Yahshua Is God's Right Hand Man.

[gadar perets]

For all of you that think the Son was God, but then that God became a man, may I ask what he is now? Is the Son God again now that he has returned to heaven?

 

[CherubRam]

Yes, very, very very small number of Christians are Non-Trinitarian, like 1.5% or something. Go out and look for yourself.

And I think it is so tiresome that you constantly push back on the trinity. I've studied it a lot also. The non-Trinitarian viewpoint.

Judaism and Islam are also non-trin.

 

[dfw69]

For all of you that think the Son was God, but then that God became a man, may I ask what he is now? Is the Son God again now that he has returned to heaven?

I believe he is God again ...

 

[ToBeLoved]

Judaism and Islam are also non-trin.

I was speaking about faiths that believe Yeshua is the Messiah, not faith groups in general.

I was more speaking to the constant push of non-Trinitarianism by some believers into every conversation because then every thread gets derailed into a discussion about the Trinity instead of what the OP is.

I think we should be able to have a discussion on a topic knowing each other's core beliefs and just moving forward. Not rehashing who is God or a higher God or a lower God.

Does that make sense?

 

[ToBeLoved]

For all of you that think the Son was God, but then that God became a man, may I ask what he is now? Is the Son God again now that he has returned to heaven?

Just because He became man, does that mean He lost being the Son of God? No of course not.

It says He has 'returned' as in been there before and now came back.

Jesus was 100% God and 100% man.

Have you ever read the Nicene Creed?

 

[visionary]

He will always be God in the Flesh.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Have you ever read the Scriptures? Creeds are invented by men. Scripture is inspired by YHWH. We are to live by every word of YHWH, not the fanciful imaginations of men.

And that is really the difference here. I live by scripture and believe scripture. Now why you see some hierarchy in the Godhead when God gives all to His Son, really is unbelieveable, but I'm not going to sit here and debate Trinitarianism with you because it is of no use.

But I would think about who is believing fanciful imaginations and who is believing God by faith.

 

[visionary]

"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name." Who is speaking here?

 

[gadar perets]

"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name." Who is speaking here?

Revelation 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
​

It is Yeshua that is speaking specific things to specific "churches".

Who else do you know that has the power to give to overcomers besides YHWH and Yeshua? We know it is not the Father speaking since the speaker says, "my God".

 

[ToBeLoved]

If you lived by Scripture, then you would believe Yeshua when he called his Father "the only true Elohim" (John 17:3). You would also believe Paul when he wrote;

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Messiah is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3)
​

This is really flaming. You don't know me or how I live. If this is your attitude to be offensive, I'll just pass.

You have a great weekend.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Its too bad you took that as flaming and offensive. You have no defense against the Scriptures I posted so the next best thing is to find fault with me and bow out of the discussion.

You should be defending how you can be a non-Trinitarian because it just does not make any sense with the scriptures. That is why it is not worth my time, plus it seems to be your favorite discussion, like you need to convince yourself or something because your not convincing anyone else.

 

[ToBeLoved]

If you lived by Scripture, then you would believe Yeshua when he called his Father "the only true Elohim" (John 17:3).

The word 'Elohim' is not even used in that verse, John 17:3

The word used is 'Theon', not Elohim. So maybe your not even understanding the verse yourself.

John 17:3 Interlinear: and this is the life age-during, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and him whom Thou didst send -- Jesus Christ;

 

[ToBeLoved]

I just posted several Scriptures refuting your view that there is no hierarchy "in the Godhead". Yet, all you give me back is how non-trinitarianism "makes no sense with the Scriptures." The Scriptures I just posted in post #135 make perfect sense in showing there is a hierarchy, even NOW in our day; God is #1, Yeshua is #2. If you can't refute those Scriptures, just admit it instead of attacking me as being in need of convincing myself, etc. I spend so much time (out of love for all of you) helping you to try and rightly understand many Scriptures, but you don't reply back with a Scriptural refutation to my view. All I ever get from you is personal attacks.

The bottom line is this; it is "not worth" your "time" because you cannot refute my Biblical position which is Scripturally solid. It seems you are afraid to admit even the slightest bit that I am correct in even one interpretation of one verse.

I'll look at your verses and reply below then. Just don't get all crabby and hostile.

 

[ToBeLoved]

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Messiah is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3)
​

The same word is used here, 'Theos'.

1 Corinthians 11:3 Interlinear: and I wish you to know that of every man the head is the Christ, and the head of a woman is the husband, and the head of Christ is God.

So I'm not seeing your whole 'Elohim' argument here either.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The above hierarchy is what exists NOW in Messiah's glorified state. Another verse that states the hierarchy that exists NOW in Yeshua's glorified state is Revelation 3:12;

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
​

Again, the same Greek word 'Theos'.

I think you need to prove what you believe this word is and why you think you are correct.

Because unless you can prove it in the Greek with this word, you are wrong.

I'll wait for your reply before looking at the other verses that probably use this same word, too.

 

[gadar perets]

The word 'Elohim' is not even used in that verse, John 17:3

The word used is 'Theon', not Elohim. So maybe your not even understanding the verse yourself.

John 17:3 Interlinear: and this is the life age-during, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and him whom Thou didst send -- Jesus Christ;

I wasn't quoting the verse per se, but what I believe Yeshua said. Yeshua was not speaking English or Greek to his Father, but Hebrew. The word he would have used is "Elohim" or a form of it. Disregard my use of "Elohim" if you need to. I can use "God" or "Theon" if that helps. The point is clear; our blessed Savior, in whom we trust for eternal life, said his FATHER is the "ONLY TRUE GOD". He did not include himself. If eternal life has a bearing on knowing this truth, then it would behoove all to believe those words and understand what Yeshua was saying.

 

[gadar perets]

The same word is used here, 'Theos'.

1 Corinthians 11:3 Interlinear: and I wish you to know that of every man the head is the Christ, and the head of a woman is the husband, and the head of Christ is God.

So I'm not seeing your whole 'Elohim' argument here either.

I didn't use "Elohim" here. Just address the verse itself. What does it mean? Messiah has a "head". He is called "God". Not only does that mean "God" is greater than Messiah, but it also means Messiah is not "God". If Messiah is "God", then "God's head is God". Another way of putting that is "God's God is God". The whole concept wreaks of polytheism.

 

[gadar perets]

Again, the same Greek word 'Theos'.

I think you need to prove what you believe this word is and why you think you are correct.

Because unless you can prove it in the Greek with this word, you are wrong.

I'll wait for your reply before looking at the other verses that probably use this same word, too.

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. Revelation 3:12
​

I'm not sure what I am supposed to be proving. The word "Theos" in this verse refers to Yeshua's Father, Almighty YHWH. The Greek does not quite say "my God", but "the God of me". "Me" or "my" refers to Yeshua who is the speaker. Yeshua has a God. One has a God when one is a lesser being than the one worshiped as God. Since you would agree that there is only one God and that the Son is a separate person from the Father, then the Son cannot be God if he has a God that he worships.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I didn't use "Elohim" here. Just address the verse itself. What does it mean? Messiah has a "head". He is called "God". Not only does that mean "God" is greater than Messiah, but it also means Messiah is not "God". If Messiah is "God", then "God's head is God". Another way of putting that is "God's God is God". The whole concept wreaks of polytheism.

So, then you are using no particular word as recorded in scripture, sorry Paul did not write in Hebrew so your looking for Hebrew is a little odd since the New Testament wasn't written in it anyway.

So then I stand behind my statement that that is not what the verse is saying and you have just decided to make a meaning out of the verse for which is was never intended.

Words do have a particular meaning in any language but I can see you have just used the translation and added your own meaning to it. Exactly what I thought from the beginning.

 

[gadar perets]

So, then you are using no particular word as recorded in scripture, sorry Paul did not write in Hebrew so your looking for Hebrew is a little odd since the New Testament wasn't written in it anyway.

So then I stand behind my statement that that is not what the verse is saying and you have just decided to make a meaning out of the verse for which is was never intended.

Words do have a particular meaning in any language but I can see you have just used the translation and added your own meaning to it. Exactly what I thought from the beginning.

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I did not mention anything about Hebrew concerning 1 Corinthians 11:3. Why are you bringing that up? If you disagree with my interpretation, then what do you believe is the meaning of the verse?