3 equal 1?

[millenialeden]

How can 3 equal 1? Christians say that G-d is 3; G-d, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. But G-d can only be one He says so Himself. He is the one true G-d. No can be mediator between Him and those who believe in Him and follows His commandments.

If someone can explain this to me that would be great.

 

[Outspoken]

Yup, who says it is something you can explain. The scripture says The father is God, christ is God and the holy spirit is God, it also says God is one, our only conclusion is that trinity exsists. I try to make sence of it by looking at ice, steam, water and vapor are all H2O but steam is not water, nor is it ice..

 

[Blade]

Outspoken is right. He said it real simple. God has always been and us, trying to think we can figure it out. Our life compared to his is a blink of an eye.

 

[millenialeden]

Jesus was and never will be G-d. He is the "Son of G-d" as is Israel and many other righteous people in the Bible. We are all children of G-d. Jesus wasn't G-d because he was tempted by Satan and he never even said so himself.

Are there anymore comments?

 

[Hojo Hominygrits]

I guess you're entitled to your opinion. I like the H2O explaination myself. 3 different aspects of the same substance. Makes sense to me.

Off the subject, why do you spell God "G-d"? I've seen it before and I never understood why people do that. Just wondering.

 

[Blackhawk]

Originally posted by millenialeden
Jesus was and never will be G-d. He is the "Son of G-d" as is Israel and many other righteous people in the Bible. We are all children of G-d. Jesus wasn't G-d because he was tempted by Satan and he never even said so himself.

Are there anymore comments?

John said He as God in the 1st Chapter of his gospel and in many other places in that same gospel also.  Also the HS is said to be God in John's gospel also.  The gospel of John probably is the best book of the Bible to look in for a defense of the divinity of the HS and Jesus Christ.   

 

[millenialeden]

Originally posted by Hojo Hominygrits
Off the subject, why do you spell God "G-d"? I've seen it before and I never understood why people do that. Just wondering.

To answer your question. It originates from the Orthodox Jews they believe that even spelling G-d's name could be using it in vain. Many of them miss spell or miss pronounce His name on purpose hoping not to offend or speak His name in vain. I really hope that answers that question. If not I can try to find information that may help out if you wish.

Believe it or not I am not a Christian or Jesus hater I just have strong views on this subject as most people talking or addressing this subject. I honestly don't hold the new testiment in high standards. There seem to be contridiction just in the different books in the New Testament. I know different people have different opinions and see things differently, but nonetheless, I still think that it is inaccurate.

I believe Jesus existed and was a good man, but that is as far as it goes for me. I just don't think the trinity is biblical in any stretch of the word. I don't believe that Jesus was G-d. Why would G-d have been tempted by Satan? If anyone can answer this logically then I am all ears. I wish to learn. I feel that is one of my main purposes on this earth.

I hope this gives anyone reading this post some insight into my way of thinking.

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Please let me recycle an old post.

Our great 9th century CE sage, Saadya Gaon (who lived in what is now Iraq) said that to believe that God is triune is to define & limit Him by the physical concepts of quantity and number. To believe in a truly transcendant God (that is who transcends all physical constructs/concepts, including those of quantity & number), who is wholly other, one must believe that He is One. Since He created all things corporeal, He Himself cannot be, or have been at one time, corporeal; to believe otherwise, Saadya Gaon taught, is to define Him by, & limit Him to, the corporeal form that he presumably chose. I have heard many Christians use the analogy that the three "persons" of the trinity are all one the same way that I, ferinstance, am a father to my boys, a husband to my wife, a son to my parents & a brother to my brother. I would reply that this is a human analogy & as such, it cannot be applied to a transcendant, wholly other, God. The same goes for the ice-water-steam analogy. H20 is a created, physical, corporeal thing & as such, cannot be applied to a transcendant, wholly other, God.

Be well!

ssv

 

[Blackhawk]

Originally posted by stillsmallvoice
Hi all!

Please let me recycle an old post.

Our great 9th century CE sage, Saadya Gaon (who lived in what is now Iraq) said that to believe that God is triune is to define & limit Him by the physical concepts of quantity and number. To believe in a truly transcendant God (that is who transcends all physical constructs/concepts, including those of quantity & number), who is wholly other, one must believe that He is One. Since He created all things corporeal, He Himself cannot be, or have been at one time, corporeal; to believe otherwise, Saadya Gaon taught, is to define Him by, & limit Him to, the corporeal form that he presumably chose. I have heard many Christians use the analogy that the three "persons" of the trinity are all one the same way that I, ferinstance, am a father to my boys, a husband to my wife, a son to my parents & a brother to my brother. I would reply that this is a human analogy & as such, it cannot be applied to a transcendant, wholly other, God. The same goes for the ice-water-steam analogy. H20 is a created, physical, corporeal thing & as such, cannot be applied to a transcendant, wholly other, God.

Be well!

ssv

I think I asked this one of the times you asked this before but how are Trinitarians defining God in an inapropriate way by given God "physical concepts of quantity and number" (3) while you are not when you say He is "one?"  I believe in the Trinity that He is 3 persons and one substance.  I do nt fulloy understand it but that is how I see the Bible stating who He is.  And no human analogy works for the Trinity and some actually defgine God in a modalistic way which is not what the Trinity teaches. 

 

[IslandBreeze]

John 1:1 "In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Genesis 1:2 Now the earth was [1] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.


Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Jesus was called the Word...in Genesis, the Holy Spirit was with God (see vs.2), so I can only assume that God was speaking to the Holy Spirit when he said let US make man in OUR image...

Hope that helps!

 

[millenialeden]

I believe G-d to be infinite with out boundries or limits. But G-d god is one entity in spiritual form. It says this in the Old Testiment numerous times.

Cammie:
Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

me:
This could be interpreted in many ways such as angels and other heavenly beings. Not necessarily this talking about Jesus.

Certain verses in the Bible can be interpretted many different ways and with translation the puntuation may be in the wrong space. However, other verses are as plain as day.

This verse has me curious. Maybe I shall do some digging. I will post a reply on this with my research.

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Let me recycle one more previous post:

Regarding the use of the plural in Genesis 1:26.

Medieval Jewish commentators, who lived long before both Elizabeth I of England and the 17th & 18th centuries, refer to the so-called Majesticatus Pluralis as one possible explanation. (The Qur'an uses the plural many, many times. It was written before that.)

The same medieval Jewish Sages (Rashi, Nahmanides, etc.) also teach that by saying "Let us..." God was speaking to/consulting the angelic host (see I Kings 22:20-23, Isaiah 6:8, note the use of "us", Job 1:6-12 and Amos 3:7). God certainly does not need the angels' help or advice but he speaks to them out of courtesy and modesty. (Our Sages deduce from this that a great person should always act humbly and consult those lower than him/her.) One of our Sages says that God thus "consulted" the angels at this stage because they were jealous of man, that man and not they would be the pinnacle of creation.

These same Sages offer another explanation. They note that in 1:11, God said, "Let the earth put forth grass..." and in 1:24, He said "Let the earth bring forth the living creature..." Thus, in 1:26, our Sages suggest that God was speaking to the earth when He said, "Let us make man..." In effect, He said to the earth: Let us be partners in making man. I will provide the soul and you will provide the body. When the man dies, we will each reclaim our respective parts. (See Ecclesiastes 12:7, "And the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto G-d who gave it.") (Note: Our Sages are offering a homily, a parable here, the value of which is in the idea that it teaches; it is not meant to be taken literally.)

Be well!

ssv

 

[IslandBreeze]

That's fine and dandy, but you're missing a key part to that verse--IN OUR IMAGE, IN OUR LIKENESS...humans are hardly made in the image of the earth....

 

[IslandBreeze]

Here are a couple of links for ya:

http://www.biblehelp.org/reference_2.htm

http://www.biblehelp.org/reference_1.htm

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi Cammie!

You posted:

That's fine and dandy, but you're missing a key part to that verse--IN OUR IMAGE, IN OUR LIKENESS...humans are hardly made in the image of the earth....

I repeat what I posted:

Note: Our Sages are offering a homily, a parable here, the value of which is in the idea that it teaches; it is not meant to be taken literally.

How do you interpret, "in Our image, in Our likeness.."? Do you believe that God has hands, feet & genitalia? We believe that it means that we are like Him in that we are capable of making moral judgements, of knowing right from wrong, etc.

Be well!

ssv

 

[IslandBreeze]

God absolutely had a physical body--when he came to earth in the form of Jesus Christ.

 

[lared]

Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image

If there is a three in one god.....then I guess we all should have split personalities

Has anyone seen the movie.....The Faces Of Eve....?

 

[caley]

The only person who I have ever read who has explained the Trinity intelligibly is CS Lewis in Mere Christianity. (I believe it's in part three, the chapter "Making and Begetting.")

 

[Outspoken]

"Jesus was and never will be G-d. He is the "Son of G-d" as is Israel and many other righteous people in the Bible. We are all children of G-d. Jesus wasn't G-d because he was tempted by Satan and he never even said so himself"

This is very untrue. Maybe you misunderstand the title "Son of God". I think Pslams 2 does a good job in showing it is not a biological title. Also we can see in the OT it talks about being the "son of" anyone means you have the authority to speak for that person.

 

[millenialeden]

Cammie said: God absolutely had a physical body--when he came to earth in the form of Jesus Christ.

This is one of the many reasons why Jews don't believe Jesus is the Messiah. This is considered Idolatry.

Outspoken said: This is very untrue. Maybe you misunderstand the title "Son of God". I think Pslams 2 does a good job in showing it is not a biological title. Also we can see in the OT it talks about being the "son of" anyone means you have the authority to speak for that person.

Israel is known as the son of G-d. His first born son. I don't know the exact verse, but I know that it is said. So my  statement is not untrue except for the part where I said "He is the "Son of G-d"". I don't believe that Jesus was or is the Messiah, but that's not the point. 3 still doesn't equal 1.