Why The Trinity is a False Teaching - Summarized Doctrinal Reasons

[7xlightray]

The problem with your definition of "begotten" is that the Psalm refers first of all to David. David was NOT born again from the dead. He was begotten by decree. "I will declare the decree, "You are my son, this day I have begotten thee." The fact that the Psalm by way of typology applies to Christ when he was raised from the dead does NOT support the idea that Christ was begotten by resurrection. David was NOT begotten by resurrection.

According to the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament the Hebrew word "yalad" (begotten) in 2:7 is written in the Qal which represents relationship and not actual paternity.

My point was, the Father is Yhwh in Psalm 2:7. Is He, or is He not? We read in scripture the Father is the one that glorified His Son, raised him to His throne, and put him over all that is His. The Son is the one that inherited all this, and this Son is Jesus.


Paternity? Mary was a virgin, God did not have relations with her, God prepared him a body, yet Jesus is the only begotten of the Father, and the Father is declared to be the Father of Jesus. And it was the Father that raised Jesus from the dead to His (Father's) throne. Lazarus was raised from the dead (before Jesus was raised) by Jesus (by the Father working through him), and Jesus loved Lazarus (if Jesus loved Lazarus, then surely the Father did), yet Jesus is the first-born from out of the dead, before Lazarus. So, there must be a certain understanding to it. Jesus was born from the dead, born again from the dead, meaning he came to life again. He is the first-born from out of the dead, and the first to become immortal, with a spiritual body. The Father brought him back to life, so he would be the first-born of the Father from out of the dead. Jesus is not the first-born of himself. As Israel is called son, God's son, because God birthed them, brought them into being, His nation. So, God would be the father of them. And Psalm 2 is speaking of after Christ's death, and resurrection, when he sits on God's throne. Baptism represents death and resurrection, representing being born again with a new life, and will come with a new body.

Colossians 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature...18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.​

So, first born would include preeminence.

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. 34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David.
35 Wherefore he saith also in another psalm, Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:
37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.​

If we are born-again on the inside, then we need to be born-again on the outside (our body), so that we are fully and completely sons of God, receiving a spiritual body, as Jesus did, being the first-born.

To sit on God's throne one would have to change into a spiritual body, for no man can see God and live.



Qal is the most frequently used verb pattern. It expresses the "simple" or "casual" action of the root in the active voice.

Examples: he sat, he ate, he went, he said, he rose, he bought.

Genesis 4:2 And she again bare [yalad, Qal] his brother Abel.​

 

[7xlightray]

Hello Lightray.

A long post #999 that you submitted, it will take time to negotiate, please do not respond until I have
replied in full.

Your interpretation of the concept of the 'ascending' and 'descending' of Jesus, in the New Testament may need
some revision. In your post #999 you remarked.

The verse you are quoting from is a verse enclosed in parenthesis, Lightray. This means that the translation
we have been given, may or may not be correct. There are textual variations recorded that have been observed
in relation to this verse, over the course of church history.

The phrase 'lower parts' in the verse above, has the word 'parts' omitted in the earliest references to the verse.

The ascending of Jesus involved the transition from earth to heaven, and not from death to life. Likewise
the descending of Jesus concerned the transition from heaven to earth, and not to His death it seems.

Here is the verse below.

Ephesians 4
9 (Now this expression, “He ascended,” what does it mean except that He also had descended into the lower
parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is Himself also He who ascended far above all the heavens, so that
He might fill all things.)

It is more than likely, that the text is emphasizing a lower earth in comparison with the higher heavens.

Since this verse (Ephesians 4:9), is enclosed in parenthesis it is unwise to use the verse to advance any
theology as such. It would be wiser still Lightray, to adjust your interpretation in alignment with the
following verse.

John 3:13
No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.

The Christ did descend from heaven and the Christ did also ascend far above the heavens.

Hello klutedavid,

Hope you don't mind me starting to reply.

I don't know of any real dispute whether “part” is original, or not. I know it's missing from two, one from the 9th century, and one from the 5th century, but it's in the rest, and in the oldest ones. I know “first” is disputed.

And “part” is included in a few quotes by Irenaeus who lived between 200-258, and also by Tertullian 155-240.

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book IV
For this reason also were the eyes of the disciples weighed down when Christ's passion was approaching; and when, in the first instance, the Lord found them sleeping, He let it pass,-thus indicating the patience of God in regard to the state of slumber in which men lay; but coming the second time, He aroused them, and made them stand up, in token that His passion is the arousing of His sleeping disciples, on whose account "He also descended into the lower parts of the earth,"

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book V ch. 31:1
Then also the apostle says, "But when He ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth?"

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book V ch. 31:2
If, then, the Lord observed the law of the dead, that He might become the first-begotten from the dead, and tarried until the third day "in the lower parts of the earth; " ...how must these men not be put to confusion, who allege that "the lower parts" refer to this world of ours,

Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus
who "descended into the lower parts of the earth," and who "ascended up above the heavens;"

Tertullian Against Praxeas
and also descends to the inner parts of the earth.

We also have Psalm 86:13...

For great is thy lovingkindness toward me; And thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest Sheol.​

Then there is...

Colossians 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

2 Peter 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
​

Made alive by the spirit, by which, so, this must have taken place after his resurrection.

20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.​

 

[Jack Terrence]

My point was, the Father is Yhwh in Psalm 2:7. Is He, or is He not?

The Father is indeed YHWH. I just wanted to discuss the Hebrew word yalad.

 

[Hoghead1]

Interesting point, The Boxer

 

[7xlightray]

The Father is indeed YHWH. I just wanted to discuss the Hebrew word yalad.

Sure, that's fine by me.

If we both agree, Psalm 2:6-7 speaks of the Father speaking to the son, even that the Father beget Jesus to His throne, I'm not so sure what part of my comment you are objecting to? As Peter says Acts 2 (and also Paul in Acts 13) it is understood that it was through the resurrection Jesus was begotten, and that to the throne.

Peter says in acts 2, that David being a prophet understood, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne. David understood he was prophesying about Christ, and foreseeing Christ's resurrection, and him sitting on God's throne. David understood this did not speak of himself. If David penned Psalm 2:6-7, then he would have understood this spoke of Christ after his resurrection.

Anyway, also as we haven see (from my last post) God does not birth, bring forth, beget, in the way we are accustomed to. And seeing as it is a father that begets a son, and the son is Jesus, then the father is God the Father that begot Jesus from the dead, as other passages state, that it was the Father that raised Jesus from the dead, for a son does not beget himself, and God is both Jesus' God and Father. And that yalad, Qal does refers to begetting.

 

[klutedavid]

Hello Lightray.

Here is a passage for you to consider, we have the passage below stating that YHWH was talking to directly
to Adam.

Genesis 3
8 They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife
hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 Then the Lord God called to
the man, and said to him, “Where are you?”

Now according to Jesus, as you are aware Lightray, no one has ever heard the Father's voice.

John 5
37 And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen
His form.

If no one has ever seen or heard the Father at any time, then who's voice was Adam hearing in the garden?

In addition to this, we know that the Father is spirit, so the Father does not have a physical form.

John 4
24 God is spirit...

So how can Adam and Eve hear God 'walking in the garden'?

 

[7xlightray]

Hello Lightray.

Here is a passage for you to consider, we have the passage below stating that YHWH was talking to directly
to Adam.

Genesis 3
8 They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife
hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 Then the Lord God called to
the man, and said to him, “Where are you?”

Now according to Jesus, as you are aware Lightray, no one has ever heard the Father's voice.

John 5
37 And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen
His form.

If no one has ever seen or heard the Father at any time, then who's voice was Adam hearing in the garden?

In addition to this, we know that the Father is spirit, so the Father does not have a physical form.

John 4
24 God is spirit...

So how can Adam and Eve hear God 'walking in the garden'?

Hello klutedavid,

Who is speaking here in these famous trinity verses, if no one heard the Father's voice...

Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Mark 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Luke 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

John 12:28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. 29 The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him. 30 Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.

2 Peter 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.​

Was it the Father, an angel, the Son speaking to himself, or who?

 

[klutedavid]

Hello Lightray.

A one line statement made by the Father, is not the Father conversing with humanity.

John 5
37 And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at
any time nor seen His form.

Jesus was revealing the truth about who was doing the talking in the Old Testament.

Surely you realize that it must have been Jesus that was walking and talking with Adam and Eve?

It is impossible for the Father to have been in the garden of Eden.

 

[Jack Terrence]

Sure, that's fine by me.

If we both agree, Psalm 2:6-7 speaks of the Father speaking to the son, even that the Father beget Jesus to His throne

It was YHWH the Father speaking to David (not Christ).

I'm not so sure what part of my comment you are objecting to? As Peter says Acts 2 (and also Paul in Acts 13) it is understood that it was through the resurrection Jesus was begotten, and that to the throne.

It appeared to me as if you were denying that Jesus was preexistent prior to the begetting. But the word yalad as it is used in 2:7 does NOT imply that at all. The LORD said to David, "Today I have begotten you." David preexisted the begetting. He was a grown man. Then LORD came to David and said, "Today I have begotten you."

According to the TWOT the word yalad is written in the Qal, which means that it speaks of relationship and not actual paternity. So it does NOT mean that David began to exist on that day. He was a grown man when God spoke those words to him. It means that he now had a new relationship to God, that of father and son. The Psalm by way of typology is applied to Christ, but was NOT primarily about Christ and therefore in no way can be invoked to disprove his preexistence.

 

[7xlightray]

Hello Lightray.

A one line statement made by the Father, is not the Father conversing with humanity.

John 5
37 And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at
any time nor seen His form.

Jesus was revealing the truth about who was doing the talking in the Old Testament.

Surely you realize that it must have been Jesus that was walking and talking with Adam and Eve?

It is impossible for the Father to have been in the garden of Eden.

It matters not how many words He spoke. What's the difference if He spoke one word, or hundred words? If some heard Him speak, then they heard Him speak, and He can be heard, though not by all. And if they heard Him in the N/T, then they could have heard Him in the O/T.

Numbers 12:5 And Jehovah [Yhwh] came down in a pillar of cloud, and stood at the door of the Tent, and called Aaron and Miriam; and they both came forth. 6 And he said [Yhwh], Hear now my [Yhwh] words: if there be a prophet among you, I Jehovah will make myself known unto him in a vision, I will speak with him in a dream. 7 My servant Moses is not so; he is faithful in all my [Yhwh] house: 8 with him will I speak mouth to mouth, even manifestly, and not in dark speeches; and the form of Jehovah shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant, against Moses?​

So, we know from Numbers 12 that it is Yhwh's house that Moses was faithful in. And we will find out from Hebrews 3, if it was the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit speaking in Numbers 12...

Hebrews 3:4 For every house is builded by some one; but he that built all things is God [Yhwh]. 5 And Moses indeed was faithful in all his [God-Yhwh] house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken; 6 but Christ as a son, over his [God-Yhwh-Father] house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.​

Jesus is the Son of God the Father-Yhwh's, who's house it is. It was Jehovah Father that spoke in Numbers 12:5-8.

 

[7xlightray]

It was YHWH the Father speaking to David (not Christ).

It appeared to me as if you were denying that Jesus was preexistent prior to the begetting. But the word yalad as it is used in 2:7 does NOT imply that at all. The LORD said to David, "Today I have begotten you." David preexisted the begetting. He was a grown man. Then LORD came to David and said, "Today I have begotten you."

According to the TWOT the word yalad is written in the Qal, which means that it speaks of relationship and not actual paternity. So it does NOT mean that David began to exist on that day. He was a grown man when God spoke those words to him. It means that he now had a new relationship to God, that of father and son. The Psalm by way of typology is applied to Christ, but was NOT primarily about Christ and therefore in no way can be invoked to disprove his preexistence.

I certainly agree, it sure could not disprove his preexistence, for this is God raising him from the dead.

 

[klutedavid]

Hello Lightray.

There seems to be some confusion in your posts relating to what Jesus said, what Jesus stated was crystal clear.

John 5
37 You have neither heard His voice at any time.

Jesus before His incarnation as 'the Son' at Bethlehem, was with any doubt the YHWH in the Old Testament.

Hence, humanity has never heard the Father's voice, humanity has only ever heard the voice of the Logos or YHWH.
This is why Adam and Eve could hear the Logos walking, and talking in the garden of Eden. The Father is invisible
and Spirit, no one has seen, heard, or known the Father. The Father definitely was not walking around in the cool
of the day in Eden.

YWHW declares that He will send His Son, Jesus is YHWH and declares that He will send His Son. When
YHWH takes the appearance of a man, then the Son has been begotten in a human form at Bethlehem.

It matters not how many words He spoke. What's the difference if He spoke one word, or hundred words?

Oh it matters Lightray, we do not want to be in conflict with the words of Jesus. It may be possible to be in conflict
with an apostle at any time, but to be contradicting the words of Jesus is never advisable.

If some heard Him speak, then they heard Him speak, and He can be heard, though not by all. And if they heard
Him in the N/T, then they could have heard Him in the O/T.

Jesus told you that no one has heard the Father! This means that the Father was not the orator in the Old Testament.
The Father only utters a few words in the entire Bible, i.e., 'listen to Him', and this was directed to the apostles.

Jesus was only identified by the title, 'the Son', during His earthly life. Before and after that interval, i.e., Bethlehem
to Golgotha. Jesus was the Lord (YHWH), is the Lord (YHWH), and always will be the Lord (YHWH).
The Logos is YHWH, the Logos speaks and can be seen by humanity, the Father is unknown and silent.

So, we know from Numbers 12 that it is Yhwh's house that Moses was faithful in. And we will find out
from Hebrews 3, if it was the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit speaking in Numbers 12...

YHWH is the Lord of the house that we are, YHWH is the builder of the house. Jesus was a carpenter and
carpenters build houses Lightray. YHWH before He becomes the Son is the builder of all things. When
YHWH is the Son, He is Lord of the house. After the Son ascends after first descending, the Son once again
assumes the heavenly title YHWH, and rules the house absolutely.

The 'I AM' is the Logos, the very visible and audible, Holy and Righteous, author of life.

 

[7xlightray]

Hello Lightray.

There seems to be some confusion in your posts relating to what Jesus said, what Jesus stated was crystal clear.

John 5
37 You have neither heard His voice at any time.

Jesus before His incarnation as 'the Son' at Bethlehem, was with any doubt the YHWH in the Old Testament.

Hence, humanity has never heard the Father's voice, humanity has only ever heard the voice of the Logos or YHWH.
This is why Adam and Eve could hear the Logos walking, and talking in the garden of Eden. The Father is invisible
and Spirit, no one has seen, heard, or known the Father. The Father definitely was not walking around in the cool
of the day in Eden.

YWHW declares that He will send His Son, Jesus is YHWH and declares that He will send His Son.

Hello klutedavid,

Are you saying Jesus is the Son of himself? Jesus did not send himself, the Son did not send the Son, the Father sent him. Jesus makes this clear, that he did not send himself John 6:38; John 8:42.

Here you say humanity has never heard the Father.

Oh it matters Lightray, we do not want to be in conflict with the words of Jesus. It may be possible to be in conflict
with an apostle at any time, but to be contradicting the words of Jesus is never advisable.

No, we don't want to be in conflict with the words of Jesus. Nor, contradict the words of Jesus.

You are arguing as if I had said, “it matters not if He did not speak a word, or whether he did speak a word,” which I did not. If some heard Him (Father) speak, then it does not matter how many words He spoke, they still heard Him speak. So, how is that in conflict with what Jesus said, seeing as even you agree some heard the Father utter a few words?

Jesus told you that no one has heard the Father! This means that the Father was not the orator in the Old Testament.
The Father only utters a few words in the entire Bible, i.e., 'listen to Him', and this was directed to the apostles.

Jesus did not say, “no one has heard the Father,” read it again carefully “You have neither heard His voice at any time.”

And no, it was not only directed at the apostles, for the Father also spoke at Jesus baptism, Jesus had not yet chosen his disciples yet. It was for whoever was a witness of Jesus baptism. Then there were those in John 12:27-29. And then there was at his transfiguration, which was for his disciples.

Your saying on one hand, no one has heard the Father, and that humanity has never heard the Father, and this is the reason you give as to why Adam and Eve could not have heard the Father speak, then on the other hand, you say the Father did speak a few words, and some did hear Him.

As some sort of defense, you make the argument that only a few heard the Father speak. What does that matter, there was only Adam and Eve in the garden.

Jesus was only identified by the title, 'the Son', during His earthly life. Before and after that interval, i.e., Bethlehem
to Golgotha. Jesus was the Lord (YHWH), is the Lord (YHWH), and always will be the Lord (YHWH).
The Logos is YHWH, the Logos speaks and can be seen by humanity, the Father is unknown and silent.

I've already shown you passages that show the Father is called Yhwh. Before you can start making statements to me, like the ones you've made in this post, you're first going to have show the passages that I've given, that show the Father is Yhwh, are not in fact revealing the Father is Yhwh.

YHWH is the Lord of the house that we are, YHWH is the builder of the house. Jesus was a carpenter and
carpenters build houses Lightray. YHWH before He becomes the Son is the builder of all things. When
YHWH is the Son, He is Lord of the house. After the Son ascends after first descending, the Son once again
assumes the heavenly title YHWH, and rules the house absolutely.

The 'I AM' is the Logos, the very visible and audible, Holy and Righteous, author of life.

Jesus is the builder. The Father wants to build His house, and had His Son build His house 2 Samuel 7:13; 1 Kings 5:5; 1 Chronicles 17...

10 And since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel. Moreover I will subdue all thine enemies. Furthermore I tell thee that the LORD will build thee an house.
11 And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.
12 He [Son] shall build me [Father] an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.
13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:
14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.

1 Chronicles 28:6 And he said unto me, Solomon thy son, he shall build my house and my courts: for I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be his father.​

It's similar as an owner wants to build a house, so he hires someone to build his house, but in this case the father had the son build the house. They were the Father's and the Father gave them to His Son, but they are still the Father's, for all things are of the Father. The Son hands over the kingdom to the Father, when the last enemy is destroyed, after the 1000 years.

Hebrews 3:4 For every house is builded by some one; but he that built all things is God[Yhwh]. 5 And Moses indeed was faithful in all his [God-Yhwh] house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken; 6 but Christ as a son, over his [God-Yhwh-Father] house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.

Hebrews 10:21 And having an high priest [Jesus] over the house of God

Hebrews 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him [Father] that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.​

God the Father put Jesus over His house.

 

[klutedavid]

​

Hello Lightray.

John 5:37 And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time
nor seen His form.

And no, it was not only directed at the apostles, for the Father also spoke at Jesus baptism

The Father spoke directly to only the apostles at the transfiguration, no others 'heard' the Father speaking.
At the baptism of Jesus, two of the accounts said, 'you are my beloved Son', (Mark 1:11, Luke 3:22). This
could mean that the Father was only addressing the Son. The wider audience present, did not hear the Father
speaking they only heard it thunder. I will maintain my original claim, that the Father has not been speaking in
general to mankind. Certainly not in an audible manner throughout the Old Testament.

Jesus did not say, “no one has heard the Father,” read it again carefully “You have neither heard His voice
at any time."

You will need to clarify Lightray, the way you understand this verse.

Your saying on one hand, no one has heard the Father, and that humanity has never heard the Father, and
this is the reason you give as to why Adam and Eve could not have heard the Father speak, then on the other hand,
you say the Father did speak a few words, and some did hear Him.

Not only did Adam and Eve not hear the Father speaking, the Father was not walking around on two feet in the
garden. How about you tell me Lightray, just how is the Father walking and talking, when He is spirit and exists in
unapproachable light.

You need to strongly assert what it is that you believe to be true, was the Father the one walking around in the garden,
Lightray? I believe the Logos to be YHWH as you know Lightray, from my standpoint the Father is silent. Except
for a few audible words here and there.

Genesis 3
8 They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid
themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 Then the Lord God called to the man,
and said to him, “Where are you?”

You said the following.

Hebrews 3:4 For every house is builded by some one; but he that built all things is God [Yhwh]. 5 And Moses indeed was faithful in all his [God-Yhwh] house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken; 6 but Christ as a son, over his [God-Yhwh-Father] house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end. Jesus is the Son of God the Father-Yhwh's, who's house it is. It was Jehovah Father that spoke in Numbers 12:5-8.

Before the Son existed, the Son was the Logos, the Logos is the builder of the house. Logos = YHWH.

I noticed the word 'Jehovah' in your post, now that is one appalling translation of the name YHWH.

 

[7xlightray]

​

Hello Lightray.

John 5:37 And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time
nor seen His form.

The Father spoke directly to only the apostles at the transfiguration, no others 'heard' the Father speaking.
At the baptism of Jesus, two of the accounts said, 'you are my beloved Son', (Mark 1:11, Luke 3:22). This
could mean that the Father was only addressing the Son. The wider audience present, did not hear the Father
speaking they only heard it thunder. I will maintain my original claim, that the Father has not been speaking in
general to mankind. Certainly not in an audible manner throughout the Old Testament.

Not only did Adam and Eve not hear the Father speaking, the Father was not walking around on two feet in the
garden. How about you tell me Lightray, just how is the Father walking and talking, when He is spirit and exists in
unapproachable light.

You need to strongly assert what it is that you believe to be true, was the Father the one walking around in the garden,
Lightray? I believe the Logos to be YHWH as you know Lightray, from my standpoint the Father is silent. Except
for a few audible words here and there.

Genesis 3
8 They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid
themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 Then the Lord God called to the man,
and said to him, “Where are you?”

Hello klutedavid,

Yes, at the transfiguration the Father spoke to three of the apostles. Though in John 12:12,28-29 a great crowd was present, and some said it thundered, some an angel spoke to him. We know it did not thunder, but that it was a voice. Whether it was the voice of the Father Himself, or an angel, it was representative of the Father, but notice, if it was the Father speaking Himself (or even an angel), some did not hear Him speak, but only heard thunder, so that some were not able, or not permitted to hear Him speak, while others did.

It could have been the Father that spoke, for I don't know of any verse that says no one has heard the Father speak. In fact the scripture says God spoke to Moses as a man speaks to a friend face to face, though this would be referring more so to God speaking clear to Moses, so that Moses understood, and knew God. On the other hand Hebrews 2:2 and Galatians 3:19 says the law was given through angels, and the message spoken through angels.

So, if the Father spoke to a great crowd in the N/T, whether Himself, or by a representative, then He could have spoken in the O/T times, whether Himself, or by representative, e.g. Angels. And no reason to suggest Jesus was the Yhwh that was speaking. What I am saying is, you would have to produce a reason why it must be Jesus they heard in the O/T and not the Father, or an representative angel that spoke in place of the Father, for scripture does bare out the latter two.

And Hebrews 1 says God the Father in times past spoke to the fathers by the prophets, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son. So, in time past it was not Jesus speaking to the fathers, but the Father speaking to the fathers, nor did He speak by the Son in times past.

As to Adam and Eve, it does not say Adam and Eve seen God, but heard God walking.

You give as a reason that only the Son could have appeared in the O/T, and that in the form of a man, because the Father is spirit, even though 1 Corinthians 6:13-17; 2 Corinthians 3:17 and 2 Corinthians 4:5 says the Son Jesus Christ the Lord is the spirit, you also give the reason of John 5:37, that they have never seen God's form, yet some did see the form of God the Father like Stephen, and Daniel, and even Moses seen the form of God. Though, no one has seen God's face. If you say, God the Son could appear as a man in the O/T, then surely so could the Father. And if the Holy Spirit could appear as a dove (representative), then surely so could the Father appear as creation (representative of the Father).

As you can see there are a couple of problems with your argument. For one, the Holy Spirit is spirit, and could be seen as a dove. And two, the Lord Jesus is the spirit, so was Jesus always the spirit, or did he become the Spirit after death and resurrection? And in either case, if Jesus was the Spirit, or became the Spirit, then what about the Holy Spirit? Did the Holy Spirit stop being the Holy Spirit, or do we now have two Holy Spirits, or was the Holy Spirit ever a person? Or, maybe God was able to do all this by the power of His spirit.

Yet, in John 5:37, is Jesus referring to literally seeing the Father, or understanding and recognizing the Father.


Then, let look at this...

1 John 4:2 ...Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God [Father]:
3 ...that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh...
9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God [Father] sen this only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.​

Notice John does not say God came, but that God sent His Son, nor does it say in verses 9 and 10 the Father sent the Son, but God sent, when in verse 14 it says the Father sent. If it says the Father sent, then why say God sent His Son? If God is a trinity, then why say God sent His Son? Why say God sent instead of the Father sent, if Jesus is God, and we know Jesus did not send himself John 8:42? This would make things very confusing, if God sent and Jesus is God, yet Jesus who is God did not send himself. Should it not always say the Father sent His Son? Why does it not say, God came to be the propitiation for our sins? Why does this not state we must believe God came in the flesh, instead it says, God sent? God sent, and Jesus did not come of himself...

John 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.​

And it is in this sense, Jesus is not claiming to be their Father, nor their God-Yhwh of the O/T.

You will need to clarify Lightray, the way you understand this verse.

In John 5:37 Jesus was only speaking to some Jews, that they have not heard His voice. He was not speaking to every single person that ever lived, and like I've already said, what did Jesus really mean by saying this.

And again, just to be clear... “I believe the Logos to be YHWH as you know Lightray, from my standpoint the Father is silent. Except for a few audible words here and there.” ...yes, I understand that, but what I am saying is, if the Father spoke a few words here and there, then He could have also spoken words at other times, as in the times you say it was the Son. And the reason I am saying this, is because you have not shown that Jesus is the only one that is referred to as Yhwh, and I have shown that the Father is referred to as Yhwh. So, you would first have to reverse this.

You said the following.

Before the Son existed, the Son was the Logos, the Logos is the builder of the house. Logos = YHWH.

I noticed the word 'Jehovah' in your post, now that is one appalling translation of the name YHWH.

What I am showing is that Numbers 12 and Hebrews 3 reveals that God the Father is Yhwh.

It says the logos became flesh, and the logos was God/god, e.g. divine, and God sent His Son. Jesus is the word made flesh, the image of God. Also, the O/T is the word of God that speaks of the promises of God, that are fulfilled through His Son, and speaks of His set apart righteous Son, the second Adam, and the word became flesh.


Just so this is clear, Jesus is not the Father of himself, nor the Son of himself, he is the Son of God the Father, who is a separate person, and has a separate will, so, Jesus cannot be the Son of himself.


I don't get involved in these kinds of word arguments whether Yhwh, or Yhvh, nor in whether the word “trinity” or the word “rapture” is in scripture, nor KJV only, as long as we understand what each other is referring to, it's all good to me.

 

[klutedavid]

Hello klutedavid,

Hello Lightray.

What I am saying is, you would have to produce a reason why it must be Jesus they heard in the O/T

Zechariah 12:10
I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication,
so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son.

Why does YHWH say, 'they will look on Me whom they have pierced'? This passage indicates that the YHWH
of the Old Testament is the Logos in the New Testament.

And Hebrews 1 says God the Father in times past spoke to the fathers by the prophets

Negative Lightray, your assuming that 'God' is the Father in Hebrews 1. Here is the passage you cited above.

Hebrews 1
1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these
last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the
world.

As I said before Lightray, the Logos spoke to mankind in the past and then spoke to us in the form of the Son.
God made the world 'through' the Logos as it states above, hence the Logos is the creator and the mighty one of
the O.T. The Logos is YHWH, the very one we have pierced.

If you say, God the Son could appear as a man in the O/T, then surely so could the Father.

The Logos appeared as the angel of the Lord and the Logos also appeared in human form. As I have said
previously Lightray, the Son does not actually become the Son until Bethlehem. The Logos came from God
and is fully God, though the Logos is not the Father. Humanity has never seen the Father's form, humanity
has only ever seen the Logos in various forms in the scripture.

And two, the Lord Jesus is the spirit, so was Jesus always the spirit, or did he become the Spirit after death
and resurrection?

The Logos appeared to us in a human form, though He came from above and is spirit by nature.

Malachi 3:1
Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek,
will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming,
says the Lord of hosts.

The Lord has already arrived at His temple in the past and they did not recognize Him.

 

[7xlightray]

Hello Lightray.


Zechariah 12:10
I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication,
so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son.

Why does YHWH say, 'they will look on Me whom they have pierced'? This passage indicates that the YHWH
of the Old Testament is the Logos in the New Testament.

Hello klutedavid,

The Yhwh of the O/T is the Logos in the N/T. And the Logos is the mind, reason of God, and Jesus has the mind of God, and we are to have the mind of Christ.

Notice the pronouns “Me” and “Him,” in Zechariah 12:10. Lets not forget Psalm 69:9 For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me. When they were rejecting Jesus they were rejecting the Father, for you seen me you seen the Father; and the Father was in Christ; and Jesus is the image of God the Father; and the Father sent His Son; and Jesus came in his Father's name. Whatever they did to Jesus they were doing to the One that sent him. When one rejects a kings messenger, one rejects the king that sent that messenger.

Though, that's not the end of it, some manuscripts read...

Zechariah 12:10
RSV “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of compassion and supplication, so that, when they look on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a first-born.​

ASV ...and they shall look unto [a]me whom they have pierced; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.
Footnotes:
a.Zechariah 12:10 According to some manuscripts, him.​

NABRE ...so that when they look on him whom they have thrust through, they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and they will grieve for him as one grieves over a firstborn.​

Or...

NRSV ...so that, when they look on the one whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn.​

As it reads in John, as John quotes it...

John 19:37 KJV
And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.​

Or...

NRSV And again another passage of scripture says, “They will look on the one whom they have pierced.”​

John chose the “look on him,” or “the one whom” version.

Another thing to keep in mind is O/T prophecy's that speak of Christ, sometimes first speak of someone else, then are applied to Christ in the N/T. So, a prophesy that first spoke of Solomon that is applied to Christ, we would not then therefore say Jesus is Solomon.

Negative Lightray, your assuming that 'God' is the Father in Hebrews 1. Here is the passage you cited above.

Hebrews 1
1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these
last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the
world.

As I said before Lightray, the Logos spoke to mankind in the past and then spoke to us in the form of the Son.
God made the world 'through' the Logos as it states above, hence the Logos is the creator and the mighty one of
the O.T. The Logos is YHWH, the very one we have pierced.

There is a very good reason I assume God refers to the Father, for God has spoken to us in His Son. Therefore the God of the Son must be the Father. Not unless you are trying to say the Son is the Son of the Son, or in other words Jesus is the Son of himself? Who is the Son sitting at the right and of? Himself? I don't think so! And verse 5 “I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?” it would seem obvious to me, Jesus is not the Father of himself.

Hebrews 1:2 ...by whom also he made the worlds;​

The Greek word for “worlds” is aionas, which means ages. There is this age, then the 1000 year age, then the age that comes when he hands over the kingdom to the Father.

The Logos appeared as the angel of the Lord and the Logos also appeared in human form. As I have said
previously Lightray, the Son does not actually become the Son until Bethlehem. The Logos came from God
and is fully God, though the Logos is not the Father. Humanity has never seen the Father's form, humanity
has only ever seen the Logos in various forms in the scripture.

How does Jesus appear as the angel/messenger of the Yhwh, if Jesus is the Yhwh? In this context Jesus is not Yhwh, but is the messenger.

If you say Jesus was not the Son before Bethlehem, then you disagree with the early fathers Creeds, like Nicene Creed, which is fine, but then you would find those fathers in error.

You said the apostles, the Jewish apostles, did not know of a trinity, not until it was revealed to John much later, around the time John wrote the Gospel of John. So, a three person God would differently be a God they did not know...

Deuteronomy 13:1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.​

Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.​

Seems rather clear to me. How could a Jew serve a three person God which they did not know? We are to believe in one God, and serve and trust the one God. We are not to have any other God, but the one true God. A test of God, to see if we love Him with all our heart, and soul, is to see if we will hold to the one God, and not go after other gods. As God tested Israel Judges 2.

The Logos appeared to us in a human form, though He came from above and is spirit by nature.

If the Father cannot be seen because He is spirit, as you said, then how was Jesus seen if he is spirit by nature?

Malachi 3:1
Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek,
will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming,
says the Lord of hosts.

The Lord has already arrived at His temple in the past and they did not recognize Him.

Malachi 3:1

“Behold, I send My messenger,
And he will prepare the way before Me.​

Do you recognize this as speaking of John the baptist? God the Father is sending John before Himself, the work that the Father will do John 5:17, by and through His servant, His Son Jesus Acts 2:22.

And the Lord, whom you seek,
Will suddenly come to His temple,
Even the Messenger of the covenant,
In whom you delight.​

The Lord here would be referring to Jesus.

Behold, He is coming,”
Says the LORD of hosts.​

"He is coming" would be referring to Jesus, and "Says the LORD" would be referring to the Father.

 

[Blade]

Well seems the op has left?

Tell me.. anyone.. who would I talk to if I wanted to know more about you? Then why do you not ask the Father of our Lord Yehsua (Jesus) Christ? Clearly the 12 /120 so for so on had something new something we lost got lied about today. Peter and John.. the gate beautiful. Never once did they have to ask GOD JESUS for anything. What I "have" give I unto you IN Jesus name walk....not this is not about healing. "What I have".

Peters in Jail..others are gathered together praying for him. A knock on the door..sis can you get that? "Sure".. comes back.. "its just Peters angel". What CHURCH would even think that today. That was normal then. God has not changed.. we have. Now for some odd reason.. we come to places like THIS to talk to debate discuss everything about GOD Jesus and every other kind of religion yet.. we cant come together as one and pray and just ASK our Father..anything in Jesus name.. desire anything.. know He hears us and we will get the petition we prayed for..if we doubt.. get nothing from Him.

Just what I said there.. people will ..hmm "discuss". Comes a point are you going to BELIEVE or keep following what someone else says? I dont care what Baptist to word of faith says..what Mormons say what Cath say.. I wanted to find out from this GOD Him self. Oh but He is JUST! Meaning He does not play games. You have to mean it with your heart..just saying words means nothing.. cant fool Him.

Anyway.. to make man in OUR.. its not the angels lol He was talking to or about. Ask the Father for the Holy Spirit.. He will send.. I (Jesus) have to go or HE will not come.. He being ONE not many..spirit. Yet to just take this out farther.. Jesus talking in REV.. the 7 spirits of God...and really? We on this earth been around a few thousand years.. are going to tell people what GOD is like if there is 1-3 parts of Him.. If HIS ways are not ours.. if HIS thoughts are not ours...man just give up.. bow down.. HE is GOD Jesus is lord..and praise HIM that our names are written in HIS book and HE is coming

 

[jerry kelso]

There is only one God, the Father, as it is written,


Now, God, in his authority, has granted Jesus Christ authority to be Lord and God over his own creation in representation of the Father. The same with holy spirit, yet holy spirit is in subjection to Jesus Christ.

cgaviria,

1. The subjection theory which is the perception from your statement is Christadelphian in nature.

2. Deuteronomy 6:4 of the shema; the Hebrew word for "Lord" and 7600 times in the old testament means self-existent, Eternal and Immutable one or Unity. It doesn't tell how many persons are in the one {unified} Lord but the scriptures mention 3 persons who are called "Lord" and who are self existent, eternal and immutable and all can be called Jehovah. Jehovah is used in many compound names of Deity. Genesis 19:24; Psalm 110:1; Matthew 22:44; Zechariah 2:10-11 the father and the son both are called Lord and Exodus 16:7 with Hebrews 3:7-8 and Isaiah 6:8-9 with Acts 28:25 and Exodus 17:7 with Hebrews 3:7-9 and Jeremiah 31:31-34 with Hebrews 10:15-16 prove that the Holy Spirit is also called Lord or Jehovah. All three are called God. This is from Dake's Plan of God For Man in lesson 27; the doctrine of the trinity Names of God in the old testament pg.480-481.

3. Why do you think it is so illogical to think that there are 3 persons each as God? The number 1 is God in three persons makes perfect sense and 1 is unity. God can be unified within himself and he is but he is a relationship God and this is why the number 1 makes sense in one God in three persons with unity that cannot be broken.

4. There is more but just let me know if you are Christadelphian where Jesus is human and the Holy Spirit is just the Spirit of God the Father or if you believe in 1 God in number and has three offices or whatever your belief is. Let me know. Jerry Kelso

 

[Teslafied]

I don't see the Father as nameless really, we can call Him Abba, Elohim, Jehovah, Yawheh, the Great I Am or God the Father.

I believe Jesus was not created but more so begotten. The Catholic trinity makes no sense as it stands in order to have a Father you need a Son. God the Father didn't just figuratively have a Son, He literally had a Son. God is a Spirit so out of His Spirit was Jesus begotten. This is not to say that Jesus was created or that He had a beginning, if Jesus came from Gods very essence then essentially Jesus always existed but once begotten He became another person of the Godhead.

As for the Holy Spirit well again I don't see Him as the Catholics teach in the trinity or what most believers see Him as as if He's a separate entity running around, the only way I could see it is that He is not a separate God. The Holy Spirit IS the very essence of God the Father but unlike Jesus the Holy Spirit was not begotten but instead the Holy Spirit is just an emanation from the Father. He came from God the Father to live in the ark in the OT and in us from NT onward.

Without the blood of Jesus we couldn't hold the Holy Spirit or we'd burn up , and without containing the Holy Spirit in us we couldn't make it into heaven or we'd burn up once we met the Father. The Holy Spirit is what draws us to the Father like a magnet of sorts because again the Holy Spirit is God the Fathers spirit branching forth to bring us who receive Him home. Either way this Holy Spirit is a He because He's from God but for the Catholics to claim He's separate or not the Father is ludacris because He IS a part of the Father - He's the way the Father draws us in.

May I also add through Christ was all the world made. I believe the Father begat Him way before the creation. Figured I'd add that in.