oneness vs trinity

[larryt]

You claim I dodge your question but I believe it is you that is ignoring question so I will ask again.

Maybe you can answer these 3 questions for me, and then if you give the answers I believe you will, explain to me how this is not saying the Jesus is 1/3 of the Godhead or Trinity or God.

First of all you never asked me these questions. You asked them of RG. I will answer them for myself. And I will answer them precisely the way they are asked.

#1. How many Gods are there?

One God

#2. How many member of the Godhead or Trinity are there?

3 persons who are one God.

#3. How many members of the Godhead or Trinity became Jesus Christ?

none. The Son did not become the Son, He always was the Son as the Father aways was the Father because He has a father/son relationship.

Now if you would do me the honor of answering my questions I will get back to you some time tomorrow.

LT

First you are saying that ''God the Son'' did not become a man?

As far as your lettuce verse 2 things.

#1 You can not take one verse and make a doctrine out of it that contradicts the rest of scripture.

#2 Remember when Jesus said b4 Abraham ''I am'', God is out side of time He is Omnipresent, that doesn't just mean all places at all time, but it also mean all times at all times. God could have very well been speaking of the man Jesus when creating Adam and saying ''us'' because He was and is present at creation now, and at Jesus' time now and in the present now and in the future now. You cannot limit God, nor can you use this verse to say the one God is not one.

Hi Zeke,

I take it that you are responding to Post 113 on page 12. There was a lot more train of thought that you could have addressed and maybe been a little less evasive. there were more questions throughout the post. Just answering the last ones does not show you understand my point of view. As long as you believe that I believe in three 1/3 Gods you have no understanding of what I believe for I do not believe that. I have stated what I believe and for some reason you cannot accept that.

#1 you would be right except for the fact that this is not the only place God refers to Himself in the plural.

Ge 3:22

[BlindSeeker]

The name Elohim is a plural noun and is literally Gods.

Larry,

If

[BlindSeeker]

Floatingaxe,

I have had this post in response to one of your posts and you as of yet have not responded. May I ask why?

Sorry, blindseeker. It was a nice post.

Thanks for reading it Floatingaxe

[BlindSeeker]

I believe that every time God is said to have appeared to men, it was Jesus, pre-incarnate, as in Melchizedek ("He was priest of God Most High"). The Lord doesn't correct me on it, so I will continue to believe it. It doesn't interfere at all with how the Word of God presents Jesus as God incarnate. In fact, it has been the right thing to believe.

Are you saying Melchizedek was actually Jesus?

I think He was. I'm not the only one. He was "the Holy Priest of God" Capitalized and everything!

I know it is capitalized in the English . . . is it in the original?

[BlindSeeker]

God said, "Let US make man in OUR image."(Gen 1:26)

Since you said you expected more of me, I decided I would stay up and address this as well.

There are those that would argue as to whether or not the angels were already made at the time of Adam

[larryt]

God said, "Let US make man in OUR image."(Gen 1:26)

Since you said you expected more of me, I decided I would stay up and address this as well.

There are those that would argue as to whether or not the angels were already made at the time of Adam’s creation or not. However, I personally find it difficult to accept that God would have created a spiritual being higher than man after Adam’s creation, but I can easily see the wisdom of God creating man “ little lower than the angels” for the justifying of Himself after the rebellion of the fallen angels.

Therefore, to me it is easy to receive the words “"let us make man in our image" as God being inclusive of the remaining angelic host as He was about to create Adam and set the stage for greatest revelation of the mystery that was hid from before the creation of the world . . . a thing which the angels were desirous to look into.

1Pe 1:12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

I can personally readily accept Genesis 1:26 without any conflict of reason as God saying (as would any teacher explaining the mysteries unknown to their students), “Class, let us . . .” as the lesson begins. We also know very well that God has manifested Himself with one head, two arms and two legs as has man . . . a form which the angels themselves reflect.

We also know that Jesus Himself paralleled the essence of man after the regeneration to that of the angels . . .

Mt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Mr 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

My presentation of what God may have meant by “Let us make man in our image” is no more of a probable speculation than you’re saying it was a discussion amongst the Trinity.

These are simple truths that prevent both of us from saying definitively who God was speaking to in Genesis 1:26. It is a piece of evidence that could be explained so as to support both sides of the argument.

This doctrine of a Trinity is taught as a fact in almost every denomination to the young of faith even though it is not found clearly defined in scripture and is a one that even the best attempts at analogies for it fall miserably short of providing a clear understanding.

Nonetheless, it is undeniably evident by the the words "And the Lord said to the angels who ministered before Him . . ." in Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziek (please do click link for your own verification), the consideration of a compound nature of the deity was foreign to the ancient Jews, rather the concept of God’s addressing of the angels were inserted into the Aramaic Targum on the Pentateuch for those who had become unfamiliar with their own native tongue while in the Babylonian captivity. This it is sound historical evidence that the historically the Jews did not interpret Gen. 1:26 the way trinitarians do so today . . . nor do they to this day.

Because, (as one of the site states), “The Targums were explanations of the Hebrew Scriptures in Chaldaic (Western Aramaic) for the benefit of those Jews who had partially or completely ceased to understand the sacred tongue,” I would encourage you to visit the site provided and prayerfully consider what was then a common belief among the then learned Jews.

It is also clear from Col 2:9 that the entire “Godhead” dwelt in Christ's incarnation. The Greek word translated godhead has no implication whatsoever of a plurality, be it of multiple identities or of a compounding of nature. It simply means "deity," the essence of being a god. It is the Trinitarians who continually misuse the word “godhead” to denote a divine board of directors and have caused the word to even be defined as such because of its common acceptance.

Col 2:9 For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

10 And ye are complete in Him, which is the head of all principality and power

Thank you for your time and explanation.

My presentation of what God may have meant by “Let us make man in our image” is no more of a probable speculation than you’re saying it was a discussion amongst the Trinity.

These are simple truths that prevent both of us from saying definitively who God was speaking to in Genesis 1:26. It is a piece of evidence that could be explained so as to support both sides of the argument.

Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

The term "trinity" does not do justice to the idea the God is ONE and yet there are 3 distinct persons that are indicated in Scripture. The term trinity never occurs in scripture but we still find The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit who all interact with each other in various places. I BELIEVE in one God, I also BELIEVE in 3 persons that are all in themselves very God. I did not say i understood how God can be 3 and yet one but I Believe it because I see it in scripture.

LT

[BlindSeeker]

Thank you for your time and explanation.

My presentation of what God may have meant by

[Guest]

[BlindSeeker]

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE (shiloh357 @ Oct 7 2008, 09:51 PM)

When Jesus said "nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven," Jesus was not referring to His humanity. He was make a direct and obvious connection to the prophecy in Daniel.

I can agree with you here, but I feel it goes beyond your statement.

I believe Jesus was saying directly to the charge of the high priest that he personally would witness the man in front of Him literally coming in the clouds executing God