󠅤 The Lord sent Jesus Christ

As I wrote..."so that God may be all in all." ... meaning, The Son, The Holy Spirit as well as Himself.

I am not oneness in that there is only one entity that makes up God in the Godhead. The Godhead is one.
There are only 3 in the Godhead. (Like you and your wife are one flesh. You are the head over her. If you send her to the store or the bank, while she is gone, you are still one flesh...... That is biblical. If we meet I would not know if you had another... but it is certain that if I met her in the grocery and she said she was Mrs. Runningman, I would know you are one....... and hands off, if I can be so blunt.

I am Trinitarian .

But since you are not, please answer the following . I believe YOU said the Spirit and the Father are one?????

It suggests in both Mathew and Luke that the Holy Spirit will impregnate Mary. (Not in those words but that is the meaning)

I'm just curious as to how you feel this all could have worked.

If the Father and Spirit are one....................... DID THE FATHER COME DOWN TO EARTH TO DO IT? If not, how, being one, could it have happened?

And if YOU do not believe the Father and Holy Spirit are one, but just God and Spirit so that the Father sent the Holy Spirit to earth . Would that not make the son Jesus God's adopted Son?

Last scenario.... Mary fell asleep and was translated to heaven where ... well, you know.
Future event. The plain reading of "so that God may be all in all" means that God is not "all in all" yet. It's because some of the Lordship has been delegated to Jesus. Read more of 1 Corinthians 15. Jesus loses his Lordship later one when he will be "made subject" to God.

Jesus isn't God. Do you honestly still think that?

28And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
 
Future event. The plain reading of "so that God may be all in all" means that God is not "all in all" yet. It's because some of the Lordship has been delegated to Jesus. Read more of 1 Corinthians 15. Jesus loses his Lordship later one when he will be "made subject" to God.

Jesus isn't God. Do you honestly still think that?

Without question.
28And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
Just as your wife is subject unto you in your single flesh.
 
That would depend on the definition of "person". Neither is a person as I am a person (born to a man and woman by the merging of a sperm and egg to share the DNA from two humans who were created in the same manner).

I would say they are different Lords but the same LORD (about the best I can do in English) ... Different in Authority, one in DEITY.
Let's just use a thought experiment to work it out. You and I are both an individual person and we each have some authority in the same church. You're an elder and I am a deacon. We are both lords and by lord I mean we are both masters. Fundamentally, just means we are each a person with authority. We may have overlap, but there is separation of powers. We aren't the same lord. It's the same with Jesus and the Father.
 
Let's just use a thought experiment to work it out. You and I are both an individual person and we each have some authority in the same church. You're an elder and I am a deacon. We are both lords and by lord I mean we are both masters. Fundamentally, just means we are each a person with authority. We may have overlap, but there is separation of powers. We aren't the same lord. It's the same with Jesus and the Father.
Even the early theologians that first coined the term "person" [but not in English] to describe the reality revealed in scripture that the FATHER and the SON and the HOLY SPIRIT all had attributes that belonged to GOD alone, expressed concern that the term "person" conveyed a "separate being" connotation that was inappropriate for "GOD IS ONE" ... but there was no better word they could use to describe their distinctness within their unity. As the Athanasian Creed states,

"For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal."

Sometimes, the best you can do is set the guardrails to keep you out of the ditch and on the Biblical Road. This far and no further.
 
Still entirely separate persons. The "one flesh" concept is a euphemism intimacy.
Incredible. In this day and age. icon_smile_whistle.gif

Too much mask wearing that cut the oxygen to the brain? Inability to read? American English not the mother language? bracing_myself_emoticon.gif

What the heck do you think God in 3 persons means? confused.gif

Who ever suggested that the two were one person or that the three were one person? I want a name for they must go back to school. read_smiley.gif
 
I'll share this quote for some clarification. I really intended to find a quick address of the philosophical sense of the word we see as "person."
By ‘persons’ we mean that there are personal self-distinctions within the divine Being, who can use of themselves the word ‘I’, and of the others the words ‘you’ and ‘he’. But we do not mean that the divine Being is capable of being divided, or is to be thought of as a collection of three separate individuals. Mysteriously, one person can be said to be ‘in’ another (John 17:21). God is ‘one indivisible essence’. In this sense he is one. But this divine essence exists eternally as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In this sense, God is three. We cannot conceive how three persons can have among them but one intelligence and one will

Stuart Olyott, What the Bible Teaches about The Trinity (Darlington, England: EP Books, 2011), 60–61.
 
Again, Christ was a complex person with two distinct natures ~ one flesh and blood, the Son of Man, the other, the Son of God, making him equal to God, in his deity by being the only begotten Son of God, which even the Pharisees understood this truth....
...
Pancho, you are not rightly dividing the word of truth. God was the Father of Jesus Christ as far as his humanity goes, and as such, he summited himself to God, even unto the death of the cross....

Hi, Red Baker!
Thanks for your post.

I see at least two big problems in trying to explain Jesus submission or subordination as a reflection of only one of his two distinct natures, the human one, leaving intact his deity.

PROBLEM 1: We could use that argument to try to defend the deity of many other persons. We would just adjudicate any human feature or action of such person to his human nature, and that's it.


Let's imagine that a friend of us called Arthur upholds the deity of Moses.
You try to prove that Moses is not God by pointing out to several deeds of features of Moses that indicate he was a human.
Arthur replies that such deeds and features just prove the human side of the dual nature of Moses, but do not disprove his other nature. Arthur would adjudicate any miraculous or sobrenatural feature of Moses to his being God.
For example, if you said Moses was mortal, Arthur would say that Moses was mortal as a human, but the fact that the angel Michael fought with the devil over his body proves that he could not know corruption, and that he had conquered death.
If you said Moses only saw the back of God, Arthur would say that this happened according to the human nature of Moses, but that the Bible also says that he talked to God face to face, and this proves that Moses was also God.

Arthur would perhaps tell us that Moses, Jesus and Elijah are all divine persons. He might add Enoch and The Angel of YHWH, and say that the Godhead consists in Seven Divine Persons.
Arthur would go on saying that Moses predicted the coming of Jesus as a prophet "like me", so Moses and Jesus are equally divine person. Arthur would say that Moses talked to Jesus in the mount of Transfiguration (and with Elijah) proving that they all participated in the salvific plan and were equally glorified. The narratives of the Elijah and Enoch being taken to God without dieying would prove important evidence, for Arthur of, their deity.

PROBLEM 2: If Jesus had the Father as His Only God because of the human nature of Jesus, then we as human should also consider The Father as our Only and True God.

Jesus is our example. As a human He showed us, humans, how a human must live, resist temptation, love and worship.
If we say that Jesus as human worshiped The Father, considered the Father his God, the Only and True God, and submitted his will to the Father, why wouldn't we do the same thing He did, if we are also humans?
-
 
Even the early theologians that first coined the term "person" [but not in English] to describe the reality revealed in scripture that the FATHER and the SON and the HOLY SPIRIT all had attributes that belonged to GOD alone, expressed concern that the term "person" conveyed a "separate being" connotation that was inappropriate for "GOD IS ONE" ... but there was no better word they could use to describe their distinctness within their unity. As the Athanasian Creed states,

"For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal."

Sometimes, the best you can do is set the guardrails to keep you out of the ditch and on the Biblical Road. This far and no further.
We should be careful for the illusion al guardrails that may seem to keep us on the road, but ultimately intentionally guide us into a ditch.

The Athanasian creed always crossed me as a simpleton's argument. It also says,

"And yet there are not three eternal beings; there is but one eternal being. So too there are not three uncreated or immeasurable beings; there is but one uncreated and immeasurable being... Yet there are not three almighty beings; there is but one almighty being... Yet there are not three gods; there is but one God....Yet there are not three lords; there is but one Lord."

If I sat three apples on the table before you and said, "Not three apples, one apple." Would you believe me?
 
I don't completely agree with all of the interpretations you've provided, but I understand why you believe what you do. I don't believe in the Trinity because I take a more strict, literal, and less theological/philosophical approach to what the Bible says. As you already saw, 1 Cor. 8:6 does indeed explicitly say that there is one God, the Father. So that's what I believe. That's why I am a Unitarian. I can point at the Bible and say "Look, God is one person." While on the other hand, God is never described as 3, or three in one, or a compound god, or something like that.

We can talk shop about theology, doctrines, and interpretations all day, but I am always going to understand the Bible around explicit statements like John 17:3, Ephesians 4:6, 1 Cor. 8:6, etc. So why do you not believe the Father is the only true God?
Again, I interpret scriptures as they are given, and I do not try to force one verse fits all ~ each scriptures must be intrepreted base upon the overall teaching of the scriptures, plus according to its context ~ Example: In one place, Jesus' humanity might be under consideration, in another his deity as God might be the teaching under consideration; so, I labor to blend them all together without having them against each other.

The prophet Isaiah clearly said that the child that was to be born and the son given was no other than the everlasting Father, along with the prophet Micah who said that is going forth had been from everlasting. So in both places it clearly teaches us that Jesus was indeed God of Genesis 1:1 and and God purposed to have a Son named Jesus, while God who is a Spirit remain just who he was a Spirit! Jesus was God's only begotten Son, thus making him equal to God, yet subject to him in his humanity as the Son of Man. God joined the flesh of the Son of God and lived in this world for around thirty three years, and preached unto men and was seen of angels for the first time in the person of Jesus Christ who was indeed the express image of the invisible God.

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Micah 5:2​

“But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.”
. So why do you not believe the Father is the only true God?
Because, Jesus in his deity as the only begotten Son of God, was the everlasting Father of all things. It is a great mystery indeed. Jesus and God are indeed ONE. To reject this truth is very dangerous.

In that day, when we see God, it will be Jesus Christ, who is the great God and the Savior of sinners. God is a Spirit, and he will always remain so inhabiting eternity, this will never change, no, not never.
 
Last edited:
Hi, Red Baker!
Thanks for your post.

I see at least two big problems in trying to explain Jesus submission or subordination as a reflection of only one of his two distinct natures, the human one, leaving intact his deity.

PROBLEM 1: We could use that argument to try to defend the deity of many other persons. We would just adjudicate any human feature or action of such person to his human nature, and that's it.


Let's imagine that a friend of us called Arthur upholds the deity of Moses.
You try to prove that Moses is not God by pointing out to several deeds of features of Moses that indicate he was a human.
Arthur replies that such deeds and features just prove the human side of the dual nature of Moses, but do not disprove his other nature. Arthur would adjudicate any miraculous or sobrenatural feature of Moses to his being God.
For example, if you said Moses was mortal, Arthur would say that Moses was mortal as a human, but the fact that the angel Michael fought with the devil over his body proves that he could not know corruption, and that he had conquered death.
If you said Moses only saw the back of God, Arthur would say that this happened according to the human nature of Moses, but that the Bible also says that he talked to God face to face, and this proves that Moses was also God.

Arthur would perhaps tell us that Moses, Jesus and Elijah are all divine persons. He might add Enoch and The Angel of YHWH, and say that the Godhead consists in Seven Divine Persons.
Arthur would go on saying that Moses predicted the coming of Jesus as a prophet "like me", so Moses and Jesus are equally divine person. Arthur would say that Moses talked to Jesus in the mount of Transfiguration (and with Elijah) proving that they all participated in the salvific plan and were equally glorified. The narratives of the Elijah and Enoch being taken to God without dieying would prove important evidence, for Arthur of, their deity.

PROBLEM 2: If Jesus had the Father as His Only God because of the human nature of Jesus, then we as human should also consider The Father as our Only and True God.

Jesus is our example. As a human He showed us, humans, how a human must live, resist temptation, love and worship.
If we say that Jesus as human worshiped The Father, considered the Father his God, the Only and True God, and submitted his will to the Father, why wouldn't we do the same thing He did, if we are also humans?
-
I'll come back later and address this post. I got a few things to do first.
 
We should be careful for the illusion al guardrails that may seem to keep us on the road, but ultimately intentionally guide us into a ditch.

The Athanasian creed always crossed me as a simpleton's argument. It also says,

"And yet there are not three eternal beings; there is but one eternal being. So too there are not three uncreated or immeasurable beings; there is but one uncreated and immeasurable being... Yet there are not three almighty beings; there is but one almighty being... Yet there are not three gods; there is but one God....Yet there are not three lords; there is but one Lord."

If I sat three apples on the table before you and said, "Not three apples, one apple." Would you believe me?
If you sat 3 apples on a table I would believe you if you said they were a pie.
 
PROBLEM 1: We could use that argument to try to defend the deity of many other persons. We would just adjudicate any human feature or action of such person to his human nature, and that's it.


Arthur replies that such deeds and features just prove the human side of the dual nature of Moses, but do not disprove his other nature. Arthur would adjudicate any miraculous or sobrenatural feature of Moses to his being God.
For example, if you said Moses was mortal, Arthur would say that Moses was mortal as a human, but the fact that the angel Michael fought with the devil over his body proves that he could not know corruption, and that he had conquered death.
If you said Moses only saw the back of God, Arthur would say that this happened according to the human nature of Moses, but that the Bible also says that he talked to God face to face, and this proves that Moses was also God.

Arthur would perhaps tell us that Moses, Jesus and Elijah are all divine persons. He might add Enoch and The Angel of YHWH, and say that the Godhead consists in Seven Divine Persons.
Arthur would go on saying that Moses predicted the coming of Jesus as a prophet "like me", so Moses and Jesus are equally divine person. Arthur would say that Moses talked to Jesus in the mount of Transfiguration (and with Elijah) proving that they all participated in the salvific plan and were equally glorified. The narratives of the Elijah and Enoch being taken to God without dieying would prove important evidence, for Arthur of, their deity.
There's truly is no problem ~ since neither Enoch, Moses, nor Elijah do, or say, anything personally that would cause folks to attribute Divine attributes of the Godhead, to them, regardless what some may say, and truly no man would impute to those godly men one single attribute that only the Godhead possessed.

John 1:48​

“Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.”

Did any of those godly men, ever say:

John 8:58​

“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”

Or...

John 10:30​

“I and my Father are one.”

Much more we could add, but enough for now.
PROBLEM 2: If Jesus had the Father as His Only God because of the human nature of Jesus, then we as human should also consider The Father as our Only and True God.

Jesus is our example. As a human He showed us, humans, how a human must live, resist temptation, love and worship.
If we say that Jesus as human worshiped The Father, considered the Father his God, the Only and True God, and submitted his will to the Father, why wouldn't we do the same thing He did, if we are also humans?
We must, and we are born with sinful flesh. Jesus likewise took part of the same as his people, but came in the likeness of sinful flesh because God was his Father as far as his sonship goes, being God's only begotten Son, in the manner in which he was conceived.
 
Again, I interpret scriptures as they are given, and I do not try to force one verse fits all ~ each scriptures must be intrepreted base upon the overall teaching of the scriptures, plus according to its context ~ Example: In one place, Jesus' humanity might be under consideration, in another his deity as God might be the teaching under consideration; so, I labor to blend them all together without having them against each other.
Well, for starters you are still begging the question. In other words, you are raising a point that has not been dealt with. The point that has not been deal with is that the Trinity is not explained or described in the Bible. I hope we are on the same page that Christianity is about what the Bible says. So from this point alone there is no such thing about God being three persons.
The prophet Isaiah clearly said that the child that was to be born and the son given was no other than the everlasting Father, along with the prophet Micah who said that is going forth had been from everlasting. So in both places it clearly teaches us that Jesus was indeed God of Genesis 1:1 and and God purposed to have a Son named Jesus, while God who is a Spirit remain just who he was a Spirit! Jesus was God's only begotten Son, thus making him equal to God, yet subject to him in his humanity as the Son of Man. God joined the flesh of the Son of God and lived in this world for around thirty three years, and preached unto men and was seen of angels for the first time in the person of Jesus Christ who was indeed the express image of the invisible God.

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
In the version you quoted, this is unfortunately a failed prophecy because it says "he will be called" those things. Was Jesus every called any of those things in the Bible? Is the Son the Father? I would also add that there are numerous ways to translate this passage. I'll show you two alternatives below.

Isaiah 9 (LXX - Brenton's Septuagint Translation)
6For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.

Yeshayahu (Isaiah) - Chapter 9 (CJB)
5For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

Micah 5:2​

“But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.”
Refers to his origin or beginning point. Just 2 verses later it says that YHWH is his God. Means that the shepherd isn't YHWH. Means that he isn't God.

Micah 5 (KJV)
4And he shall stand and feed in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth.
Because, Jesus in his deity as the only begotten Son of God, was the everlasting Father of all things. It is a great mystery indeed. Jesus and God are indeed ONE. To reject this truth is very dangerous.

In that day, when we see God, it will be Jesus Christ, who is the great God and the Savior of sinners. God is a Spirit, and he will always remain so inhabiting eternity, this will never change, no, not never.
Never read anything like that in any Bible.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom