When did God tell the Israelites that He was three persons?

[Soapy]

I quoted Scripture. Have you no respect?

It’s not the scriptures that you quoted that I’m calling gibberish… it’s your misinterpretation misunderstanding and misappropriation of them.

 

[Soapy]

The primary meaning of the term (as a noun) is breath or wind. I take the reference as poetic, but it may have had an idiomatic connotation about which we can only guess.


As I've noted elsewhere, Joel S. Burnett's A Reassessment of Biblical Elohim does an excellent job of noting this as an example of an Ancient Near East grammatical form he calls the "concretized abstract plural" where a thing" is conveyed as a plurality of forms and qualities. Other examples in Hebrew would be mayim (water) and panim (face).

Or Fish or Sheep…

 

[Soapy]

The Trinity is an essential doctrine of the Christian faith. It is so important that to deny the trinity is to deny Christianity. To be blunt, those who deny the Trinity cannot be Christians.

Some of the heresies:
Arianism:- Arian thought was that because God is one, Jesus could not have also been truly God. Arianism is the official teaching of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Tritheism teaches that the Trinity consists of three equal, independent, and autonomous beings, each of whom is divine. Tritheism stresses the plurality of the Godhead. So, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three independent divine beings; three separate gods who share the 'same substance'.

Mormonism believes that the Trinity is three separate gods; the Father is an exalted man who became a god, Jesus is the first spirit-child between God the Father and his wife, and the Holy Spirit is another spirit-child of the Father and his wife.

Modalism taught that the three persons of the Trinity is different “modes” of the Godhead. Adherents believed that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not distinct personalities, but different modes of God's self-revelation.

Docetism taught that Jesus Christ was a purely divine being who only had the “appearance” of being human.

Adoptionism taught that Jesus was born totally human and only later was “adopted” – either at his baptism or at his resurrection – by God in a special (i.e. divine) way.

The doctrine of the Trinity does not on the one hand assert that three persons are united in one person, or that three beings in one being, or that three Gods in one God (tri-theism); nor on the other hand that God merely manifests Himself in three different ways (modalism); but rather that there are three eternal [personal] distinctions in the substance of God.

Oh, so it’s the title ‘Christian’ that worries you… Well then I’m not a ‘Christian’ because I don’t believe the fallacy of trinity… That’s a new one on me!

I mean, I thought the title ‘Christian’ just meant: ‘Follower of Christ’ - that’s exactly what I’m doing .., so…….!!

1) Where did Jesus say he was three persons?
2) Where did Jesus say the spirit of the Father was God?
3) Where did Jesus say that HE is ESSENCE OF GOD?

You define ‘God’ as an ‘Essence’ that you’d three persons of God partake in equal measure…

Yet the Father is greater than the Son… but no comparison is made of a third person (or is there a scripture I’ve missed?)

And you say Jesus was a man and God at the same time - Yes?

So, how did Jesus decide when he was a man and when he was God…?

In fact, what did Jesus ever do that showed he was God?

And, is Jesus a man now or only God now that he is in Heaven STANDING IN FOR GOD until all things are put under his feet!?

 

[Soapy]

The Trinity is an essential doctrine of the Christian faith. It is so important that to deny the trinity is to deny Christianity. To be blunt, those who deny the Trinity cannot be Christians.

Some of the heresies:
Arianism:- Arian thought was that because God is one, Jesus could not have also been truly God. Arianism is the official teaching of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Tritheism teaches that the Trinity consists of three equal, independent, and autonomous beings, each of whom is divine. Tritheism stresses the plurality of the Godhead. So, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three independent divine beings; three separate gods who share the 'same substance'.

Mormonism believes that the Trinity is three separate gods; the Father is an exalted man who became a god, Jesus is the first spirit-child between God the Father and his wife, and the Holy Spirit is another spirit-child of the Father and his wife.

Modalism taught that the three persons of the Trinity is different “modes” of the Godhead. Adherents believed that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not distinct personalities, but different modes of God's self-revelation.

Docetism taught that Jesus Christ was a purely divine being who only had the “appearance” of being human.

Adoptionism taught that Jesus was born totally human and only later was “adopted” – either at his baptism or at his resurrection – by God in a special (i.e. divine) way.

The doctrine of the Trinity does not on the one hand assert that three persons are united in one person, or that three beings in one being, or that three Gods in one God (tri-theism); nor on the other hand that God merely manifests Himself in three different ways (modalism); but rather that there are three eternal [personal] distinctions in the substance of God.

It doesn’t matter which way you try to cut it - if you believe in three in one then that is trinitarianism.

It is WRONG!

 

[Soapy]

Is Jesus in your ideas a God? Or just a mere creature like other humans?

Jesus is the second and last Adam. Have I not stated that before?

And what does ‘Adam’ mean?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Or Fish or Sheep…

Huh?

 

[Soapy]

Huh?

Aren’t these also words that are used in plural or singular according to the desire of the speaker in a sentence?

• ‘Goldfish are fish are from Carp family’
• ‘Look at those sheep in that field - I counted 20 of them!’

 

[Wildswanderer]

If you want to claim Jesus was ‘SENT FROM HEAVEN’ then you also need to say that the Apostles were ‘SENT FROM HEAVEN’!

No .. you really like to twist scripture don't you?

 

[Wildswanderer]

It is God: YHWH that says: “Draw near… from the beginning I have not spoken in secret…”

Who is speaking here?
"Thus says the Lord,

your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel:"

Who is our Redeemer?

 

[Brian2]

He said he was no more ‘God’ than all the other people that THE GOD OF THE JEWS HIMSELF called ‘Gods’. But, in fact, he HAD ONLY SAID that ‘God is my Father’.

Jesus also showed the positional status of God as being greater than his own position: ‘My Father is greater than i…’

Jesus also stated that anything he did was because of the Father: ‘Father, You will know that everything I have is from you’ (John 17:7)

How do you then say: ‘Jesus is Almighty God’?

John 10:33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” 39 Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

We see in this quote from John 10 that Jesus did not say that He was not God.
We see at the end of the quote that the Jews were again trying to kill Him, so Jesus was not really appeasing them and saying that they were wrong.
Actually in the quotes below we see that the Messiah, the Son of God, (who btw speaks in the first person here, so was alive back when the Psalm was written) is given the nations as His inheritance.
Then we see in Psalm 82 (which Jesus refers to when saying that the law says that you are gods) that it is God who inherits the nations. (and btw who judges the earth---------- something only Jesus is going to do).
So anyway Jesus was actually claiming to be God by claiming to be the Son of God, the Messiah.
Maybe you can't see it. I'll explain again if that is the case.

Psalm 2:7 I will proclaim the Lord’s decree:
He said to me, “You are my son;
today I have become your father.
8 Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.

Psalm 82:6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But you will die like mere mortals;
you will fall like every other ruler.”
8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance.

And yes while Jesus was on earth the Father was in a greater position than Jesus.
And yes the source of everything the Son has is His Father.
But being God (Ps 82/Ps 2) does make Jesus almighty. He is almighty and everything the Father has belongs to Him (John 16:15) including name, power, authority etc etc. etc............................. etc.
It is just that the Son is a son and is a good son and does not demand His inheritance now but waits to be given it (as seen in Phil 2:6-9)

 

[Soapy]

Who is speaking here?
"Thus says the Lord,

your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel:"

Who is our Redeemer?

YHWH is the redeemer WHO SENT the saviour:

• “Behold MY SERVANT whom I have chosen [To Carry Out My Will] in whom I delight. I will put MY SPIRIT on him and he will bring justice to the nations.” (Isaiah 42:1)
• “This is my Son; In him I am well pleased!”

God told the Israelites that if they believed in him then he would save them. God ‘saved’ them BY SENDING A MAN OF SINLESSNESS to die as a sacrifice for the sin of Adam: One sinless man’s death for one sinful man’s trespass:

• “For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!” (5:15)

So, again, God’s redemption came in the form of a GIFT OF GRACE in the man: Jesus Christ.

 

[Brian2]

That argument might be made for the Jesuses of Paul and John, but not for the Jesus of Mark, who you'll recall was an ordinary Jew until baptized by JtB and adopted by God on the model of David in Psalm 2:7.

Interestingly the begetting of Jesus from the OT is used in the NT to mean the resurrection of Jesus. (Acts 13:32-34) But also we know that Jesus was God's Son before coming to earth (John 3:16).
The resurrection begetting was God declaring Jesus to be His Son and the heir of all things.

But as I keep pointing out, nothing of that is in the NT. Jesus isn't promoted to God status till after the NT has been written.

Promoted to God status. How does anyone become God?
But in the gospel of John Jesus is called God in chapter one.
John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

I think I've mentioned to you before that as John 17 makes clear, Jesus is one with God in the same way that anyone who believes in Jesus can be one with God. Your hypothesis would leave us with as many persons of God as there are dead Christians, not so much a Trinity as an engorgement.

John 17:20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Read it carefully and you will see that it is Christians who become united to one another in Christ.

Only by proxy, as if looking at the envoy you're looking at the principal. As it says,

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known​

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father's side, has made Him known.​

Jesus did say that He is in the Father and the Father is in Him, so it is more than proxy.
Col 2:9 In Him dwells all the fullness of deity in bodily form.
The Holy Spirit brings the presence of the Father and Son to dwell in a believer. (John 14:23)
The Spirit comes from both the Father and Son.

I stand by my previous remarks. First, that's not what the Trinity doctrine says. Second, why you say threatens to make sense, and if it makes sense then it's no longer "a mystery in the strict sense" ─ which is the churches' title for the situation.

It's enough of a mystery without misquoting what the doctrine is and says.

Of course they can. Herakles became a god. Augustus and Claudius became gods. Jesus was becoming a god by popular demand by the second century CE and was officially so declared before the end of the fourth. All you need is a congregation. Ask any Hindu.

That is not how things work in the Bible. God is God and there is no other, never was and never will be.

Yes, the "Kenosis hymn" which you mentioned before (said by experts not to be Paul's words but a quote from earlier Christianity).

But no, it does NOT say "being in very nature God". As I told you above, Philippians 2:6 says ─

ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων ─ "although he began / arose / existed in the form of a god".​

What I was saying is that Jesus was equal to God before (as in the Kenosis) and will be equal after being subject to His Father.

No, he's simply given the name Jesus. There's no mention, no hint, that the name Yahweh is involved. Which raises the interesting question, if he wasn't called Jesus until after his death, what was his name when he was alive?

Your interesting question shows how silly your understanding is of the Kenosis is.
What do you think the name above all names is if not YHWH?
And this would be the same name that He inherits (Heb 1:4) from His Father.
But of course He owns it anyway even before inheriting it (John 16:15)
​

Yes, I mentioned that before too ─ In Paul and John, but clearly not in Mark, Matthew or Luke, Jesus is the gnostic demiurge who dwelt in heaven with God and created the material universe. (If I was the author of Genesis I'd be soooo offended!)

In the Bible Jesus is the Logos (God's Word) through whom everything was created and He is God along with the Father. One God, one compound God.

Because any attempt to reconcile the five conflicting versions of Jesus only results in a sixth version of Jesus, not a single person. As I keep pointing out, the Jesus of Paul and of John pre-existed in heaven, created the material universe, and was born on earth from Jewish parents with a father who was descended from David.

The Jesus of Mark, by contrast, is an ordinary Jew until his baptism and adoption. His birth was not foretold by angel messengers, and he expressly wasn't descended from David.

The Jesuses of Matthew and of Luke, like Mark's Jesus, didn't pre-exist in heaven but were created by the divine insemination of a virgin. They are said, absurdly, to be descended from David because Joseph is said to be descended from David, but Joseph is specifically, out loud and proud, NOT their father. AND the genealogies purporting to show that descent, irrelevant as it is, are neither of them credible and neither of them compatible with the other ─ from an evidentiary point of view a total farce.

But that of course is just the low-hanging fruit, three incompatible and irreconcilable models of Jesus before they even shut the doors and prepare for takeoff.

Each gospel adds to our knowledge of Jesus. Just because some information is not in one Gospel does not mean that the writer did not know that information.
As for the genealogies it seems that the best way to see them for consistency is that the genealogy of Matthew is the of Joseph and the one in Luke is that of Mary.

 

[Brian2]

Brian2 says the OT used the named YHWH for Jesus … but yet Jesus says that the name above all names was given to him AFTER he, Jesus, had fulfilled what the Father taught him, and then sent him, to say and do …!:

• “All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come to me through them. I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one.“ (John 17:10-11)
• “Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,” (Phil 2:9)

Who are we to believe: Jesus, or Brian2?

Compare Heb 1:10 to Psalm 102:25 and Isa 44:24 and you might see that Jesus is being called YHWH in the OT according to the NT.
Then again you may not see that but won't comment on it anyway because you never answer what I post to you, you just go off in another direction.

 

[Brian2]

You are saying that Jesus is ‘the humble suffering servant of God’ … and IS GOD?

So then he is the humble suffering servant of himself?

He was sent to be the humble servant of His Father. (Phil 2)

You say that almighty God is in a lesser position to Almighty God? How can an almighty entity be less than an almighty entity which is itself that self-same entity?

You say Jesus was LESS THAN GOD before becoming a man - ALMIGHTY GOD BECAME A MAN!!

Jesus was the Son of His Father. That is a position of submission but He was never a subordinate, like a servant. He had to take the form/nature of a servant (Phil 2)

Phil 2 does not say anything about a pre-existence of Jesus. It states that anyone who desires to be like Jesus should follow the example of Jesus - in that, though he was anointed with the spirit of God and could do great things, he nonetheless made himself humble and acted like a servant. The whole of Phil 2 is about setting Jesus as an example for the behaviour of those in Christ-like power: though you have the power to do great things do not throw it in peoples faces. Jesus emphasised this in speaking with Peter: ‘Unless I wash your feet…’ (washing someone’s feet was the most humblest of tasks after greeting someone in your home!) - Also: ‘Those wish to be first in the kingdom of God must set themselves last’… that’s what Phil 2 is about!

No it speaks of Jesus being in the form of God and equal to God and not complaining when God sent Him to become a man.

!! You say Jesus is almighty God but almighty God receives everything from his Father … Well, that’s an odd kind of almighty God entity!! The giver is greater than the receiver - but in your scenario the receiver is equal to the giver: what kind of illogical thing is that? What can an equal entity receive from another equal entity and yet while being equal is less than the equal but GREATER entity…

Jesus is the Son of God and has been from eternity. The Son is equal to His Father in nature.

, an HEIR does not OWN the things his Father HAS IN STORE for him until it is given him. The all power and authority in Heaven and earth WAS ONLY UNTIL all things were set to rights…. Whereupon Jesus HANDS BACK the power and authority to his Father…

If Jesus is ‘Almighty God’ while he has all power and authority, what is Jesus after he hands it back to almighty God?

And you say trinity is not incomprehensible???

Jesus hands back the KINGDOM. As the Son and as a man with a God it is fitting that God has the Kingdom and is all in all.

 

[Brian2]

I love this:

Fantastic nonsense…

The bit about the mathematics is the best part:
1 - I and the Father are one (That makes a trinity
2 - When we see God we see [the trinity] : ‘Stephen, looking up into Heaven saw GOD seated on his throne and Jesus STANDING next to him…
3 - The Father is greater than I… Jesus is equal God but lesser to his Father who IS GOD… notice that there is no comparison to a supposed third triune entity!!

You just couldn’t make it up!!! ……. Oh, but they did!!!

Your ability to mock gets better with practice but you never have good answers.

 

[Soapy]

Compare Heb 1:10 to Psalm 102:25 and Isa 44:24 and you might see that Jesus is being called YHWH in the OT according to the NT.
Then again you may not see that but won't comment on it anyway because you never answer what I post to you, you just go off in another direction.

Uh oh… another trinitarian twist: accusing posters of not answering them when the trinitarian can’t find a problem against their opponent…. Yep, seen it used many times - the poor imitators gave the game away a long time ago:

• “I’m not going to answer you because you didn’t answer some fictitious question I’m claiming I asked you in some unnamed post way back!”

The truth is that Jesus is named ‘Jesus’ - in fact, it is ‘JOSHUA’ (or ‘Yeshua’) and you know that these names mean the same thing: ‘He saves his people’ or some such. So, in the same way that Joshua led the children of Israel into the promised land, his namesake will lead the children of God into the paradise land of God.

This story of John the Baptist being called ‘John’ and his Father attempting to defy the Angel who was commanded to tell Zacharias to name his son, ‘John’, illustrates the contrast with Jesus being called so. Zacharias argued that there had been nobody in the family history that was named ‘John’ and so he could not call the child so because it was against the custom. And, as he was high priest, he must be seen to conform to the norm. In contrast, Mary agreed immediately to the child to be born from her to be called ‘Jesus’… ‘JOSHUA’..,. since there had been an ancestor named ‘Joshua’ in the family lineage…

Tip-top-toes… there it goes!

((We will continue to use ‘Jesus’ as it has become such a distinguished name of our Lord that it’s pointless to go back to ultimate fundamentals - even knowing that it this causes a potential source of ignorance among purists and learners of the truth!))

So, NO! Jesus has has one name (‘Jesus’) and a direct title (‘[the] Christ’) but many working managerial titles such as ‘Lord’. Finally, when all things are accomplished, he is given the leading man’s title which establishes him in his ETERNAL POSITION as Ruler over mankind: ‘YHWH’, the name above all names!!

This last title is not to say he is THE FATHER, who also has the same name, because ‘YHWH’ is a RULING TITLE OF AN ETERNAL BEING. It is only a contraction of ‘I Am Who I Am’ - which means ‘Eternally never changing’… reflected by Jesus saying:

• “I am he who WAS DEAD… but NOW AM ALIVE FOR EVERMORE (or ETERNALLY)!”

The eternal is not FROM ETERNITY but from the time that he became so onwards.

I know Trinitarians always try to defy logic but someone who was dead cannot say that they WERE ALWAYS ALIVE… which counters the solacious and despicable claims that Jesus was ALIVE while DEAD in the grave - even as scriptures states:

• ‘Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep; he was buried with his ancestors and his body decayed. But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.‘ (Acts 13:36-37)

When Trinitarians declare that Jesus did not die… whooeee… it means that this next verse is a lie!:

• ‘Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you.’ (Acts 13:38)

and brings to mind these verse:

• “It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.’ (Hebrews 6:4-6)

Of course, these words are pointed at those anojnted with the spirit of God at Pentecost. But they are also a warning to those who have been shown the truth of God by the spirit of God in writings and testimonials such as this forum. Fortunately for these latter, Jesus was crucified and died and do the forgiveness of sin of man is available - but the public shaming in the claim that Jesus did not die still hangs on them:

The greatest event in human history : the sacrificial death of a holy, sinless, and totally righteous man (described as the ‘Lamb of God who takes away the sin of man’), is called a lie by those proclaiming that Jesus was in fact GOD IN THE FLESH and therefore DID NOT DIE!!!​

 

[blü 2]

Interestingly the begetting of Jesus from the OT is used in the NT to mean the resurrection of Jesus. (Acts 13:32-34)

That confirms Mark's Jesus, and as you know, Mark's Jesus is an ordinary Jew whose birth was not foretold by heavenly messengers and who only becomes son of God ─ on the model of David in Psalm 2:7 ─ after JtB has baptized him.

It doesn't fit the Jesuses of Paul and of John, who pre-existed in heaven with God, and it doesn't fit the Jesuses of Matthew and Luke, who are the result of divine insemination.

But also we know that Jesus was God's Son before coming to earth (John 3:16).

No, that's not accurate. All we know is that the Jesus of Paul and the Jesus of John pre-existed in heaven with God (and made the material universe) ─ unlike the three synoptic Jesuses, where Mark's Jesus isn't son of God till his adoption, and Matthew's and Luke's Jesuses aren't son of God until their conception.

The resurrection begetting was God declaring Jesus to be His Son and the heir of all things.

Sorry, what's a "resurrection begetting"? And which of the six resurrection stories in the NT are you referring to?

Promoted to God status. How does anyone become God?

By being proclaimed a God by their followers. That's true throughout history, for the gods of Sumer and Egypt and Harappi and so on, and it's true for the much later Yahweh. (He began as one late-coming member of the Canaanite pantheon, with his consort Asherah, roughly around 1500 BCE, you'll recall.)

But in the gospel of John Jesus is called God in chapter one.

OR he's identified as the personification of some aspect of God, such as God's wisdom. You'll recall from the Tanakh that the ruach ─ the 'breath' of God ─ is not taken to be a separate being, but a manifestation of the one God ─ in contrast to the NT view, where Jesus is not a manifestation of God but God's envoy.

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God

That is, you may have seen Jesus, but that is not the same thing as seeing God.

but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

For accuracy, I mention it doesn't say "closest"; it says εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς. 'in the bosom of the Father'.

John 17:20

Yes, the point of John 17 is that by believing in Jesus you canb be one with the Father in exactly the same sense that Jesus is one with the Father.

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God,

Exactly. You can look at Jesus all day and at no point will you be looking at God.

Col 2:9 In Him dwells all the fullness of deity in bodily form.

That's because he's God's envoy and carries God's authority ─ as he explains in John 17 and elsewhere.

It's enough of a mystery without misquoting what the doctrine is and says.

Okay, if that's the case, explain to me how God makes decisions when Jesus disagrees with the Father and the Ghost.

(And please don't say they never disagree ─ that would mean they only had one will, and were not three entities but only the one entity.)

Your interesting question shows how silly your understanding is of the Kenosis is.
What do you think the name above all names is if not YHWH?

Jesus,of course. That's the only name mentioned in the text. Yahweh is mentioned nowhere.

Each gospel adds to our knowledge of Jesus. Just because some information is not in one Gospel does not mean that the writer did not know that information.

Clearly the author of Mark didn't know what was in Matthew, Luke or John. and clearly the author of Matthew didn't know what was in Luke or John, and so on. The later ones were rewriting the earlier ones to fit their own view of Jesus. And as I said, it's not possible to make a single Jesus out of the five incompatible NT Jesuses ─ all you end up with is a sixth Jesus incompatible with the other five.

As for the genealogies it seems that the best way to see them for consistency is that the genealogy of Matthew is the of Joseph and the one in Luke is that of Mary.

The bible expressly says each of them is a genealogy of Joseph (Matthew 2:16, Luke 3:23). Or as my English teacher used to bark when we were rehearsing for Play Day, "Lines, lines!" (which means "Get the ****** text right!")

 

[Brian2]

Uh oh… another trinitarian twist: accusing posters of not answering them when the trinitarian can’t find a problem against their opponent…. Yep, seen it used many times - the poor imitators gave the game away a long time ago:

• “I’m not going to answer you because you didn’t answer some fictitious question I’m claiming I asked you in some unnamed post way back!”

I imagine you would have seen many people claim you have not answered them.

The greatest event in human history : the sacrificial death of a holy, sinless, and totally righteous man (described as the ‘Lamb of God who takes away the sin of man’), is called a lie by those proclaiming that Jesus was in fact GOD IN THE FLESH and therefore DID NOT DIE!!!

The soul of a person does not die at the death of their body. (Matt 10:28,) also see the witch of Endor story when Samuel was brought up from his rest in sheol to speak to Saul. Also see the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were alive according to Jesus and could be resurrected. Being asleep does not mean being out of existence.

If Jesus died and was not in existence then He would have had to have been recreated. It would be a copy of Jesus and not the same one who was reunited with His body.

 

[Brian2]

Okay, if that's the case, explain to me how God makes decisions when Jesus disagrees with the Father and the Ghost.

If disagreements happened then the Son and the Spirit would submit to the will of the Father.

Jesus,of course. That's the only name mentioned in the text. Yahweh is mentioned nowhere.

:"the name above all names" is mentioned.

The bible expressly says each of them is a genealogy of Joseph (Matthew 2:16, Luke 3:23). Or as my English teacher used to bark when we were rehearsing for Play Day, "Lines, lines!" (which means "Get the ****** text right!")

The Bible does not expressly say that, it leaves it open as there could be a father in law there.

 

[Wildswanderer]

YHWH is the redeemer WHO SENT the saviour:

• “Behold MY SERVANT whom I have chosen [To Carry Out My Will] in whom I delight. I will put MY SPIRIT on him and he will bring justice to the nations.” (Isaiah 42:1)
• “This is my Son; In him I am well pleased!”

God told the Israelites that if they believed in him then he would save them. God ‘saved’ them BY SENDING A MAN OF SINLESSNESS to die as a sacrifice for the sin of Adam: One sinless man’s death for one sinful man’s trespass:

• “For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!” (5:15)

So, again, God’s redemption came in the form of a GIFT OF GRACE in the man: Jesus Christ.

• Who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.
  Titus 2:14