God has used different functions but He is the only God!
there are Three distinct Persons in the Godhead. Not one with different "masks".
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
God has used different functions but He is the only God!
thanks for the reply, but is that's your opinion, or FACT.... thought so....... YOUR OPINION.but it is clear that you have not!
if this is true, the I ask, "Who made all things?", scripture, John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."there are Three distinct Persons in the Godhead. Not one with different "masks".
You're out of your mind, jumping to conclusions beyond serious acceptability. ehyeh is a conjugation of the verb 'to be', nothing more, nothing less, it is used throughout the Bible for all statuses of beings. You lie when you say otherwise. When Jesus said '..in the name ..' he did not refer to YHWH, it's just a flippin' noun that everyone uses, everyday.The Hebrew Name of God, “Yahweh”, has its root in the verb, “’ehyeh”, speaking of the “eternal, self-existence” of the God of the Holy Bible, Who is Unique, as He has no equal.
The main Name of the Triune God of the Holy Bible, is “Yahweh”, or, as some use the corrupted form, “Jehovah”. It is this NAME, that Jesus Christ refers to in Matthew 28:19, which is used equally for the Three Persons.
No one who is a man, claiming to be God, declares that he is a man. You haven't an ounce of sense in anything that you have said.Jesus is here speaking during His Incarnate life, as the God-Man, and as The Servant. the Bible says that during this time Jesus laid aside His "equality" with God the Father, as seen in Philippians 2:5-11; John 17:5; Hebrews 2:2-9; Luke 24:26. While Jesus was during His earthly life "subordinate" to the Father, yet, because He never ceased to be Almighty God, He could, while on earth demand equal honor with the Father, John 5:23, say that He and the Father wre "one" as to their Power and Authority and Protection, John 10:30, accept the fact when told that He was "equal to God" John 5:18; accept Worship as God, Matthew 14:33, had the power to forgive sins Matthew 9:1-8, etc, etc. There is no doubt that Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit, are 100% coequal, coessential and coeternal with the Father.
we must disagree with that assessment. according to Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, "ANOTHER", here in John 14:16 concering God is the same one person. listen to the definition, "Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort" Sort is the same kind, or person, which God is only one Person.In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit, as “another Comforter” (14:16). “another” is from “ἄλλος”, which means, “another, i. e. one besides what has been mentioned”.
Oh how true the scriptures are, "But to us there is but one God, the Father", who is LORD, (per, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:") so the ONE God is LORD, all caps.... which is the "First", the Ordinal First. and ONE Lord, which is the Last, the Ordinal Last. (per, 1 Corinthians 15:45 "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.").1Co_8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
he is oneness which teaches the Son is the Father or one person is the other.you write, "The Father is not the Son; but the Son is the Father (Isaiah 9:6). and "And also, the Lord is that Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:17), even the Holy Ghost." as two examples from #2
In the first place, "The everlasting Father", is not saying that Jesus Christ is God the Father. The Hebrew here is literally, "Father of Eternity", From Whom eternity originates, as in "The First and The Last".
In the passage in 2 Corinthians, The "Lord" here is not Jesus Christ, but the Holy Spirit, where the Greek construction, "ο δε κυριος το πνευμα εστιν", with the repeated article, "ο, το", can read, "And the Spirit is Lord", as the verse goes on to say, "and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." and this is clear from verse 18, "απο κυριου πνευματος", "from the Lord Spirit".
No where in the Bible are The Three Persons in the Trinity, shown as identical Persons.
I do not identify as Oneness. I identify myself as having leanings towards Oneness doctrine.he is oneness which teaches the Son is the Father or one person is the other.
Our God is a jealous God so think! I am a son, I am a husband, and I am a father. That doesn't make me three people.I do not identify as Oneness. I identify myself as having leanings towards Oneness doctrine.
I do emphasize the Oneness of the Lord in my teachings; but I do believe that there are distinctions between the Persons in the Trinity; and technically this classifies me as Trinitarian.
well someone is smelling the coffee. (Just not able to drink it... yet). correct, because one Person may carry three title, but those titles do not make that one person, three distinct person(s). Titles are not persons, but A PERSON CAN HOLD A TITLE, OR MANY, AS STATED ABOVE.Our God is a jealous God so think! I am a son, I am a husband, and I am a father. That doesn't make me three people.
He didn't explain anything that he concluded, Randy. He pre-supposed that Jesus was God, then went throughout the Bible trying to establish proof-text for it, without ever once either recognizing, or addressing, the incomprehensible nonsense of his proposition.You're really good at explaining this. Since the Trinity Doctrine is also one of my favorite subjects, I really appreciate it.
There is absolutely no distinction between the persons of the trinity, outside of their names - each one is identical, for each one is God who is perfect in every way. In order for there to be a change in one from the other, there would have to be a deficiency, as in one lacking something that the other had. In other words, it is the absolute quintessence of redundancy to have 2 all-powerful persons in one entity, let alone 3?So I think it very important that we establish a clear distinction between the Persons of the Trinity. And I appreciate your clear ability to do this.
He didn't explain anything that he concluded, Randy. He pre-supposed that Jesus was God, then went throughout the Bible trying to establish proof-text for it, without ever once either recognizing, or addressing, the incomprehensible nonsense of his proposition.
He twisted and eisegeted almost all the Greek that he set forth as having an unequivocal meaning and usage. There are absolutely no reserved words for God in any of the Bible, there is no intrinsic meaning or inference to 'I am', nor 'Alpha', nor 'Omega', nor 'Lord' or 'god'. Context defines all exegesis.
Genesis 3:14 employs an entire expression, which is meant to convey a principle, the aseity, supremacy and sovereignty of God. One can never parse the text, and then still retain the principle that was conveyed in the entire statement. 'I am that I am' means what was intended only in its entirety, 'I am' on its own does not have the same inherent declaration. It is the same with '..Alpha and Omega..', individually, there is no divine inference in the etymologies of the two words. This is so elementary, that it's a shame that it needs to be pointed out.
He jumped to conclusions on every time that the '..I am..' appeared in a sentence, expressed by Jesus, but, either ignorantly, incompetently, or deceitfully, did not address the areas where Paul, and the blind, amongst many others, also uttered the same statement - but the translators expressed it more correctly ('I am he'). On another post, he claims that the Roman soldiers were so well versed in the Torah, that they recognized the Tetragrammaton simply because Jesus replied to their inquiry as to ' who is Jesus?', with 'I am he, ...let these people go' (notice the context).
He hasn't a clue what he's talking about, Randy. Sorry to intervene, but his argumentation is utterly incompetent. Look again at the context, it's self-explanatory why Jesus said 'I am..'
John 18:7-9
18:7. Therefore He again asked them, "Whom do you seek?" And they said, "Jesus the Nazarene." 8. Jesus answered, "I told you that I am He; so if you seek Me, let these go their way," 9. to fulfill the word which He spoke, "Of those whom You have given Me I lost not one."
Further, whenever Jesus asserts that he is subordinate to the Father, he comes back with the cliché, 'that's Jesus referencing his man nature..'. Question is, why does one who is clearly a man to all those around him, he ate food, sweat in the hot sun, defecated in the woods , etc.., feel a need to impress upon his audience that he is a man? ...It is because, so that they do not dare think that his power or authority is from himself, nor do they even try to deify him. This is why he was so emphatic about his ontological inequality with the Father, and and his stress to glorify God, the Father (countless times throughout Scripture).
There is absolutely no distinction between the persons of the trinity, outside of their names - each one is identical, for each one is God who is perfect in every way. In order for there to be a change in one from the other, there would have to be a deficiency, as in one lacking something that the other had. In other words, it is the absolute quintessence of redundancy to have 2 all-powerful persons in one entity, let alone 3?
The trinity doctrine is as perverted and subversive, as any theological tenet can ever be.
Sorry Randy, I would like to address the rest of his thesis, but it's too long for now (late over here). Hopefully another time soon...
@Randy KluthIn fact, the Greek version of the Hebrew Old Testament, which was produced some 150 years before the Birth of Jesus Christ, by the best Hebrew scholars of the day, render the Hebrew text as, “"ego eimi ho on", which is, “I am the Eternal One”. Say to those who ask of you, that “I AM” (’ehyeh), has sent me to you. “God also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘The YHWH, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is My Name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations.” (verse 15).
Yes it does as YHWH is an acronym or acrostic of 'I am that I am'. It is to be used for God's name. So now, anytime that Jesus uses the word 'name' in a sentence, he's referring to YHWH??? You see the impetuous, biased and incompetent mishandling of the text?The Hebrew Name of God, “Yahweh”, has its root in the verb, “’ehyeh”, speaking of the “eternal, self-existence” of the God of the Holy Bible, Who is Unique, as He has no equal.
The main Name of the Triune God of the Holy Bible, is “Yahweh”, or, as some use the corrupted form, “Jehovah”. It is this NAME, that Jesus Christ refers to in Matthew 28:19, which is used equally for the Three Persons.
To say there is little distinction among the members of the Trinity does not do justice either to what their different names signify
But, it is extremely abstract and incoherent, there is not a single trinitarian apologist or theologian, who has ever claimed to understand it throughout history, not one! For, the notion of a god-man is absolutely preposterous: every attribute that defines divinity, is antithetical to those that define humanity. One is immortal, the other mortal, one is immaterial, the other corporeal, one is transcendent, the other secular, one is infallible and holy, the other fallible and corrupt, etc...The Trinity is hardly incoherent or too abstract or anything you may argue by which to depreciate it. It is orthodox doctrine as established by the Church Fathers and by the early councils of the Church.
But, not at all, only the expression as a whole references God (the eternal one). 'I am' is the most common expression in the history of languages, it is not a claim of deity on any level. It is used countless times throughout the Bible in reference to humans."I Am" is more than a name--it is experiential for the believer.
But you are assuming why the bowed down, but the full Biblical evidence does not support this. For, shortly after, they beat him to a pulp, and mocked him by taunting him to prophecy as the 'king of the Jews' which he claimed to be, not God. Even at his trial, the Sanhedrin charged him with claiming to be the son of God, not God Himself.This is why the Roman soldiers fell down at Jesus' self-proclamation, making himself known for who he was.
But there isn't, if each is God, and God is completely perfect in every way, then there is absolutely no distinction whatsoever outside of their names. And, that is regardless as to what roles that they played, for since each is all-powerful, either one could've fulfilled the required duties of the other.To say there is little distinction among the members of the Trinity does not do justice either to what their different names signify nor to the different ways that we see the members of the Trinity operating separately and distinctly in the Scriptures. There are definite differences, distinguishing them as separate persons, even though they share the one Person of the one Deity, as well.
God does have limitations, he is indivisible, unconfused, cannot be quantified, transcendent, cannot die, cannot become sin, nor sin, He cannot be tempted as Jesus was, etc...I was warned that 3 does not equal 1, because it's a contradiction. But when you're talking about a transcendent Deity, then finite forms of that one Deity can be expressed as 3 separate persons. The one transcendent and infinite Deity can utilize His Word to express Himself within the finite world, presenting Himself in different personalities, whether spirit or human.