The Trinity Doctrine

Participant

Quote

Quote (david @ Mar. 24 2006,06:27)
Quote
Expressions we find in the Bible:

Jehovah God–50 times
the [true] God Jehovah–4 times
Jehovah their God–39 times
Jehovah the [true] God–8 times.
Jehovah is in truth God–1 time
Jehovah is God–1 time
Jehovah is my God–1 time
Jehovah is our God–1 time
Jehovah your God–455 times
Jehovah our God–105 times
Jehovah my God–40 times
Jehovah his God–29 times
Jehovah is a God–7 times
Jehovah the God of–204 times
Jehovah a God–1 time

How many times is the holy spirit referred to as: “God”?

I haven't actually checked yet. Does anyone know? It took quite a while for me to search through the entire Bible and find the 1000 TIMES or so where Jehovah is called God. So if there's someone who has already checked and could save me the time, that would be great.

How many times is the holy spirit referred to as God?

Anyone?

David.

Once that I know:

Act 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart to LIE TO THE HOLY SPIRIT, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
Act 5:4 While it remained, did it not remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power? How is it that thou hast conceived this thing in thy heart? thou has not LIED NOT UNTO MEN, BUT TO GOD.

Is this right?

I'm not sure it is right. I was looking for something more specific. All those thousand times it is very very clear that Jehovah is being called “God.”

Looking at this account:
Speaking of this same thing, a few verses down, in verse 9, it talks about the spirit of the lord, God's spirit.. The holy spirit is God's holy spirit.
This verse might be like saying: “You hurt my arm….you hurt me.” It's my arm, Just like it's God's holy spirit. I use my arm to get things done, just like Jehovah uses his spirit. But my arm is not me. It's mine, but not me.

When you hurt my arm, you hurt me. (Doesn't mean my arm is me.)
When they lied to God's holy spirit, they lied to God. (Again, it doesn't have to mean the holy spirit is God, in this verse.)

My point is that “Jehovah God” (expression used 50 times) has made it very clear that “Jehovah our God” (used 105 times) is “the [true] God Jehovah.” (4 times)
A thousand times we find very clear unambigous references to Jehovah, the Father, being “God.”

Where are all the scriptures that speak of the holy spirit being God?
If the Father and the holy spirit are 'equally God,' why is it not made equally clear that the holy spirit is God?

March 27, 2006 at 7:27 am#18276

Participant

Quote

Quote (emma123 @ Mar. 25 2006,20:28)
If Jesus is not God then we have creature worship.From the Old Testament and the New we see God's decree concerning worship.We are told in Ex:14:34 that “you shall worship no other gods.” In Ex 20:1-6 we are told ” You shall have no other gods before me”,and “you shall not bow down to them or serve them.” Very clear here. Worship God alone. Jesus tells us the same thing in Mt.4:9-10. Satan offered Jesus all the kingdoms of the world if He would worship him. Jesus 'response echoed Exodus. He stated ,”You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only you shall serve.” So if Jesus accepted worship He would be in violation of God's decree. Did He accept worship? Jesus received worship from a leper Mt.8:2 , from a blind man Jn.9:35 ,from his disciples Mt.14:33. This was not just a middle eastern custom of bowing to someone. When Jesus was worshipped by His disciples in Mt.28:9 they held His feet and worshipped Him. Now the question must be asked why didn't He rebuke them as the angel rebuked John in Rev. 22:8-9 when John tried to worship him. Also when Cornelius tried to worship Peter he was rebuked by Peter. Jesus never once rebuked anyone for worshipping Him. Why? We must also look at Heb.1:6. It states when He( the father God) again brings his firstborn into the world He says,” let all the angels of God worship Him. Would the same God who decreed man to worship Him alone break that decree and have His angels worship Jesus?God declared in Is.42:8 He would not share His glory with another yet Jesus says in Jn.17:5 “And now O Father glorify me together ,with Yourself,with the glory which I had with you before the world was.God said in Is.45:23,”To Me every knee shall bow.”(worship) . Paul declares the same of Jesus when he said in Phil.2:10 at the name of Jesus every knee will bow(worship). You must honor the Son as you honor the Father.Worship can only be given to God and if Jesus received it and God decreed it then Jesus must be God

Nice post emma123,
I was going to find a post I wrote a while back for David but you have covered most of what I said. I think the bolded part of your post is a key point. I believe in every instance in the NT where “worship” was given inappropriately (and promptly rebuked by the recipient) the worshipper fell down. This obviously is a pointer to the fact that the act goes well beyond polite deference.

Hi Emma. We have recently been discussing this very topic in the “worship” thread.

Emma, you wrote:

Quote

So if Jesus accepted worship He would be in violation of God's decree. Did He accept worship? Jesus received worship from a leper Mt.8:2 , from a blind man Jn.9:35 ,from his disciples Mt.14:33.

Exactly. “if Jesus accepted worship he would be in violation of God's decree.” We know he would break God's decree, so he wouldn't accept worship would he?

THE HEBREW AND GREEK WORDS [proskynéo (Greek) and hishtachawah (Hebrew)] THAT ARE OFTEN TRANSLATED “WORSHIP,” HAVE A VARIETY OF MEANINGS. (See my post in the “worship” thread)

Here is an example of where the word “worship” shouldn't be in Bibles:

MARK 15:19 (New King James Version)
“Then they struck Him on the head with a reed and spat on Him; and bowing the knee, they WORSHIPED Him.”
Many Bible's here have “paid homage to him,” or did “obeisance to him,” or something similar. Clearly, they were not spitting on him and at the same time worshiping him. The verse before (Mark 15:18) and Matthew 27:29 make clear that they “made fun” of him. It was in a mocking way that they did “obeisance to him,” bowing to him. They were not worshiping him and the context certainly doesn’t allow proskynéo to be translated as “worship” here.
CLEARLY, IT SHOULD NOT ALWAYS BE TRANSLATED AS “WORSHIP.”

While some translators use the word “worship” in the majority of cases (and modern translations use that word less and less) where proskynéo describes persons’ actions toward Jesus, the evidence does not warrant one’s reading too much into this rendering. Rather, the circumstances that evoked the obeisance correspond very closely to those producing obeisance to the earlier prophets and kings. (Compare Mt 8:2; 9:18; 15:25; 20:20 with 1Sa 25:23, 24; 2Sa 14:4-7; 1Ki 1:16; 2Ki 4:36, 37.) The very expressions of those involved often reveal that, while they clearly recognized Jesus as God’s representative, they rendered obeisance to him, not as to God or a deity, but as “God’s Son,” the foretold “Son of man,” the Messiah with divine authority. On many occasions their obeisance expressed a gratitude for divine revelation or evidence of favor like that expressed in earlier times.—Mt 14:32, 33; 28:5-10, 16-18; Lu 24:50-52; Joh 9:35, 38.

Sammo provided a link that speaks of “worship” on page 3 of the worship thread I believe.
It points out the following:
“We should notice immediately that if we refer to any of the newer translations, such as for example the Revised Standard Version (RSV), New International Version (NIV) or New American Standard Bible (NASB) the number of incidents in which the word worship is used about Jesus drops from fourteen to about six. The New English Bible (NEB) has none. As we shall see, this is not because the KJV translation was poor, but rather because the meaning of the English word worship has changed over the centuries….”

Quote

When Jesus was worshipped by His disciples in Mt.28:9 they held His feet and worshipped Him

Yes, that's how many Bible's translate it, with the word “worship.” They (trinitarian minded translators) chose to use that word, but where the same word occurs in Matthew 18:26 for example, where it is refering to a human king, what word does your Bible use? The word translated “worship” in your Bible has a number of meanings. When referring to God, it definitley means “worship.”

Quote

So if Jesus accepted worship He would be in violation of God's decree. Did He accept worship? Jesus received worship [actually, Gk. proskynéo] from a leper Mt.8:2 , from a blind man Jn.9:35 ,from his disciples Mt.14:33.

Jesus wouldn't violate God's law, as you say. So he wouldn't receive worship, obviously. He did receive proskyneo, which can be translated as: “showed him reverence”, “bowed down before him”, “fell at his feet”, “did obeisance to him” OR “worshiped.”
Which word fits in view of the fact that Jesus wouldn't violate God's law, as you say?
I know some biased Bible translators use the word “worship” there. But that's only one possible meaning and only fits if Jesus is God Almighty.
You cannot use the fact that some Bible's use the word “worship” with reference to Jesus to prove the Jesus is God Almighty.

david

March 27, 2006 at 7:44 am#18277

Participant

Quote

Here is a case in point:
If you propose that relational sunordination DOES disprove the trinity then, using the same logic, you must also accept that 1 Corinthians 11:3 disproves a woman’s humanity:

1 CORINTHIANS 11:3,4
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

The head of a woman is man. This is solely a matter of authority – NOT ontology. The woman is still 100% human, she is not any LESS human than man. This is very simple to understand Truebelief4u, I hope you can grasp it.

Is 1:18, I hope you are able to grasp the simplicity of what I am saying: (notice the subtle inuendo that if you don't agree with me, you're not smart. I dislike this tactic. It makes the person feel like they have to agree, be quiet, or be considered dumb.)
Anyway, I apparently, am not smart enough to understand what you are attempting to say. I understand that it is not speaking of ontology, and that it is referring to authority, as you say. But this still brings me to a non-trinitarian conclusion.
1 Cor. 11:3
“I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” (RS)
Clearly Christ is not God, and God is of superior rank to Christ or as you say, this 'is soley a matter of authority.' God is the head of Christ. He has more authority than Christ.
(It should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.)

I believe that if someone is subordinate to someone, then they are not equal in power. If I can command someone to do something and they go do it and act as my representative and I annoint them and they teach what I tell them to, then they are not really equal, in terms of authority at least.

March 27, 2006 at 9:26 am#18278

Participant

Quote

…or sometimes it means just what is written: “I genuinely hope you can grasp what i' trying to convey”

Quote

Anyway, I apparently, am not smart enough to understand what you are attempting to say. I understand that it is not speaking of ontology, and that it is referring to authority, as you say. But this still brings me to a non-trinitarian conclusion.

Really? It shouldn't.

Quote

1 Cor. 11:3
“I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” (RS)
Clearly Christ is not God, and God is of superior rank to Christ or as you say, this 'is soley a matter of authority.' God is the head of Christ. He has more authority than Christ.

Ok, it's clear that you don't get what I meant. I'll use a military example to see if I can make myself understood.

John is of superior rank to Jim in the Navy BUT NONETHELESS they are both human.

Don't confuse authority with ontology. A disparity in authority does not make Christ a lower being than His Father, in the same sense that a disparity in authority does not mean that Jim is of inferior ontology to John. See?

Quote

(It should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.)

Yes David. Christ's Father became His God when He emptied himself and took on the form of a bondservant. When He died, rose again and ascended He didn't cease being human. His Father remains His God for all eternity. This doesn't, however, annul what He is intrinsically – He was deity, and still is. His humanity didn't replace his deity, you can't extinguish that. He IS the Alpha and Omega.

BTW, I bolded a key word you wrote. If you meant what you wrote then you DO understand. It's a relational matter. That is the point Paul was making in 1 Cor 11:3.

Quote

I believe that if someone is subordinate to someone, then they are not equal in power.

I don't think that is true. I might subject myself to my Father who might be physically and mentally handicapped – while I might be a Rhodes scholar with a 180 IQ and a champion body builder. By nearly every standard of measure I might be more powerful that my Father (although we have identical ontology) but because, as my father, he is the head of the house I subject myself to his authority.

Quote

If I can command someone to do something and they go do it and act as my representative and I annoint them and they teach what I tell them to, then they are not really equal, in terms of authority at least.

Correct – perhaps you do get it after all. I might “command” my wife to go to the shop, but that wouldn't disprove her humanity now would it.

March 27, 2006 at 5:48 pm#18279

Participant

QUOTE: (Emma123): “Thus the question:Do we have two Mighty Gods?. Seems improbable if there is only one God. If Jesus is God the problem no longer exists;Which He is and therefore it doesn't.”

There are many “gods,” the question is which is OUR (Christian) “GOD!” Yahweh is our God, the Bible makes that abundantly clear. Christ is our LORD, who we have to GO THROUGH to GET TO our God, a point which is NOT always made clear, due to the many times the text has been monkeyed with over the years, particularly by the Roman Church, which was bound determined to make Christ equal with God so they had support for their “trinity” doctrine.

If Jesus WAS GOD, then the statements Jesus made concerning the “Father (God/Yahweh)” being greater than he, and that Jesus came to do the “will/works of the Father” would be ludicrous….such statements can only be true if God is “greater” than Jesus (which in fact is exactly what the older copies of the text say) and simply conferred His (God's power) on Jesus to do “HIS (GOD'S) WILL here on earth during Christ's ministry.

That SOME of the verses/passages have been changed by the Roman Church is unfortunate, but if you look at the verses/passages that WEREN'T changed, it can be very clearly seen that God is greater than Christ, relatively speaking. [Furthermore, think about this; if Jesus were “God,” then WHO RESURRECTED HIM?” GOD cannot die….HE is immortal, PERIOD. Jesus DIED, and obviously it was God who resurrected him….once again making Jesus a lesser power (than God).]

March 27, 2006 at 8:05 pm#18280

Participant

Quote

There are many “gods,” the question is which is OUR (Christian) “GOD!”

Truebelief4u,
When Yahshua “made all things” (John 1:3, Col 1:16) did this include the “gods” you mentioned? Maybe you could do some “SERIOUS textual research” and let me know.

Quote

[Furthermore, think about this; if Jesus were “God,” then WHO RESURRECTED HIM?” GOD cannot die….HE is immortal, PERIOD. Jesus DIED, and obviously it was God who resurrected him….once again making Jesus a lesser power (than God).]

JOHN 2:19-21
19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
20The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”
21But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

MATTHEW 26:61
and said, “This man stated, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild it in three days.'”

MATTHEW 27:40
and saying, “You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross.”

March 27, 2006 at 8:53 pm#18281

Participant

QUOTING Is 1:18: “Truebelief4u,
When Yahshua “made all things” (John 1:3, Col 1:16) did this include the “gods” you mentioned? Maybe you could do some “SERIOUS textual research” and let me know.”

I think that since God (Yahweh) made “all things,” we would have to assume that includes the lesser “gods,” (or whoever they were), who likely elevated themselves to that position. The commandment, “Worship no other gods,” could not be a valid commandment unless there were OTHER “gods” that could be worshipped.

March 27, 2006 at 9:06 pm#18282

Participant

Is 1:18: Regarding the “resurrection,” I admit I am working from “logic.” God, being immortal, cannot die, yet we know Jesus died….therefore it must have been God (Yahweh) who resurrected him…..had “GOD” died, there would have been NO ONE to “resurrect him!” The resurrection is a problematic issue, and there aren't a whole lot of “proofs” available, either in the texts or secular history. References:
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/student….on.html
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/num9.htm
http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/resurrection-evidence.htm

March 28, 2006 at 2:03 am#18283

Participant

Hi TB4U,

Emma123 wrote:

Quote

QUOTE: (Emma123): “Thus the question:Do we have two Mighty Gods?. Seems improbable if there is only one God. If Jesus is God the problem no longer exists;Which He is and therefore it doesn't.”

You replied:

Quote

There are many “gods,” the question is which is OUR (Christian) “GOD!” Yahweh is our God, the Bible makes that abundantly clear. Christ is our LORD, who we have to GO THROUGH to GET TO our God, a point which is NOT always made clear, due to the many times the text has been monkeyed with over the years, particularly by the Roman Church, which was bound determined to make Christ equal with God so they had support for their “trinity” doctrine.

The part I highlighted was your answer to emma's contention that there can't be two “Mighty Gods” was it not? Your underlying assumption appears to be that Yahweh and Yahshua (the Word's earthly name) exist among a pantheon of other “gods”. The main problem I have with this answer and the main thrust of my counter question to you was 'are these “gods” created of uncreated'? If it's the former then your answer is inadequate for emma123 because its not reasonable to just lump the Creator into the same ontological caegory as His creation. If it's the later then we have true polytheism.

Quote

Yes, I agree with this last point, but the first sentence ignores the fact that, at the very least, the pre-incarnate Word was the agent of creation. Here is my reasoning:

JOHN 1:3
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The statement “All things were made by him” is an astonishingly high statement to make of the logos, and impossible to apply to a mere creature. Just to emphasise this, and put His causelessness beyond all doubt, John then writes “and without [aside from] him was not any thing made that was made”. There was nothing in the created order that was not made through the action of the logos, including angels. John could not have made a stronger distinction between the logos and “things” that He made.

Its also provocative to me that the Greek word for “was” in the first clause of John 1:1 is the imperfect verb “eimi” which denotes a continuous action of the Word being in the past, or simply put: whenever the “beginning” was, the logos was already in existence. By using this construction John was making it clear that logos is without a beginning, He is time-less. Compare this with the aorist verb “egeneto” used by John to describe the incarnation in v 14 which, by contrast, happened at a fixed point in time. By using this contradistinction in terminology John delineated the eternal logos from the temporal nature of the “things” He created.

COLOSSIANS 1:16
For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him

The language is unambiguous, according to Paul the pre-incarnate Jesus created all things, an unqualified statement. Therefore He Himself cannot possibly be a thing (i.e. created), as everything seen and unseen (including heaven!) were created by the hands. Moreover, since ALL things were created during the creation week, this must have encompassed time itself because the universe is a continuum of time, space and matter and all three are irrevocably interlinked, i.e. no one of which can have a meaningful existence without the other two. Since Christ actually created T, S & M then it naturally follows that time began when Christ created it, THEREFORE He must have transcended time altogether and be, by definition, time-less.

The writer of Hebrews more precisely elucidates the magnitude of His involvement in creation by applying Psalm 102:25 directly to Jesus.

HEBREW 1:10
10And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands

Psalm 102:25 was written in exclusive reference to the Most High God, YHWH, and the writer of Hebrews unequivocally applied it to Jesus. It shows that the pre-incarnate logos was the actual executor of the creation event, and is YHWH. According to the writer it is the Father Himself who personally addresses His Son as THE Creator of the cosmos!

The first 6 verses of Hebrews 3 are also revealing of Jesus role in creation too, I think:

HEBREWS 3
1Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; 2Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. 3For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house [Jesus Christ] hath more honour than the house [Moses]. 4For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God. 5And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; 6But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

Here the glory of Moses and the Jesus are contrasted using the analogy of the builder and the building. In one breath the writer of Hebrews writes that the builder of the house (i.e. Moses in a narrow context and humankind [v6] in a broader one) is Jesus Christ – and in the very next states that He that built all things is God” The clear inference is that Jesus is the God who created us. This strongly supports the VERY high Christology evident in the first chapter of Hebrews.

March 28, 2006 at 2:11 am#18284

Participant

Quote (truebelief4u @ Mar. 27 2006,21:06)

JOHN 2:19-21
19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
20The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”
21But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

MATTHEW 26:61
and said, “This man stated, 'I am able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild it in three days.'”

MATTHEW 27:40
and saying, “You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross.”

Jesus, in plain language, claimed that He would raise Himself. The question I have for you, Truebelief4u, is do you believe Him? Was He speaking the truth or not?

March 28, 2006 at 3:18 am#18285

NickHassan

Participant

Hi,
I am well. I am still convinced that Jesus is the Son of God and his divine origins do not make him God himself. That would deny that he was the Son of God. He was conceived in Mary by the Spirit of the living God and became like to us in all ways, a son of man and a son of David. He was a pure vessel for the Father to visit His people as Spirit. Because of this we, as like vessels can follow him.

March 28, 2006 at 11:29 am#18286

NickHassan

Participant

Now let me see if I have got this trinity theory sussed

God sends His equal self called His son[though he never really was a son]
to become an embryo in His surrogate mother Mary[she was not his real mother]
to become a son of Adam[not a real son though]
and son of David [sorry once again but not a real son]
was anointed by God the Holy Spirit and God was with Him[Acts 10.38]
and God was also in him[2Cor 5.19].
He worked in his own power[?]and prayed to one other equal self as God.
He died and raised himself and went to stand at the right hand of His equal self- [though equal God the Holy Spirit seemed to be missing in much of this process]

Lies. Foolish dangerous imaginative speculations and lies from the father of lies.

Matt 1.20
“…Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit”
Jn 20.17
“..I ascend to My Father, and your Father, and my God and your God”
He was of divine nature, a true only begotten son and image of the Father. He emptied himself of his own powers, obeyed his greater Father God and was sent being conceived in Mary of the Spirit of the Living God and was like to us in all ways but sin. He was a vessel for God, filled and empowered by the Spirit of God revealing his Father in nature and power to men. He died like us and was raised by the Father to glory with God.
These things are written. That is why we know they are true.

March 28, 2006 at 11:40 am#18287

Proclaimer

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 29 2006,06:29)

Yep, I think you got it.

Welcome back bro.

March 28, 2006 at 12:18 pm#18288

Scripture Seeker

Participant

Welcome Nick,
I don’t like to think of it as dividing. Maybe multiplying could be a better example?

1 God the Father X 1 God the Son X 1 God the Holy Spirit = 1 God
Even though they are separate they are one.
1 X 1 X 1 = 1They are one in the same essence.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the WORD WAS WITH GOD, AND THE WORD WAS GOD.

Is this scripture true? OK so you have two choices here either …

1. Jesus was with God and was God. This is Trinity language.

2. Jesus was with God and was a God.
Even if you say the word was A God, how many Gods do we have?
There is only one God ALL others are either self proclaimed or man made. Happy to show this with Gods word if required.

Oh yeah then we have the next verse
Joh 1:2 THE SAME was in the beginning with God.

Joh 1:3 ALL THINGS WERE MADE BY HIM; AND WITHOUT HIM WAS NOT ANY THING MADE THAT WAS MADE.

Was it Jesus who made us (as above) or the Spirit of God (as below)? Or did They create half each?

Job 33:4 The SPIRIT OF GOD HATH MADE ME, and THE BREATH OF THE ALMIGHTY HATH GIVEN ME LIFE.

OK lets take a look at the beginning
Notice the switching back and forth between singular and plural.

Gen 1:26 And GOD SAID, Let US MAKE man in our image, after OUR LIKENESS: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So GOD CREATED MAN IN HIS OWN IMAGE, in the IMAGE OF GOD CREATED HE HIM; male and female created HE them.
Are they not ONE?

Joh 10:30 I AND MY FATHER ARE ONE.
Joh 10:31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

Of course the Jews wanted to stone him they understood him.

Joh 5:21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; EVEN SO THE SON QUICKENETH WHOM HE WILL.
Joh 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
Joh 5:23 That ALL MEN SHOULD HONOUR THE SON, EVEN AS THEY HONOUR THE FATHER. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

For those that are asking Jesus to show him the Father PLEASE read the word of God.

Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, HAVE I BEEN SO LONG TIME WITH YOU, AND YET HAST THOU NOT KNOWN ME, PHILIP? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, SHEW US THE FATHER?
Joh 14:10 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: but the FATHER THAT DWELLETH IN ME, he doeth the works.
Joh 14:11 Believe me that I AM IN THE FATHER, AND THE FATHER IN ME: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

Joh 16:15 ALL THINGS THAT THE FATHER HATH ARE MINE: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

Joh 17:10 And all MINE ARE THINE, AND THINE ARE MINE; and I am glorified in them.
Joh 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may BE ONE, AS WE ARE.

Joh 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with THINE OWN SELF with the glory which I HAD with thee before the world was.

Joh 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, FATHER, ART IN ME, AND I IN THEE, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Joh 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, EVEN AS WE ARE ONE:

Is the Trinity dividing God or are we trying to divide God by saying Jesus is not ONE with God.

Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth ALL THE FULNESS OF THE GODHEAD CORPOREALLY.

March 28, 2006 at 12:54 pm#18289

malcolm ferris

Participant

Scripture Seeker

1X1X1=1 OK so does 1X1=1 or for that matter 1X1X1X1X1X1X1X1…=1

If we are to be one as He, Jesus the Son is one with His Father, then surely there is not only 3 persons in the Godhead, but rather millions…

No clearly the oneness spoken of here is a oneness of the Spirit of Life of God. Which is the only source of Eternal Life. If we claim we by a rebirth have eternal life then we are faced with admitting a few things. Eternal means no beginning and no ending.
The Scriptures tell us there is only one original source of Eternal Life and that is God. So for us to have eternal life therefore we either are God (unlikely) or sons of God – (likely)
Now language clearly defines that a son is one that is begotten of or came out from.
Sons are also distinct in that they have beginnings.
So now the question as to how a finite creature can come to have eternal life becomes a little clearer…

As to the question who made all things? – GOD – how? – in Christ.
Who is our saviour? – GOD – how? – in Christ.
God was IN Christ reconciling the world to Himself.
for IN Him (Christ) dwelled all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

March 28, 2006 at 4:06 pm#18290

Participant

Is 1:18….Its also provocative to me that the Greek word for “was” in the first clause of John 1:1 is the imperfect verb “eimi” which denotes a continuous action of the Word being in the past, or simply put: whenever the “beginning” was, the logos was already in existence. By using this construction John was making it clear that logos is without a beginning, He is time-less. Compare this with the aorist verb “egeneto” used by John to describe the incarnation in v 14 which, by contrast, happened at a fixed point in time. By using this contradistinction in terminology John delineated the eternal logos from the temporal nature of the “things” He created. END QUOTE.

The “logos” (Word) was always existent, yes, I agree. And ya can really get into some wild stuff here because there are as many arguments for the “pre-existence” of Christ as there are for his “non-existence” until he was born of Mary. It all depends on how one views the language/terms used. This is a REALLY sticky subject. I personally tend to lean toward the non-existence of Christ until he was born of Mary, but I'd hate to put money on it….that's just my personal opinion.

Regarding the “Gods;” I believe there is only one GOD, and that is Yahweh, who has always existed. I believe ALL OTHERS that have been called “gods” are simply lesser beings (created) who either artificially elevated themselves to the title of “god,” or have been artificially elevated by humanity to the position of being a “god.”

March 28, 2006 at 8:15 pm#18291