to believe, I can only sit back and laugh at such ignorance. For I have needed none of what many offer concerning doctrines like 'trinity' or 'osas' or any such non sense. I know the relationship that I have with God through His Son and that proves that such insistence of others is utterly invalid. I 'know' better.

As in other conviction I am often offered through the Holy Spirit, if God wanted me to believe His is 'triune', He would reveal it to me. He hasn't. In fact, I have been led to refute it. What I offer in such discussions is what I have been led to believe.

You see, no one 'got to me' first. For whatever reason, God chose me 'before' anyone snagged me with man made theology. When I came to know God, I knew nothing about Him. What I know, is what has been revealed through scripture and Spirit.

And all I can offer is this: I am as honest as I am capable of being. While I'm a liar, a cheat, a thief an adulterer, fornicator, just about anything you may choose to accuse me of, I am. But that hasn't altered the relationship I have with God through His Son. Most of those things that I am are what has brought about the realization of just how helpless I am when left to my own devices. But I'm as honest as I'm able to be. Each time I stumble, I get back up and ask for forgiveness. Many of the things that I am are not longer a part of my 'new life'. But I have never ignored what it is that I am. I am a man. But a man that has come to the truth. And that truth has not been defined by men.

So you can wish me well and indicate that you think you are in a 'better place' if that makes you feel superior. Doesn't really matter to me. What I offer i offer because it has been revealed for me to share. I ask nothing in return and expect nothing. I offer what I offer because I know how it has brought about changes in my life. Positive changes. Changes that my previous self couldn't even comprehend. In my opinion, changes that most that I discuss such issues with here on the forums seem to have a hard time comprehending.

But I'm not here to reap. I am simply here to plant seeds. Seeds that those that claim 'trinity' have been trying to eliminate for thousands of years with relatively zero success. Those that refute 'trinity' and all it's limitations in understanding are still here today.

The Bible tells us that there will always remain a remnant of those that have found the truth. And that alone ought to tell anyone about where to place their faith: in the majority? or in the remnant? The world loves it's own. It hates the 'truth'. And what I have found throughout the years I have tried to witness to others is that those that profess 'trinity' are often the most nasty when it comes to anyone or anything that refutes 'trinity'. I have people threaten to 'fight' me physically over the 'doctrine'. Yet I have never threatened another over their 'belief in trinity'. I have been called all kinds of names, treated like a second rate citizen, offered hatred and spite and malice over this 'trinity' by those that profess to believe in it and follow it. Yet I have never threatened anyone, treated them with hatred or spite or malice over their belief 'in it'.

So, when all is taken into consideration: the history of 'trinity'. The treatment of the congregation by those that professed to believe in 'trinity' for thousands of years. The lack of any use of the term or any reference to it in the Bible, and personal revelation that matter not to me if anyone believes me or not. What I'm left with is what I believe to be the truth: there is no such thing as 'trinity' so far as the teachings of 'any prophet' ever sent by God, His own Son or the apostles. It is nothing but man made theology more akin to philosophy and mythology than anything offered in the Bible. A 'doctrine' that was never even introduced until hundreds of years after the death of Christ. And even after introduced continues to evolve till this day.

For if you cannot adequately define 'trinity', then it still remains a mystery. And as any mystery, the longer it remains a mystery the more it evolves over time.

But the relationship that i have with God is no mystery. For He wants us to 'know' Him. Not as a 'mystery', but as our Heavenly Father. His Son would never had revealed Him in secret or as a mystery. For what is the point of revelation is upon receiving, it still remains a 'mystery'?

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Albion]

It's true. We don't understand your answer.

Jesus claimed to be God. Jesus claimed the authority that only God can have. Jesus was understood by those Jewish authorities who heard him speak to be claiming to be God. And he is described in Scripture as God, quite apart from the passages in which he himself is speaking.

Sure, we think he is God. All of that information is from the Bible.

It's not because some "men" said to think of Jesus as God. Not any more than we'd doubt him simply because other men say to do that instead.

 

[redleghunter]

I get it now. You are so steeped in the theology you've been taught that you don't understand my answer.

It is exactly what it is: Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I don't 'need' to place a 'man made label' on Him. I do not worship Him as God. I worship Him as the Son of God.

You have a hard time understanding because of what you have been taught to believe. I don't have such preconceived notions guiding my understanding. I don't 'need' to define deity or demi or anything else.

I know "one" God. And I know 'one' Begotten Son of God. And i have never been led through The Spirit to define what is obvious. Nor to limit my understanding by setting 'rules' about God or His Son. I accept what the Bible offers without the need for 'men' to define it for me.

And I have found that quite often those that 'need' someone else to 'guide' then in 'their understanding' resent the freedom that I exhibit. I don't only 'not need' someone to 'tell me what to believe', but have experienced a relationship with God through His Son that most that I witness to or offer testimony of find utterly foreign. Most don't believe me.

So that merely strengthens what i already know. I know God and I know His Son. That's enough for me and has been enough. I have never received conviction of the Holy Spirit that I am wrong in my understanding or that my relationship would be enhanced by following 'men' and their 'teachings'.

So when I discuss things with those that insist upon the 'creations' of men in the theology they have chosen to follow, when someone tries to tell me what I 'need' to know or 'need' to believe, I can only sit back and laugh at such ignorance. For I have needed none of what many offer concerning doctrines like 'trinity' or 'osas' or any such non sense. I know the relationship that I have with God through His Son and that proves that such insistence of others is utterly invalid. I 'know' better.

As in other conviction I am often offered through the Holy Spirit, if God wanted me to believe His is 'triune', He would reveal it to me. He hasn't. In fact, I have been led to refute it. What I offer in such discussions is what I have been led to believe.

You see, no one 'got to me' first. For whatever reason, God chose me 'before' anyone snagged me with man made theology. When I came to know God, I knew nothing about Him. What I know, is what has been revealed through scripture and Spirit.

And all I can offer is this: I am as honest as I am capable of being. While I'm a liar, a cheat, a thief an adulterer, fornicator, just about anything you may choose to accuse me of, I am. But that hasn't altered the relationship I have with God through His Son. Most of those things that I am are what has brought about the realization of just how helpless I am when left to my own devices. But I'm as honest as I'm able to be. Each time I stumble, I get back up and ask for forgiveness. Many of the things that I am are not longer a part of my 'new life'. But I have never ignored what it is that I am. I am a man. But a man that has come to the truth. And that truth has not been defined by men.

So you can wish me well and indicate that you think you are in a 'better place' if that makes you feel superior. Doesn't really matter to me. What I offer i offer because it has been revealed for me to share. I ask nothing in return and expect nothing. I offer what I offer because I know how it has brought about changes in my life. Positive changes. Changes that my previous self couldn't even comprehend. In my opinion, changes that most that I discuss such issues with here on the forums seem to have a hard time comprehending.

But I'm not here to reap. I am simply here to plant seeds. Seeds that those that claim 'trinity' have been trying to eliminate for thousands of years with relatively zero success. Those that refute 'trinity' and all it's limitations in understanding are still here today.

The Bible tells us that there will always remain a remnant of those that have found the truth. And that alone ought to tell anyone about where to place their faith: in the majority? or in the remnant? The world loves it's own. It hates the 'truth'. And what I have found throughout the years I have tried to witness to others is that those that profess 'trinity' are often the most nasty when it comes to anyone or anything that refutes 'trinity'. I have people threaten to 'fight' me physically over the 'doctrine'. Yet I have never threatened another over their 'belief in trinity'. I have been called all kinds of names, treated like a second rate citizen, offered hatred and spite and malice over this 'trinity' by those that profess to believe in it and follow it. Yet I have never threatened anyone, treated them with hatred or spite or malice over their belief 'in it'.

So, when all is taken into consideration: the history of 'trinity'. The treatment of the congregation by those that professed to believe in 'trinity' for thousands of years. The lack of any use of the term or any reference to it in the Bible, and personal revelation that matter not to me if anyone believes me or not. What I'm left with is what I believe to be the truth: there is no such thing as 'trinity' so far as the teachings of 'any prophet' ever sent by God, His own Son or the apostles. It is nothing but man made theology more akin to philosophy and mythology than anything offered in the Bible. A 'doctrine' that was never even introduced until hundreds of years after the death of Christ. And even after introduced continues to evolve till this day.

For if you cannot adequately define 'trinity', then it still remains a mystery. And as any mystery, the longer it remains a mystery the more it evolves over time.

But the relationship that i have with God is no mystery. For He wants us to 'know' Him. Not as a 'mystery', but as our Heavenly Father. His Son would never had revealed Him in secret or as a mystery. For what is the point of revelation is upon receiving, it still remains a 'mystery'?

Blessings,

MEC

"Remnant" claims of direct revelation.

Are you claiming an apostolic authority?

Why you responded as you did is odd.

This is what I was referring to in using the Bible to look at attributes:


Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Son of man. We all agree.

Let's look at some of the eternal attributes of the Son of God, Son of man.

Revelation 1:

John, to the seven churches in Asia: grace to you and peace from the one who is and the one who was and the one who is coming, and from the seven spirits who are before his throne, and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

To the one who loves us and released us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father—to him be the glory and the power forever and ever . Amen.

Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even every one who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over him. Yes, amen. I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God, the one who is and the one who was and the one who is coming, the All-Powerful.

Revelation 1:4-8 LEB http://bible.com/90/rev.1.4-8.LEB

And I turned to see the voice which was speaking with me, and when I turned, I saw seven gold lampstands, and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, dressed in a robe reaching to the feet and girded around his chest with a golden belt, and his head and hair were white like wool, white as snow, and his eyes were like a fiery flame, and his feet were like fine bronze when it has been fired in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters, and he had in his right hand seven stars, and a sharp double-edged sword coming out of his mouth, and his face was like the sun shining in its strength.

And when I saw him, I fell at his feet like a dead person, and he placed his right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid! I am the first and the last, and the one who lives, and I was dead, and behold, I am living forever and ever , and I hold the keys of death and of Hades. Revelation 1:12-18 LEB http://bible.com/90/rev.1.12-18.LEB

Daniel 7:

“I continued watching until thrones were placed and an Ancient of Days sat; his clothing was like white snow and the hair of his head was like pure wool and his throne was a flame of fire and its wheels were burning fire. A stream of fire issued forth and flowed from his presence; thousands upon thousands served him and ten thousand upon ten thousand stood before him.

The judge sat, and the books were opened. “I continued watching in the visions of the night, and look, with the clouds of heaven one like a son of man was coming, and he came to the Ancient of Days, and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and kingship that all the peoples, the nations, and languages would serve him; his dominion is a dominion without end that will not cease, and his kingdom is one that will not be destroyed.

Daniel 7:9-10, 13-14 LEB http://bible.com/90/dan.7.9-14.LEB

I think it is clear the Daniel vision was the pre-incarnate Christ. Also clear the vision of John is the Risen and Glorified Christ. Same attributes of physical appearance and same use of "first and last."

Taking the above we can now look at Isaiah 44:

Isaiah 44:

Thus says Yahweh, the king of Israel, and its redeemer, Yahweh of hosts: “I am the first, and I am the last, and there is no god besides me. And who is like me? Let him proclaim it! And let him declare it and set it in order for me since I established an eternal people and things that are to come, and let them tell them the things that are coming.

Isaiah 44:6-7 LEB http://bible.com/90/isa.44.6-7.LEB

I believe the above needs little explanation. By God's Grace.

 

[7xlightray]

And then there's this, from John 20:
26 And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” 27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your handhere, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.”

28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

All these are taken with the evidence already presented in John 1, which specifically says that Jesus is God, as shown and presented before. And there are more in other places in scripture.

I can start with the easiest first.


We have to keep scripture in light of all scripture.

Right off the bat, lets keep this verse in mind 1 Corinthians 8:6, which clarifies that “God” is the Father, and “Lord” is Jesus.

And it may be good to keep this in mind as well, that just because the leaders of Israel are called gods, does not mean they are God John 10:34. So, we need more scripture to determine whether someone who is called G/god, is the God.


Why did Thomas say My Lord and my God?

Seeing Jesus alive, he new at that moment, that Jesus was his lord (lord as in king of Israel, not the God), but he recognize that the Father was in Jesus, believing what Jesus had told them. In John 14 just before Jesus was arrested, Philip asked "show us the Father", Thomas was present, and part of the conversation.

John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have knownmy Father also: ...10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself [Jesus said do not worry what to say, it's the Father that speaks in you]: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works [John 14:24]. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.​

Thomas had seen the work the Father did, by the Father raising Jesus from the dead. And now believed Jesus, that it was the Father dwelling in Jesus, speaking and doing the works through Jesus. Thomas was confessing that God (the Father) was with, or in Jesus speaking the truth, the light, as Isaiah 52 also says.

Isaiah 52:6 Therefore my [The Father speaking here about His salvation to come) people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I [Father] am he that doth speak: behold, it is I [The Father. We know it is the Father, because Jesus also confirmed it is the Father that speaks in him John 14:10; John 14:24]. . .13 Behold, my servant [Then the Father speaking about His Christ] shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. 14 As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men:​

The tomb was sealed, only God could have raised him, God giving His testimony, His witness, that all that Jesus spoke was true.

Jesus makes it clear he is not God, there are so many, but here is one.

John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me [It was the Father that sent him. Think of all the things Jesus taught, because it was not his doctrine]. 17 If any man will do his will [So this would be the Fathers will, by what Jesus just said], he shall know of [about, concerning] the doctrine [The doctrine of Christ, what he taught. Paul called it his doctrine, but it's not his], whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself [Jesus separates himself from God, and makes it clear he is not God. There is only one God, right?]. 18 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.​

Jesus did not call himself God. First, Jesus said it was not his doctrine, but the one that sent him, it was the Father that sent him (the Father, who sent him John 14:24).
Second, Jesus saying it was Gods doctrine, and not his, shows it did not originate from him, as it did not originate from Paul.
And third, by him stating it is not his doctrine, but God's, shows he cannot be God, for it is not his doctrine, but God's.

There are many more scriptures that show Jesus is not God Almighty. In fact the New Testament tells us who the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is.

 

[nomadictheist]

I can start with the easiest first.


We have to keep scripture in light of all scripture.

Right off the bat, lets keep this verse in mind 1 Corinthians 8:6, which clarifies that “God” is the Father, and “Lord” is Jesus.

And it may be good to keep this in mind as well, that just because the leaders of Israel are called gods, does not mean they are God John 10:34. So, we need more scripture to determine whether someone who is called G/god, is the God.


Why did Thomas say My Lord and my God?

Seeing Jesus alive, he new at that moment, that Jesus was his lord (lord as in king of Israel, not the God), but he recognize that the Father was in Jesus, believing what Jesus had told them. In John 14 just before Jesus was arrested, Philip asked "show us the Father", Thomas was present, and part of the conversation.

John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have knownmy Father also: ...10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself [Jesus said do not worry what to say, it's the Father that speaks in you]: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works [John 14:24]. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.​

Thomas had seen the work the Father did, by the Father raising Jesus from the dead. And now believed Jesus, that it was the Father dwelling in Jesus, speaking and doing the works through Jesus. Thomas was confessing that God (the Father) was with, or in Jesus speaking the truth, the light, as Isaiah 52 also says.

Isaiah 52:6 Therefore my [The Father speaking here about His salvation to come) people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I [Father] am he that doth speak: behold, it is I [The Father. We know it is the Father, because Jesus also confirmed it is the Father that speaks in him John 14:10; John 14:24]. . .13 Behold, my servant [Then the Father speaking about His Christ] shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. 14 As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men:​

The tomb was sealed, only God could have raised him, God giving His testimony, His witness, that all that Jesus spoke was true.

Jesus makes it clear he is not God, there are so many, but here is one.

John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me [It was the Father that sent him. Think of all the things Jesus taught, because it was not his doctrine]. 17 If any man will do his will [So this would be the Fathers will, by what Jesus just said], he shall know of [about, concerning] the doctrine [The doctrine of Christ, what he taught. Paul called it his doctrine, but it's not his], whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself [Jesus separates himself from God, and makes it clear he is not God. There is only one God, right?]. 18 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.​

Jesus did not call himself God. First, Jesus said it was not his doctrine, but the one that sent him, it was the Father that sent him (the Father, who sent him John 14:24).
Second, Jesus saying it was Gods doctrine, and not his, shows it did not originate from him, as it did not originate from Paul.
And third, by him stating it is not his doctrine, but God's, shows he cannot be God, for it is not his doctrine, but God's.

There are many more scriptures that show Jesus is not God Almighty. In fact the New Testament tells us who the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is.

This does nothing to answer any of the verses. Nobody here is denying that Jesus (God the Son) and God the Father are separate, even though They are also One. However, your interpretation is fraught with error.

Your first and most major error is that Israel's kings were not called "Gods" by the Jewish people. The Jews always addressed their kings as "my lord, the king." not "my lord and my God."

Jesus reference in John 10:34 is to Psalm 82:6. It is you who have said that all scripture should be taken in context with the rest of scripture, so why do you not do so? Psalm 82:6 is an anomaly among scripture rather than a norm for labeling kings as "gods." It is a picture that God is painting through the psalmist. He is saying they are gods in the sense that they represent the authority of God to mete out justice and rule over the nations. Jesus then says that the Messiah has much more right to claim this title, having dominion over all things according to the will of the Father.

But this verse does not refute the rest of the verses, all of which show Jesus to be God. There are many who deny the deity of Jesus, who being in the form of God, did not consider equality of God something to be grasped. They think that because He humbled Himself and submitted fully to the will of the Father, that means that He is not equal with the Father. They believe that Jesus choosing to speak on the the words that the Father gives Him means that He could have no authority of His own.

This interpretation of scripture makes the error of attributing to God one human trait that God does not possess: pride. Jesus was not proud, so He thought it nothing to become flesh and to submit Himself to the will of His Father. Rather than use His equality to resist or disobey, He submitted Himself fully to the will of the Father in every way, even speaking only the words given by the Father.

And in order to believe this, one must ignore a myriad of passages and verses in the Bible that directly point to Jesus as God. I have presented many of them. There are more. I have not revisited most of the ones that others have offered, and I will not revisit them now.

 

[redleghunter]

This interpretation of scripture makes the error of attributing to God one human trait that God does not possess: pride. Jesus was not proud, so He thought it nothing to become flesh and to submit Himself to the will of His Father. Rather than use His equality to resist or disobey, He submitted Himself fully to the will of the Father in every way, even speaking only the words given by the Father.

Important above as we see Satan temp Christ into doing things to break His humility.

Excellent point.

 

[Harfelugan]

Harfelugan,

I would respond to each of your responses but it's pretty clear that whatever I might offer would be pretty much a 'waste of time'.

You wont respond to replies about a post you made that necessitated the many replies I returned to you. This tells me that your only interested in discussion if you see opportunity of spreading seed. This means that all your posts may only be diatribe. This is how cult leaders spread their messages. Yet you personally aren't a cult leader.

You indicate that you believe that 'trinity' explains Godhead. Yet I posted scripture that basically warns us against 'creating our own design' of Godhead.

You did no such thing, and I showed you the grammatical error that led to your misinterpretation.

Godhead is not a 'mystery' to those God has chosen to reveal it's meaning. But 'trinity' remains a mystery no matter what. Even when 'supposedly' divinely revealed, it still remains a 'mystery'.

The Godhead is no less a mystery than the trinity because they are the same thing. Neither are fleshed out in scripture. If you've received specific revelation of the Godhead you didn't get it from scripture. You must have been indoctrinated into it through the devices of mere men.

So what's the point? Only one that I can fathom. Those that 'created trinity' did so in order to be justified in worshiping the Son as the Father: God. That is the only thing that 'trinity' really 'changed. Justification for worshiping the Son 'as' the Father: God.

You are very close to the Kingdom of God.

The Bible does 'not' teach us that one plus one plus one equals 'one'. Any first grader 'knows' that one plus one plus one equals 'three'. So no matter what attempts one makes to try and 'trick' someone into believing otherwise, one plus one plus one equals 'three'.

You can 'say' three equals one till doomsday. But the truth is that there is no such thing. Three equals three and that is the reason that so many others view the 'trinity' as polytheistic. It is. Three persons do not a 'God' make. Three persons would be 'three persons'.

I agree.

God is not a 'person'. God is God. There is nothing on earth or in the heavens or in the seas that can be used to compare to God. God is God. There is nothing else 'like' God except God. He is 'one' and uncompounded. There is no other like Him in existence. Not even the Son.

Blessings,

MEC

I agree until the uncompounded part. With it I need specific parameters to it's contextual definition.
And yes the Son is not like the Father, he is distinct from the Father.

I'll plagerize the best analogy, in which every analogy can be broken, especially if viewing God through human understanding.

Emotion
Intellect
Will
3 Human attributes that define the human essence. Divinity has an essence as well.
We can't relinquish one of these attributes without crippling our human essence. Defined as some form of mental handicap.
One human attribute can't operate without the other two. All other attributes are connected to these attributes, in some way derive themselves from them. You consist humanly as a three part being yet, you are one. That's all it takes to comprehend the Trinitarian concept of God. It's not 1+1+1=3, it's 3=1. Which shows your not even in the same discussion with many of the posters in this thread.

 

[7xlightray]

This does nothing to answer any of the verses. Nobody here is denying that Jesus (God the Son) and God the Father are separate, even though They are also One. However, your interpretation is fraught with error.

Your first and most major error is that Israel's kings were not called "Gods" by the Jewish people. The Jews always addressed their kings as "my lord, the king." not "my lord and my God."

Jesus reference in John 10:34 is to Psalm 82:6. It is you who have said that all scripture should be taken in context with the rest of scripture, so why do you not do so? Psalm 82:6 is an anomaly among scripture rather than a norm for labeling kings as "gods." It is a picture that God is painting through the psalmist. He is saying they are gods in the sense that they represent the authority of God to mete out justice and rule over the nations. Jesus then says that the Messiah has much more right to claim this title, having dominion over all things according to the will of the Father.

Where you erred is in stating I said, the Jewish people called their leaders gods. It was the Spirit through the writer that called them gods. Maybe not so much an anomaly...

Psalm 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty [el]; he judgeth among the gods [elohim].
. . .6 I have said, Ye are gods [elohim]; and all of you are children of the most High.​

There is also...

Psalm 97:7 Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of idols: worship him, all ye gods ['elohiym].​

And there is even Moses Exodus 4:16 ...and thou shalt be to him as God

Angels are also called gods Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7

And, don't you know, His son's and daughter's will be called Yhvh?

My point was, which you seemed to have missed, was this does not make them "Man" God, nor have the nature of God. They will partake of His nature when they receive eternal life.

This is, what I meant “He is saying they are gods in the sense that they represent the authority of God to mete out justice and rule over the nations” To be honest, I don't know how you came to any other conclusion, from what I said, which was “And it may be good to keep this in mind as well, that just because the leaders of Israel are called gods, does not mean they are God John 10:34. So, we need more scripture to determine whether someone who is called G/god, is the God.”.

This does nothing to answer any of the verses....And in order to believe this, one must ignore a myriad of passages and verses in the Bible that directly point to Jesus as God. I have presented many of them. There are more. I have not revisited most of the ones that others have offered, and I will not revisit them now.

I said, I would start off with the easiest, because no point in starting off with the more difficult, as we can see.

There are many who deny the deity of Jesus, who being in the form of God, did not consider equality of God something to be grasped. They think that because He humbled Himself and submitted fully to the will of the Father, that means that He is not equal with the Father. They believe that Jesus choosing to speak on the the words that the Father gives Him means that He could have no authority of His own.
This interpretation of scripture makes the error of attributing to God one human trait that God does not possess: pride. Jesus was not proud, so He thought it nothing to become flesh and to submit Himself to the will of His Father. Rather than use His equality to resist or disobey, He submitted Himself fully to the will of the Father in every way, even speaking only the words given by the Father.

“He did not consider equality of God something to be grasped,” as Eve did.

But as to humility why, as many teach, would Jesus proclaim openly to the Jews he is God the “I AM”, if he was not trying to grasp at equality, that's a contradiction. Yet, in privacy saying to his disciples, he does not know the day, or the hour; or praying to the Father saying He is the only true God? That's like the reverse, the opposite, contradictions.

 

[7xlightray]

Nobody here is denying that Jesus (God the Son) and God the Father are separate, even though They are also One.

I was not suggesting anybody was. I was saying, Jesus was separating himself from “God,” as I stated...

“[Jesus separates himself from God, and makes it clear he is not God. There is only one God, right?].”

...because this is how it is stated “whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” It does not say, whether it be of the “Father,” but it does say, whether it be of “God.”

 

[nomadictheist]

Where you erred is in stating I said, the Jewish people called their leaders gods. It was the Spirit through the writer that called them gods. Maybe not so much an anomaly...

Psalm 82:1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty [el]; he judgeth among the gods [elohim].
. . .6 I have said, Ye are gods [elohim]; and all of you are children of the most High.​

There is also...

Psalm 97:7 Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of idols: worship him, all ye gods ['elohiym].​

And there is even Moses Exodus 4:16 ...and thou shalt be to him as God

Angels are also called gods Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7

And, don't you know, His son's and daughter's will be called Yhvh?

My point was, which you seemed to have missed, was this does not make them "Man" God, nor have the nature of God. They will partake of His nature when they receive eternal life.

This is, what I meant “He is saying they are gods in the sense that they represent the authority of God to mete out justice and rule over the nations” To be honest, I don't know how you came to any other conclusion, from what I said, which was “And it may be good to keep this in mind as well, that just because the leaders of Israel are called gods, does not mean they are God John 10:34. So, we need more scripture to determine whether someone who is called G/god, is the God.”.

And that is why I have presented a lot of scripture apart from this. I'm sure Thomas did remember Jesus' conversation when He said "anyone who has seen me has seen the Father..." You claim that this is only because the Father dwelt within Jesus, but John claims it was because Jesus existed as God eternally (You can see this claim in John 1).

I said, I would start off with the easiest, because no point in starting off with the more difficult, as we can see.

You say it's the easiest, but you haven't actually explained it. You said that Thomas was addressing two persons/beings instead of one when he said "my Lord and my God." There is no contextual or other scriptural evidence to support that.

Not only that, it says that Thomas worshiped Jesus. There is only One who is worthy of worship, and He does not share His glory with any other (see Isaiah 42:8). Furthermore, we see all of heaven (except the Father) worshiping Jesus as well in Revelation.

“He did not consider equality of God something to be grasped,” as Eve did.

You forgot the first part of the verse: "Being in the very form of God..."
Eve, like Adam, was created in the image of God. Neither of them ever existed in His very form. Jesus existed in the very form of God, but still humbled Himself to the point of taking on flesh and dying on the cross.

But as to humility why, as many teach, would Jesus proclaim openly to the Jews he is God the “I AM”, if he was not trying to grasp at equality, that's a contradiction. Yet, in privacy saying to his disciples, he does not know the day, or the hour; or praying to the Father saying He is the only true God? That's like the reverse, the opposite, contradictions.

The problem is that you continue to take an either/or approach to everything. You say "either Jesus is God or Jesus is the Son of God."
Once you get rid of this preconception, you no longer have to pull out all the mental acrobatics to try to make everything work. It's not either/or. It's both/and. Jesus is God, and Jesus is the Son of God. Only the Father knows the day and the hour because the are both One and separate. Just like Jesus said "not My will, but Yours be done..."

In terms of your questioning of Jesus' humility, Jesus openly declared to His disciples that He was God. You even took a very small part of it in your interpretation of Thomas' calling Jesus "my Lord and my God."

John 14:8 Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.”

9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves."

Jesus doesn't just say that the Father is in Him. He also says that He is in the Father. In fact, He says it twice. "I am in the Father and the Father in Me." And based on John 1, He clearly revealed His deity at least to John, and probably to the rest of the apostles as well.

 

[7xlightray]

You claim that this is only because the Father dwelt within Jesus, but John claims it was because Jesus existed as God eternally (You can see this claim in John 1).

I have already stated in this thread John 1:14 ...the word (3056. logos - a word, being the expression of a thought; expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit) became flesh, not a person became flesh. It does not say a person became flesh, it says the word became flesh. When Gods word became a tree, does that mean the tree is God? No!

...it was because Jesus existed as God eternally (You can see this claim in John 1). You say it's the easiest, but you haven't actually explained it. You said that Thomas was addressing two persons/beings instead of one when he said "my Lord and my God." There is no contextual or other scriptural evidence to support that.

Of course I did...

John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: ...10 ...the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.​

And God raised him from the dead, that is the work of God. Thomas believed he was seeing the character of God, God working in him. What there is no evidence of, is that John 1:1-[to whatever verse you prefer], was spoken to anyone until John penned the book of John.

Not only that, it says that Thomas worshiped Jesus. There is only One who is worthy of worship, and He does not share His glory with any other (see Isaiah 42:8). Furthermore, we see all of heaven (except the Father) worshiping Jesus as well in Revelation.

Then, all I could suggest is doing a study on the word “worship”. We are not to worship another as God.
We do worship Jesus, he is our king, but Jesus also said to the Church in Rev. 3:9 ...behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. This is the same Geek word "worship - G4352" that is used for worshiping Jesus, and God.

And there's Genesis 41:43; Daniel 2:46-47; 1 Chronicles 29:20, these godly men accepted worship, but they were not worshiped as God.

John 1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.​

He believed the scriptures when they said that the anointed king would be called the son of God...

2 Samuel 7:13 He [Solomon, and points to Jesus] shall build an housefor my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. 14 I will be his father [verse 8, 11 says this is the LORD - Yhvh], and he shall be my son [Solomon, and points to Jesus]. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:​

You forgot the first part of the verse: "Being in the very form of God..."
Eve, like Adam, was created in the image of God. Neither of them ever existed in His very form. Jesus existed in the very form of God, but still humbled Himself to the point of taking on flesh and dying on the cross..

“Form” 3444. morphé – properly, form (outward expression) that embodies essential (inner) substance so that the form is in complete harmony with the inner essence.

He outwardly expressed the character of his Father, so that if we seen Jesus we seen the Father.

The problem is that you continue to take an either/or approach to everything. You say "either Jesus is God or Jesus is the Son of God."
Once you get rid of this preconception, you no longer have to pull out all the mental acrobatics to try to make everything work. It's not either/or. It's both/and. Jesus is God, and Jesus is the Son of God.

I use to believe in the trinity for many, many years, scripture does not flow when believing in a trinity.

Only the Father knows the day and the hour because the are both One and separate. Just like Jesus said "not My will, but Yours be done..."

Jesus made it clear, he is not the LORD – Yhvh, when he stated he does not know the day and hour, because Jesus knew the scriptures, and he knew this was not given to man, nor anyone. There is a O/T scriptural reason why Jesus said this, so that anyone willing to seek the truth, would know the truth.

No, the O/T scripture says, “known to the LORD” – Yhvh. There it does not say Father, if Jesus was the LORD – Yhvh, then he would have know.

Chapter 14 of Zechariah is about the Day of the LORD, I would suggest reading the whole chapter.

Zechariah 14:7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD[God – Yhvh is not sharing when this day is. Jesus made sure those that have ears to hear, heard].
What I like is this in verse 9...
9...in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one [not trinity].

Matthew 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man [this is the word G3762 - oudeis – no one, nothing, this is not the word G444 – anthrōpos – human being, man], no, not the angels of heaven, [NU-Text adds nor the Son] but my Father only.

Mark 13:32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man [this is the word G3762 - oudeis – no one, nothing, not the word G444 – anthrōpos – human being, man], no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.​

By using this word “G3762 – oudeis (a powerful negating conjunction that leaves no exceptions)” he is excluding all others. No one else! No one else, but LORD-Yhvh, which is the Father. As the N/T also tells us who the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is.

So, the LORD - Yhvh is the Father, and no one else.

 

[7xlightray]

In terms of your questioning of Jesus' humility, Jesus openly declared to His disciples that He was God. You even took a very small part of it in your interpretation of Thomas' calling Jesus "my Lord and my God."

John 14:8 Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.”

9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves."

Jesus doesn't just say that the Father is in Him. He also says that He is in the Father. In fact, He says it twice. "I am in the Father and the Father in Me." And based on John 1, He clearly revealed His deity at least to John, and probably to the rest of the apostles as well.

If we were to use that type of interpretation, we are the God as well.

1 John 4:16 ...God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.​

 

[Imagican]

Ok,

Let me offer this:

Christ Himself says this in Revelation 3:

14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God

I don't know what this means to you, but it is pretty clear to me.

What it means to me is that Christ was the 'beginning' of the creation of God. Exactly what it says.

"In the beginning", the 'first' creation of God that pertains to mankind was God's Son: Christ. If what this states is literal and to be taken as offered, this one statement by Christ completely destroys any credibility of 'trinity'. For if Christ was 'created', He had a 'beginning'. 'Trinity' insists that Christ is 'co eternal' with God. If there was 'a time' before Christ, then 'trinity' can't be true.

"The firstborn of every creature". Whether that's in reference to 'men' or literally 'every creature', either way, if He is the 'first born' of 'every creature', then this too refers to a 'beginning'. A time 'before' He became the 'firstborn'.

And then there are many references to Christ being 'made'.

And then there are those points that are 'most' revealing: Every time Christ states that the 'words' He offered were 'not His own'. That the power to do the things He accomplished was not His own. That these attributes were 'given Him' by His Father. If something, 'anything' was 'given' to Him, that means that there was 'a time before' they were 'given'. For in order to 'give something to someone', there must be a time 'before' they possess it.

What means those that profess 'trinity' have come to in order to alter all these points I've made is iffy at best. Some of the explanations I've heard over the years are downright ludicrous. Fully man/fully God. This explains nothing. For if at one moment Christ was God, and the next He was man, then He was 'fully' neither.

Like when He was on the cross and uttered His last words: "My God, my God, why hath thou forsaken me?" I don't understand how anyone can read these words and then believe that Christ 'was God'. For it is obvious that 'God' did not 'take on' the sins of this world. God sent His Son to accomplish this task. Christ openly states over and over again that He was 'sent' by God to do this very thing.

I simply accept what is offered in the Bible. I do not accept the words of men that insist upon altering the Bible to suit their own theology. While I could be accused of following 'theology', in my honest belief: I follow 'no theology'. I have no set 'rules'. I know God and love God. I know God through His Son and I love the Son as well. But I put nothing 'before' God intentionally. I certainly do not place the Son before God. I do not worship Christ as God.

If I have a theology it is 'love'. Nothing else. I do not worship God as an idol. I worship God as my Heavenly Father. And I worship His Son as His Only Begotten Son. I have created no 'rules' to lead myself or others. No laws written on paper or upon stone. There are two commandments that Christ has implored us to follow: Love God above all else and love our neighbors as ourselves. If we come to a place in our lives where we are capable of following these two, we end up following everything God has ever intended for us to learn.

Rituals like Baptism, and 'eating in remembrance', these are swallowed up if we simply learn to love God and love each other. For God doesn't want ritual or pomp. He simply wants our love and for us to share our love with each other. It's really, 'that simple'. Once set free, ye are free indeed.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

It's true. We don't understand your answer.

Like I said, I get it. Honestly, I do. But even though one may not agree with what I offered, it shouldn't be difficult to understand even if you disagree.

So if you are incapable of understanding, then there is something missing in your ability to understand. And I don't believe that God wishes for His children to be incapable of understanding even those things that they don't agree upon.

Jesus claimed to be God. Jesus claimed the authority that only God can have. Jesus was understood by those Jewish authorities who heard him speak to be claiming to be God. And he is described in Scripture as God, quite apart from the passages in which he himself is speaking.

Well, if what you say is true, then it makes absolutely no sense that the apostles didn't 'get it'. For not a single apostle taught that Jesus was 'God'.

Each that was asked by Christ, "Who do you say that I am?" Each answered, "The Son of the Living God". Not a single apostle, when asked, answered, "God".

And I already offered the means of Paul's opening to each epistle. Let me offer it again:

Epheisans:

2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.


Sure, we think he is God. All of that information is from the Bible.

So even though Paul states that God is 'the' God 'of' Christ, you still insist that Christ 'is' God? I hope that you can understand how confusing that would be to me. That God is 'the' God of Christ. But Christ 'is' God. Tell you what, show me one line of the Bible that offers: God the Son and you may have a chance of convincing me otherwise. But if you can't, then it is obviously a 'man made' phrase that is based on nothing but 'wishful thinking'.

It's not because some "men" said to think of Jesus as God. Not any more than we'd doubt him simply because other men say to do that instead.

But in truth it 'is' a concept based on what 'some men' thought up. I'm reading the same scriptures and within them I find 'no': Jesus is God. I have read what you have to offer and many many many others. Some of what has been said 'sounds good'. But it doesn't 'fit' the totality of scripture. And it's clear when one understands what 'trinity' is that it is not contained within the Bible.

The Bible does 'not' offer 'co eternal', or 'Co Substantial', or 'Co 'anything'. It actually offers the opposite. It explains that Christ was 'begotten'. It explains that the Father who 'is' God is greater than the Son. It explains that there are things that only the Father knows. That means that there are things that the Son does 'not' know. The Son is 'not' equal to the Father. The Father 'is' God. The Son did not consider 'robbery' to be a means of trying to 'make' Himself equal to the Father. Unlike Satan who 'did' consider robbery to be a means to usurp God's place and authority.

Jesus has told us exactly 'who' He is. I have no problem accepting what He offered without the 'need' to make up my definition or definitions.

He stated from the very beginning of His ministry that He was/is: the Son of God. And Albion, that is 'enough' for me. I don't need to make up anything beyond that. I don't feel a need nor am I compelled to worship the Son as the Father. I worship only 'one' God. Not three Gods in one. But one God period.

Now, let me ask you this: Do you honestly believe that God would hold this 'against me'? When I pray, I pray: "Our Father.........................." and I close in the name of Christ.

I understand 'love'. I practice it often.

Do you think that I do these things of my own accord? Before rebirth I didn't even know what love was. I thought like the rest of 'this world': That which I Loved is what pleased me. That is what I 'loved'.

But since it has been revealed to me that love isn't what 'pleases' me, but what I am capable of doing for the sake of others without expecting 'anything' in return. Where do you suppose this understanding came from? Do you believe that I 'made it up'? Or was it divinely revealed?

For it is without a doubt that The Spirit recognizes The Spirit. That means that The Spirit dwelling within one will most certainly recognize The same Spirit dwelling within another.

But you would allow words developed by men, instituted by men, enforced upon others by men, to get in the way of such recognition? If so, I suggest that your influence is from 'men' and not God through His Son. For if you were 'truly' following in faith, it would be impossible for you to be incapable of recognizing the same Spirit dwelling within others that dwells within yourself. Not an insult, a simple observation.

And anyone that would allow the words of men to impede their ability to love others is not following in truth. And I have experienced more hatred and spite from those who profess 'trinity' than I have from those that live 'for this world'.

So what is more important? That someone believe in and follow words devised by men? or That men follow what has been offered that matters: Love God and love one's neighbor?

If the words devised by men cause one to stumble in their ability to love their neighbor, it would be my suggestion that they abandon such teachings and turn to the truth.

I'm not here to cause dissension. I'm here to spread the 'good news'. And the 'good news' isn't about what men have devised in an attempt to 'create' their own God. The 'good news' is that God sent His Only Begotten Son so that those that believe upon Him can find forgiveness for their sins. Redemption. Salvation. And these are 'not' dependent upon me believing the same 'man made theology' as you or anyone else. I am plenty capable of serving in truth without the need to offer my own definition of God or His Son. All I 'need' to do is accept what is offered as it is offered. I do not 'need' to make up anything. It has already been offered and it is merely up to me to accept it. "Trinity" is 'not' offered in the Bible and you know this as well as I do. It took men hundreds of years to develop this 'idea'. And men more akin to follow mysticism, mythology and philosophy than anything else. The apostles delivered 'no trinity' in any way, shape or form. And anyone that says otherwise is being dishonest with themselves and anyone that they try to influence with such 'false teaching'. 'Trinity' is not in the Bible nor was it taught by a single apostle.

The very essence of Christ wasn't even determined by 'The Church' until hundreds of years after the death of Christ. And then in utter opposition to the 'other half' of the Church which insisted that the essence of The Son was 'not' equal to the Father: God. And it was 'first' determined by The Church that the 'essence' was equal 'before' 'trinity' every came into existence.

You say that since it was placed within the dogma or doctrine of the 'church', that it always existed from the beginning. But this is 'not' the truth. The truth is that the concept never even existed until it was 'placed' into the 'Church'. The apostles never 'once' mentioned a 'triune' nature of God or His Son. If they never mentioned it, they certainly never 'taught it'.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[nomadictheist]

I have already stated in this thread John 1:14 ...the word (3056. logos - a word, being the expression of a thought; expressing the thoughts of the Father through the Spirit) became flesh, not a person became flesh. It does not say a person became flesh, it says the word became flesh. When Gods word became a tree, does that mean the tree is God? No!

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the Beginning...

It's right there in the Bible for anyone who has an ear to hear.

Of course I did...

John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: ...10 ...the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.​

And God raised him from the dead, that is the work of God. Thomas believed he was seeing the character of God, God working in him. What there is no evidence of, is that John 1:1-[to whatever verse you prefer], was spoken to anyone until John penned the book of John.

There is evidence that John understood Jesus to be God, and Jesus said "anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father." Without your compulsion to retranslate everything Jesus says about Himself being God, this is a clear statement that anyone who is seeing Him is seeing God.

Then, all I could suggest is doing a study on the word “worship”. We are not to worship another as God.
We do worship Jesus, he is our king, but Jesus also said to the Church in Rev. 3:9 ...behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. This is the same Geek word "worship - G4352" that is used for worshiping Jesus, and God.

And there's Genesis 41:43; Daniel 2:46-47; 1 Chronicles 29:20, these godly men accepted worship, but they were not worshiped as God.

Show me where it says they accepted worship? It never says that. They accepted the honor which God caused to be bestowed on them, but never worship. As it is written, "You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only."

Even the angels do not accept worship:
"Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things.

9 Then he said to me, “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”10 And he said to me, “Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand. 11 He who is unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is filthy, let him be filthy still; he who is righteous, let him be righteous still; he who is holy, let him be holy still.”" (Revelation 22:8-11)

Furthermore, the Lamb that was slain (Jesus) contains all the fullness of God's glory:
"22 But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light." (Revelation 21:22-23)

And further, God the Father and Jesus both claim the title of "Alpha and Omega. Beginning and End."
Revelation 1: 10-20:
I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, 11 saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,” and, “What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”

12 Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band.14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire; 15 His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters; 16 He had in His right hand seven stars, out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword, and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength. 17 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. 18 I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death. 19 Write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after this. 20 The mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands which you saw are the seven churches.

Revelation 21:5-6
5 Then He who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” And He said to me, “Write, for these words are true and faithful.”

6 And He said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts."

And, as has been stated before, God Himself said He will not share His glory with any other. Yet He shares it with Jesus.

In terms of Revelation 3, worshiping "before their feet" does not constitute necessarily that they are the ones being worshiped. And when this verse is rightly taken in the context of other scriptures, it is obvious that this cannot be the case. No man - not even the apostles - ever accepted worship. Not even the angels would accept worship. Only God the Father and Christ the Son accept worship.

John 1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.​

He believed the scriptures when they said that the anointed king would be called the son of God...

2 Samuel 7:13 He [Solomon, and points to Jesus] shall build an housefor my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. 14 I will be his father [verse 8, 11 says this is the LORD - Yhvh], and he shall be my son [Solomon, and points to Jesus]. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:​

God called Himself Israel's King: Isaiah 44:6
“Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel,
And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts:
‘I am the First and I am the Last;
Besides Me there is no God."

King of Israel is a title, and does not have to be a human title. The fact that Jesus was King of Israel does not negate the fact that He was also God, who is also the King of Israel.

“Form” 3444. morphé – properly, form (outward expression) that embodies essential (inner) substance so that the form is in complete harmony with the inner essence.

He outwardly expressed the character of his Father, so that if we seen Jesus we seen the Father.

You forget the second part - the form must be in complete harmony with the inner essence. Complete harmony, not just certain aspects. That means the very form is not just an outward reflection of the character of God - it is an outward expression of all of God's infinite attributes.

I use to believe in the trinity for many, many years, scripture does not flow when believing in a trinity.

By which you mean that the trinity is beyond your comprehension, as it is beyond mine. Heresy is born when we start to believe that we can comprehend God's nature with our finite minds.

Jesus made it clear, he is not the LORD – Yhvh, when he stated he does not know the day and hour, because Jesus knew the scriptures, and he knew this was not given to man, nor anyone. There is a O/T scriptural reason why Jesus said this, so that anyone willing to seek the truth, would know the truth.

No, the O/T scripture says, “known to the LORD” – Yhvh. There it does not say Father, if Jesus was the LORD – Yhvh, then he would have know.

Chapter 14 of Zechariah is about the Day of the LORD, I would suggest reading the whole chapter.

Zechariah 14:7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD[God – Yhvh is not sharing when this day is. Jesus made sure those that have ears to hear, heard].
What I like is this in verse 9...
9...in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one [not trinity].

Matthew 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man [this is the word G3762 - oudeis – no one, nothing, this is not the word G444 – anthrōpos – human being, man], no, not the angels of heaven, [NU-Text adds nor the Son] but my Father only.

Mark 13:32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man [this is the word G3762 - oudeis – no one, nothing, not the word G444 – anthrōpos – human being, man], no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.​

By using this word “G3762 – oudeis (a powerful negating conjunction that leaves no exceptions)” he is excluding all others. No one else! No one else, but LORD-Yhvh, which is the Father. As the N/T also tells us who the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is.

So, the LORD - Yhvh is the Father, and no one else.

And, as has been stated previously, God will share His glory with no one else. Yet the son shares that same glory. God is the Alpha and Omega. The Beginning and the End. Jesus is the Alpha and Omega. The Beginning and the End. The Word (Jesus) was with God, and the Word (Jesus) was God.