Trinity debate

[Truth Seeker-Joshua]

Peace ali,

Listen, I only have one way to explain it from my viewpoint.

When I pray to God the Father, and ask him to forgive myself and the world for turning our backs on him, I feel it in my heart. Everytime I notice something of beauty, a cloud or perfect tree, I thank God for his creations he gave, in which we take for granted. And I feel it in my heart.

When I pray to thank Jesus for every hit, lash of a whip, for having to carry the very cross he was crucified on, and for spilling his blood; all for our sins. I feel it in my heart. Every time I ask Jesus to come into my unpure heart, and to save my soul. I feel it deeply in my heart.

When I pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance for life's decisions, and for protection of my family, I feel it in my heart.

Now it may seem that Im praying to three different entities for three different purposes. Yet when I pray asking each of the trinity for different things, the feeling in my heart doesnt change; its the same. It feels the same. As if the Three are answering my prayers, but one spirit fills my heart.

I know that this doesnt help you ali, buts its the best way I can explain it from my point of view. It's something you have to feel, then believe.

Peace and Godspeed to you all.

[adampastor]

Greetings Joshua

Peace ali,

Listen, I only have one way to explain it from my viewpoint.

When I pray to God the Father... 1
When I pray to thank Jesus ... 2
When I pray to the Holy Spirit ... 3

Now it may seem that I'm praying to three different entities for three different purposes. Yet when I pray asking each of the trinity for different things...
As if the Three are answering my prayers, but one spirit fills my heart.

I know that this doesnt help you ali, buts its the best way I can explain it from my point of view. It's something you have to feel, then believe.

Your explanation?? Shows that you cannot be addressing the ONE GOD OF THE BIBLE ... THE ONE GOD WHOM JESUS THE MESSIAH, HIS DISCIPLES, & THE EARLY CHURCH ADDRESSED AS "THE FATHER"

Jesus prayed to solely ONE BEING & he taught his disciples/followers likewise

In Mark 12:28-34, Jesus didn't tell us that the Greatest of the GOD's commandments was to 'feel' & address GOD in 'three'
NO! One must love & believe upon solely ONE GOD!
How did his audience understand his response?
[Mk 12:32] And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: [33] And to love him (not them!) with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength ...

In the 16th century, a One-GOD (i.e. Nontrinitarian) believer asked trinitarians the question, "If God is three in one, why do you address them by separate prayers, and why, in these prayers, do you ask them to confer separate benefits on the race of mortals?"
In seeking to answer his question, many trinitarians eventually rejected the doctrine of the trinity, and accepted the Bible truth of the doctrine of ONE GOD, THE FATHER

Let's pray & hope that the same thing will happen to you, Joshua

Stop 'feeling' & believe on THE ONE GOD,
WHO IS THE GOD & FATHER of Our Lord Jesus Christ! Amen

[Truth Seeker-Joshua]

adam,

As if the Three are answering my prayers, but one spirit fills my heart.

You obviously dont get the meaning of my belief.. I was trying to explain it to a non-Christian, the best way possible...

Rather than chastising me for my belief in the Father, Son, And Holy Ghost, you should concentrate more on spreading the Word to non-christians yourself.

"If God is three in one, why do you address them by separate prayers,

Could you point out where I said I pray to them seperate?
Since I didnt, please don't use a 16th century qoute to correct me.

[Mk 12:32] And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: [33] And to love him (not them!)

(not them!) obviously added by you

New International Version
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

King James Version
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Please adam, lets not get into a debate about whos inturpertation of the Bible is right or wrong. We have a fellow child of God here who strayed away to 1shlam and is asking an honest question about Christianity. Lets try our best to help him.

Let's pray & hope that the same thing will happen to you, Joshua

Stop 'feeling' & believe on THE ONE GOD,WHO IS THE GOD & FATHER of Our Lord Jesus Christ! Amen

Adam my brother, if you cant simply pray to Jesus, to thank him for cleansing us of our sins, and feel it in your heart. If you cant pray to God the Father Almighty, and feel it in your heart.

You just believe? Then my friend, I pray for you.

Peace and Godspeed to you all.

[Truth Seeker-Joshua]

adam,

After I replied to your post, I was so disturbed, I had to go off online and consult with another Christian; my wife.

Ali and Adam,

And off course. wives are usually right. If I consulted her in the 1st place, I would of had a better answer for you sooner.

What we as Christians believe: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.

God the Father - is the one true God, creator of all things. He sits on the throne of his Kingdon, with the Lamb of God; Jesus, at his right hand. And the elders of Isreal sitting on his left.

God the Son - is Jesus Christ, the one true savior. God Almighty walked the earth in form of man, through his Son.

God the Holy Ghost - is God the Father on earth in spirit form. It can be qouted throughout the Bible of how God is always with us. He is with us through the Holy Spirit.

[webmaster]

THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT GOD IS ONE.

Isaiah 45:22 – “…for I am God and there is none else.”
Isaiah 45:5 – “…there is none else, there is no God beside me…”
Isaiah 44:6 – “…I am the first…beside me there is no God.”
1 Timothy 2:5 – “For there is ONE God…”
1 Corinthians 8:4 – “…a false god is nothing…and there is no other God but one.”
Deuteronomy 6:4 – “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is ONE Lord.”
Ephesians 4:5 – “ONE Lord, one faith, one baptism.”


Deuteronomy 6:4 – “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is ONE Lord.”

The literal translation of this would be:
4.
|8085| Hear,
|3478| O Israel,
|3068| Yahweh,
|0430| our God,
|3068| {is} Yahweh
|0259| one.
Here the name of God is mentioned three times, and the word translated one (echad) expresses a compound unity

Strong's Number: 259
Transliterated: 'echad
Phonetic: ekh-awd'
Text: a numeral from 258; properly, united, i.e. one; or (as an ordinal) first: --a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, [dai-]ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together,

example as in the expressions ''one cluster of grapes,'' ''the congregation was assembled as one man,'' and again, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.''

The Hebrew word one (yacheed), which expresses absolute unity, is never once used to express the unity of the Godhead.

24.
|5921| There-
|3651| fore,
|5800| will leave
|0376| a man
|0853| -
|0001| his father
|0853| and
|0517| his mother
|1692| and will cling
|6106| to his wife.
|1961| And they will become
|1320| into flesh
|0259| one.

[Truth Seeker-Joshua]

Could anyone here please point out where I stated that there are 3 Gods in which I seperatley pray?

Peace and Godspeed to you all

[webmaster]

For some reason people get confused and jumpy about this simple mystery. It is unexplainable and beyond human logic. The scope boggles our simple minds because it is simply the Mind of God. He alone knows everything about everything, past - present - future. To even see a glimpse of His Love for us when He manifested Himself is Awesome!

[adampastor]

adam,

...

Ali and Adam,

...

What we as Christians believe: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.

God the Father - is the one true God, creator of all things. He sits on the throne of his Kingdon, with the Lamb of God; Jesus, at his right hand. And the elders of Isreal sitting on his left.

God the Son - is Jesus Christ, the one true savior. God Almighty walked the earth in form of man, through his Son.

God the Holy Ghost - is God the Father on earth in spirit form. It can be qouted throughout the Bible of how God is always with us. He is with us through the Holy Spirit.

You say, What we as Christians believe ... however, your definition is in total disagreement to what the church that Christ established believed ... LOOK AT THE CONTRAST FOR YOURSELF:

(1 Cor 8:4) ... that there is none other God but one.

(1 Cor 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.

To the Early Church, they recognized solely one GOD, the FATHER
Compare that to your statement above

The Christianity you represent is in conflict with True Biblical Apostolic Christianity. The early church never spoke of God the Son or God the Holy Ghost!
They solely spoke of ONE GOD, the Father, the GOD of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob,
the GOD & Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ

Don't look at this as me chastising you but rather look at it as me provoking you [Heb 10:24] to seek out 'Apostolic Christianity' as opposed to the 'Christianity' that was engineered over 300 years after Christ.

You call yourself 'Truthseeker'
Therefore, I am provoking you to do just that ...
SEEK TRUTH ... MAY GOD AID YOU IN YOUR ENDEAVOR

[adampastor]

THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT GOD IS ONE.

Isaiah 45:22 – “…for I am God and there is none else.”
Isaiah 45:5 – “…there is none else, there is no God beside me…”
Isaiah 44:6 – “…I am the first…beside me there is no God.”
1 Timothy 2:5 – “For there is ONE God…”
1 Corinthians 8:4 – “…a false god is nothing…and there is no other God but one.”
Deuteronomy 6:4 – “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is ONE Lord.”
Ephesians 4:5 – “ONE Lord, one faith, one baptism.”


Deuteronomy 6:4 – “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is ONE Lord.”

AMEN!

The Hebrew word one (yacheed), which expresses absolute unity, is never once used to express the unity of the Godhead.

The simple reason is because when one counts you don't count ...
"ONLY TWO THREE" ... ETC! NO! YOU COUNT "ONE TWO THREE" ... ETC
And guess what? The Hebrew word for 'NUMERO UNO' is ECHAD
Yacheed/yachiyd - Strong's Number 3173, is the word for 'only', solitary ...
it is not the Hebrew word for NUMERO UNO

Hence, Deut 6:4 ... YAHWEH OUR GOD, YAHWEH IS ONE
It's as simple as that!

Strong's Number: 259
Transliterated: 'echad
Phonetic: ekh-awd'
Text: a numeral from 258; properly, united, i.e. one; or (as an ordinal) first: --a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, [dai-]ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together,

example as in the expressions ''one cluster of grapes,'' ''the congregation was assembled as one man,'' and again, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.''

Oh BTW, Adam and Eve became 'one' flesh not two! ONE still means ONE
ONE Cluster ... it is still the number ONE
1 flesh, 1 cluster, not 2 ...
Likewise 1 GOD, not 2 or 3

[Truth Seeker-Joshua]

sigh

[b]You say, What we as Christians believe ... however, your definition is in total disagreement to what the church that Christ established believed ... LOOK AT THE CONTRAST FOR YOURSELF: [/b]

After I replied to your post, I was so disturbed, I had to go off online and consult with another Christian; my wife.

And off course. wives are usually right. If I consulted her in the 1st place, I would of had a better answer for you sooner.

What we as Christians believe: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.

Adam, you should really try to comprehend when you read. The term "we" as I wrote it, was reffering to my wife and I.

The Christianity you represent is in conflict with True Biblical Apostolic Christianity. The early church never spoke of God the Son or God the Holy Ghost!
They solely spoke of ONE GOD, the Father, the GOD of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob,
the GOD & Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ

Adam and webmaster, you live in an igorant bliss. I ASKED FOR SOMEONE TO POINT OUT WHERE I SAID I WORSHIPED AND PRAYED TO 3 DIFFERENT GODS...YET NONE OF YOU DID NOR CAN. ALL YOU CAN DO IS QUOTE "ONE-GOD" SCRIPTURE.

But if any of you would read the Bible in entiredy, not just the parts that best suit you, you would find that God the Father does talk many times about his presence to us on earth through the Holy Spirit. JUST AS I QUOTED ABOVE. Hence back to the whole "comprenending".

alifaia, I really do apologise for this. You, as a non-christian wrote a thread asking a question. I always try to do my part to show love and understanding to non-christians, maybe to try and help them find their way back to Jesus.

Sadly, all you see here are Christians arguing about who's interpurtation of the Bible is right and who's and wrong and condemning for the wrong. That is sad ali. I hoped that maybe I could help you in some way, and I dont blame you for looking down on our immaturity.

Peace and Godspeed to you all.

[webmaster]

Adam and webmaster, you live in an igorant bliss. I ASKED FOR SOMEONE TO POINT OUT WHERE I SAID I WORSHIPED AND PRAYED TO 3 DIFFERENT GODS...YET NONE OF YOU DID NOR CAN. ALL YOU CAN DO IS QUOTE "ONE-GOD" SCRIPTURE.

To be honest I haven't even been paying attention or replying back to neither one of you.

alifaia asked a question and I am replying back to him with information. If you 2 want to debate the concept or the information presented here then take it to the Christian Debate forum.

[webmaster]

And here we are!

[Truth Seeker-Joshua]

LoL,
You scurred me fo a second...went to the other thread and it was gone.

Ok, to be a little less blanketing, my replies were geared towards adampastor. As you can see in all of my posts, I explained my belief in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.

And yes, In my (single) prayer to Almighty God, I also pray and thank Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

Adam takes this as my praying to 3 different gods in three different prayers, then will continuley quote one-God scripture.

I can can gather that he hasnt read any of the quotes I posted. He only wants to quote sections of the Bible that best suit his argument.

But I have nothing more to explain...I stated above the meaning of God the Father..God the Son...God the Holy Ghost... and what it means to us, (us meaning my wife and I adam, not the entire Christian population).

Peace and Godspeed to you all.

[Amadeus]

I have a question for those of you that don't believe in the Trinity...


How did Jesus, if He was just a man, forgive our sins?

[adampastor]

I have a question for those of you that don't believe in the Trinity...


How did Jesus, if He was just a man, forgive our sins?

Because he was a sinless man! Hence qualified to be the Lamb of GOD.
A man (namely) Adam, got us into sin.
It took another man, a new man, a man without sin, to get us out of sin!

The Scriptures nowhere teaches that GOD had to become a man to forgive us. In fact, the Scriptures teach us that GOD is not man ... he is not 'the Son of man' [Num 23.19, 1 Sam 15.29, Job 9.32, Hosea 11.9]
Jesus, His Son, is ... man, he is 'son of man'

Hence Paul compares TWO MEN, he doesn't compare Adam with GOD!
No, he compares the man who failed (Adam) with the man who succeeded where Adam failed, namely,
Jesus of Nazareth.

NKJV Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned -- 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.

Also, whilst on earth, this man had GOD-given authority to forgive sins.
(Mat 9:6) But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power/AUTHORITY on earth to forgive sins, ...
(Mark 2:10) But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power/AUTHORITY on earth to forgive sins, ...
(Luke 5:24) But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power/AUTHORITY upon earth to forgive sins,...


BTW, altho 'a man', Jesus was/is the greatest man; because ...
he is the Son of GOD, virginally conceived by the power of GOD ...
so he is no mere man!
Now he is an immortalized man ... the first of many!
He is GOD's right hand man. [Psa 80.17]

[hisway]

Since everyone on this thread is debating the trinity I invite you all to view my new posts on this topic:

1. Reply to Omega- God Is One Not 3, Muslim & Christian Discussion

2. ONE GOD-ONE NAME - Christian Debate Forum

[(Omega)]

Yes please, come aboard! I will be glad to rebuke you all including muslims. And I will do it in the spirit of meekness.
adampastor long time no see!

[Huldah]

Bump!

Coming late to this thread as I just discovered it. Now, on another thread, I've been asking something several times and so far no one has given me an answer. I'm rather disappointed.

It has been alleged, by a trinitarian - one of the majority on this board, that Isaiah 53 teaches that God is the suffering servant. My response to that claim follows, and I wonder if anyone would be good enough to answer it:

1. Suffering servant of Isaiah is YHVH.

Really??? That's quite a claim to make, because in Isaiah 53 YHWH is someone other than the suffering servant:

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and YHWH hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased YHWH to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of YHWH shall prosper in his hand.

Please tell me who you think is saying this:

Isa 53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
Isa 53:12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

2. Jesus says he's that suffering servant.

I agree that Jesus is the suffering servant, therefore YHWH isn't.

[Aineo]

Jesus is the suffering servent of Isaiah 53. You would be better served to quote the person without using the term "trinitarian". I could just as easily quote you and use the term "heretic" to make a point.

[Huldah]

I thought trinitarians didn't mind being called trinitarians!! I should know, I've been out with two of them!!

I said it to give the person anonymity on this thread.

[Huldah]

Jesus is the suffering servent of Isaiah 53.

Does that mean that you don't believe that YHWH was the suffering servant then?

[Aineo]

Jesus is the suffering servent of Isaiah 53.

Does that mean that you don't believe that YHWH was the suffering servant then?

I meant what I posted. Jesus is the suffering servant of Isaiah 53. YHWH is the Jews covenant name for God.

[Huldah]

So, Aineo, if I may press the point, do you believe that YHWH was the suffering servant?

[Evangelion]

THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT GOD IS ONE.

Isaiah 45:22 – “…for I am God and there is none else.”
Isaiah 45:5 – “…there is none else, there is no God beside me…”
Isaiah 44:6 – “…I am the first…beside me there is no God.”
1 Timothy 2:5 – “For there is ONE God…”
1 Corinthians 8:4 – “…a false god is nothing…and there is no other God but one.”
Deuteronomy 6:4 – “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is ONE Lord.”
Ephesians 4:5 – “ONE Lord, one faith, one baptism.”


Deuteronomy 6:4 – “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is ONE Lord.”

The literal translation of this would be:
4.
|8085| Hear,
|3478| O Israel,
|3068| Yahweh,
|0430| our God,
|3068| {is} Yahweh
|0259| one.
Here the name of God is mentioned three times, and the word translated one (echad) expresses a compound unity

No, the word echad does not express a "compound unity."

Strong's Number: 259
Transliterated: 'echad
Phonetic: ekh-awd'
Text: a numeral from 258; properly, united, i.e. one; or (as an ordinal) first: --a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, [dai-]ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together

There, you see? Even your quote from Strong's Concordance shows that it can mean anything from "first" through to "only" or "alone"!

It certainly doesn't show that this word refers to a "compound unity."

Example as in the expressions ''one cluster of grapes,''

That's still one thing - a cluster of grapes. The plurality is in "cluster" (a group of grapes), not echad.

"'the congregation was assembled as one man,''

That's still one thing - an assembly. The plurality is in "assembly" (a group of people), not echad.

and again, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.''

That's purely figurative language - and it still refers to one flesh, not several fleshes in one.

The Hebrew word one (yacheed), which expresses absolute unity, is never once used to express the unity of the Godhead.

The Hebrew word yachid does not express "absolute unity" and is only used twelve times in the entire Old Testament anyway!

So there is no need for the Shema to use yachid, when echad (which is used 969 times in the OT) is quite sufficient to indicate that the Deity consists of One Divine Person. Yachid is, after all, rarely used in Biblical Hebrew. (A mere twelve times, compared with the 969 occurrences of echad!)

It has been translated in several places as "darling"; it carries the meaning "only begotten son", or "solitary", and would therefore be inappropriate as reference to the God of Israel, Who is (a) not an only-begotten son, and (b) constantly surrounded by His angelic host (and therefore never solitary.)

Trinitarians are fond of saying that yachid is never used in reference to God (which is true) - but with only twelve occurrences of this word in Scripture, you could say that about 99.9% of the people in the OT!

There is, however, another Hebrew word - bad which the Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon defines in the following way:

bad

1) Alone, by itself, besides, a part, separation, being alone.

1a) Separation, alone, by itself.
1a1) Only (adverb.)
1a2) Part from, besides (preposition.)
1b) Part.
1c) Parts (eg limbs, shoots), bars.

This word is used to describe the One God of Judaism, and it first occurs in Genesis 2:18, describing Adam's state before the creation of Eve:

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; [bad] I will make him a help meet for him.

So the absolute singularity of the One God is consistently emphasised when He is addressed, as we find in this tiny sample of the 202 places where bad is used:

• Nehemiah 9:6.
  Thou art Yahweh alone [bad]
  
  
• II Kings 19:5.
  Thou art God alone; [bad], the God of all the kingdoms of the earth
  
  
• Psalm 83:18.
  That men may know that thou, whose name alone; [bad] is Yahweh
  
  
• Psalm 86:10.
  Thou alone; [bad] art God

[Evangelion]

Echad appears in standard translations of the Bible as the numeral "one", and also as "only", "alone", "undivided", and "single." It usually means "one and not two", as we find in Ecclesiastes 4:8. Abraham was "only one man" (echad) in the New International Version's rendition of Ezekiel 33:24, and he was "alone" (echad) in the King James translation of Isaiah 51:2.

Koehler and Baumgartner's Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (1967) clearly states that the fundamental definition of echad is "one single." Any plurality, therefore, is not found within the word itself, but in the subject to which it is applied.

The simple truth of the matter is that the word echad could be replaced with the Hebrew words for "two", "three", "four", or any other number - and in every case, the "complex unity" would not be found in the number itself, but in the subject to which it is applied!

Let's take a few examples, using English:

• One pair. (The "compound unity" here is "pair" - not "one.")
  
  
• One triplet. (The "compound unity" here is "triplet" - not "one.")
  
  
• One bunch. (The "compound unity" here is "bunch" - not "one.")
  
  
• One herd. (The "compound unity" here is "herd" - not "one.")

This is no different to the use of echad (or any other number) in Hebrew. As always, it is the subject which denotes the "compound unity", not the number itself.

Finally, it is with considerable satisfaction that I now quote Gregory Boyd (the indefatigable Trinitarian apologist), who has conceded that the echad argument is totally useless for Trinitarian purposes:

Even weaker is the argument that the Hebrew word for "one" (echad) used in the Shema ("Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord") refers to a united one, not an absolute one. Hence, some Trinitarians have argued, the Old Testament has a view of a united Godhead. It is, of course, true that the meaning of the word may in some contexts denote a unified plurality (e.g. Gen. 2:24, "they shall become one flesh").

But this really proves nothing. An examination of the Old Testament usage reveals that the word echad is as capable of various meanings as is our English word one. The context must determine whether a numerical or unified singularity is intended.

Boyd, Gregory (1995), Oneness Pentecostals and the Trinity.

Echad is simply the Hebrew word for "one", and operates in exactly the same way as the English word for "one."

[Aineo]

Well, since you want to deal in semantics:

|8085| Hear,
|3478| O Israel,
|3068| Yahweh,
|0430| our God,
|3068| {is} Yahweh
|0259| one.

The word translated "our God" is

OT:430
'elohiym --



1) (plural)
a) rulers, judges
b) divine ones
c) angels
d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
a) God, a god, a goddess
b) god-like one
c) works or special possessions of God
d) the one true God
e) God
(from The Online Bible Thayer's Greek Lexicon and Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon, Copyright (c)1993, Woodside Bible Fellowship, Ontario, Canada. Licensed from the Institute for Creation Research.)

Now why do you suppose the Holy Spirit used the plural form of God instead of "el" the singular? The word "elohiym" indicates a plurality not a singularity. You have the Trinity hidden by the word used by Isaiah. The Trinity is one God with three pesonalities or distinct persons with distinct roles in the life of a Christian.

[Huldah]

What is the point in 'hiding' the trinity for all those centuries?

Aineo, do you believe that YHWH was the suffering servant?

[Aineo]

What is the point in 'hiding' the trinity for all those centuries?

Aineo, do you believe that YHWH was the suffering servant?

Jesus was the suffering servant. YHWH was the Hebrews covenant name for "elohiym".

Why hide the plurality of God in the OT? You might as well ask why God did not reveal His ultimate plan for mankind in Genesis instead of revealing His ultimate plan on the cross!

[Evangelion]

Well, since you want to deal in semantics:

|8085| Hear,
|3478| O Israel,
|3068| Yahweh,
|0430| our God,
|3068| {is} Yahweh
|0259| one.

The word translated "our God" is

OT:430
'elohiym --



1) (plural)
a) rulers, judges
b) divine ones
c) angels
d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
a) God, a god, a goddess
b) god-like one
c) works or special possessions of God
d) the one true God
e) God
(from The Online Bible Thayer's Greek Lexicon and Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon, Copyright (c)1993, Woodside Bible Fellowship, Ontario, Canada. Licensed from the Institute for Creation Research.)

Now why do you suppose the Holy Spirit used the plural form of God instead of "el" the singular?

Because it's one of many Hebrew words which are plural in form but singular in meaning.

Such Hebrew noun forms are sometimes used for abstract nouns and as intensifiers. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar devotes several pages to this subject.

The following list is by no means exhaustive, but serves to illustrate the point.

Bearing in mind that the masculine plural ending is -im, while the feminine plural ending is -oth, consider these examples:

• zequnim - old age (Genesis 21:2, 7; 37:3; 44:20.)
  
  
• ne`urim - youth. David was only a boy (na`ar), but Goliath "has been a fighting man from his youth (ne`urim.)" (I Samuel 17:33.)
  
  
• chayyim - life. This is used in the song "To life, to life, lechayyim" in the movie Fiddler on the Roof.
  
  
• gebhuroth - strength. The singular form gebhurah is the usual word for strength, but the plural form is used in Job 41:12.
  
  
• tsedaqoth - righteousness. The singular form tsedaqah is the usual word, but tsedaqoth is used in Isaiah 33:15 - "he who walks righteously (or "in righteousness.")
  
  
• chokmoth - wisdom. Chokmah is the usual form, but chokmoth is used in Proverbs 1:20.
  
  
• 'adonim - lord. 'Adon means "lord," and 'adonim normally means "lords," but Isaiah 19:4 says, "I will hand the Egyptians over to the power of a cruel master ('adonim.)"
  
  
• behemoth. This word normally means "beasts", but in Job 40:15 it refers to one particular animal.

So the plurality of elohim is by no means unique, and therefore carries no special significance whatsoever. It is, in fact, nothing more than a peculiarity of Hebrew grammar.

Plurality of form does not always indicate plurality of meaning in Hebrew, and our brief list (above) confirms this beyond any shadow of a doubt.

Hence the words of Ethelyn Simon et al, in The First Hebrew Primer for Adults

When (ELOHIM) refers to the God of Israel it is always singular in concept, even though it has a masculine plural ending."

The citation is taken from the 2nd Edition, published in 1983.

If you wish to argue for a "plurality" within the Godhead, then we are at liberty to argue for:

• A plurality of youths within Goliath.
  
  
• A plurality of lords within the "cruel master" of Isaiah 19:4.
  
  
• A plurality of beasts within Behemoth.

You see how ridiculous this would be.

The word "elohiym" indicates a plurality not a singularity.

Not always, as we have just seen.

For example:

Exodus 7:1
And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god [elohim] to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

Now, according to your argument, God said "See, I have made thee a gods to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet."

Which is obviously not what God meant at all, so it's obviously wrong.

You have the Trinity hidden by the word used by Isaiah.

No you don't.

The Trinity is one God with three pesonalities or distinct persons with distinct roles in the life of a Christian.

Find me a single verse in Scripture which says exactly this.

Oh, wait - you can't, because there isn't one.

[Evangelion]

Why hide the plurality of God in the OT? You might as well ask why God did not reveal His ultimate plan for mankind in Genesis instead of revealing His ultimate plan on the cross!

That doesn't answer the question.

And God did reveal His ultimate plan in Genesis. Read Chapter 3 and tell me what you think verse 15 is all about.

Sure, it's symbolic - but it's definitely there.

[Huldah]

What is the point in 'hiding' the trinity for all those centuries?

Aineo, do you believe that YHWH was the suffering servant?

Jesus was the suffering servant. YHWH was the Hebrews covenant name for "elohiym".

You've already said that but you haven't answered the question. Was YHWH the suffering servant - yes or no?

Why hide the plurality of God in the OT? You might as well ask why God did not reveal His ultimate plan for mankind in Genesis instead of revealing His ultimate plan on the cross!

You lot say that it is a life and death matter that we believe that God is a trinity, then, um, you say that He hid this 'most important' doctrine?

[Aineo]

I have given you my answer. Jesus is the suffering servant in Isaiah 53.

Have you ever heard the expression the OT is Jesus concealed and the NT is Jesus revealed?

[Huldah]

It isn't the answer to the question I asked.

I asked, do you believe that YHWH is the suffering servant - yes or no. So far you've evaded the question.

[Aineo]

I have answered your question. Not all questions can be answered with a yes or no.

[Huldah]

That sounds awfully like a cop out to me. Either He was or He wasn't.

[Aineo]

That sounds awfully like a cop out to me. Either He was or He wasn't.

Really? Then let me answer your question with a question and then maybe we can discern some truth.

Jesus said that no man has seen the Father. Do you agree that the Father is God? If so then lets look at Genesis 18

Genesis 18:1-8
18:1 Now the LORD appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day. 2 And when he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the earth, 3 and said, "My lord, if now I have found favor in your sight, please do not pass your servant by. 4 Please let a little water be brought and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree; 5 and I will bring a piece of bread, that you may refresh yourselves; after that you may go on, since you have visited your servant. "And they said," So do, as you have said." 6 So Abraham hurried into the tent to Sarah, and said, "Quickly, prepare three measures of fine flour, knead it, and make bread cakes." 7 Abraham also ran to the herd, and took a tender and choice calf, and gave it to the servant; and he hurried to prepare it. 8 And he took curds and milk and the calf which he had prepared, and placed it before them; and he was standing by them under the tree as they ate.
NAS

The word translated "LORD" in verse 1 is:

OT:3068

Yehovah (yeh-ho-vaw'); from OT:1961; (the) self-Existent or Eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God:


KJV - Jehovah, the Lord. Compare OT:3050, OT:3069.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

Who visited and conversed with Abraham?

[burwelm]

Luke 1:35- And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the son of God.

This verse seems to speak of the trinity: the Holy Ghost, the Highest (God the Father), and the son of God (Jesus). Other than this it has been hard for me to distinguish how God the Father and God the Holy Ghost are separate since
Mark 1:18 says (Mary) was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Since it was the Holy Ghost that is the biological father of Jesus it seems to me that the Holy Ghost cannot be separate from God the Father.

[adampastor]

For starters, the Scriptures do not speak of trinity or God the Holy Ghost
The Scriptures speak of the ONE GOD, the Father.
No OT Jew or 1st-century Christian would read the following verses and depict two persons of GOD i.e.

• (Num 24:2) And Balaam ... and the spirit of God came upon him.
• (Judg 3:10) And the spirit of YAHWEH came upon him ...
• (Judg 6:34) But the spirit of YAHWEH came upon Gideon ...
• (Judg 11:29) Then the spirit of YAHWEH came upon Jephthah ...
• (Judg 14:6) And the spirit of YAHWEH came mightily upon him, and he rent him as he would have rent a kid, and he had nothing in his hand: ...
• (Judg 14:19) And the spirit of YAHWEH came upon him, and he went down to Ashkelon, and slew thirty men of them ...
• (Judg 15:14) ... and the spirit of YAHWEH came mightily upon him ...
• (1 Sam 10:6) And the spirit of YAHWEH will come upon thee, and thou shalt prophesy with them, and shalt be turned into another man.
• (1 Sam 10:10) ... and the spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied among them.
• (1 Sam 11:6) And the spirit of God came upon Saul ...
• (1 Sam 16:13) Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the spirit of YAHWEH came upon David from that day forward. ...
• (1 Chr 12:18 ) Then the spirit came upon Amasai ...
• (2 Chr 15:1) And the Spirit of God came upon Azariah the son of Oded:
• (2 Chr 20:14) Then upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah, the son of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, a Levite of the sons of Asaph, came the Spirit of YAHWEH in the midst of the congregation;
• (2 Chr 24:20) And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest ...
• (Ezek 11:5) And the Spirit of YAHWEH fell upon me, ...

No reader of Biblical times would have read the above and taught from that, that one person of a so-called trinity was coming down from another person ... NO!

They would have understood that when GOD Almighty is depicted as working and moving i.e. GOD in action; the scriptures speak of His spirit as coming down upon people, coming upon people, and moving.
That is, GOD's spirit is synonymous with GOD's breath, GOD's ruwach i.e. GOD's power in action!

Therefore just as the spirit of GOD came upon the OT saints depicted upon, a greater miracle happen when GOD's spirit came upon Mary; it resulted in the conception, the genesis [Mat 1.18] of Jesus the Messiah!

Therefore Gabriel's words in Luke 1:35 ... poorly translated as "therefore also" should be rendered (from the Grk. dio kai) "for that reason that holy one which shall be born of thee shall be called the son of God."

The reason, therefore, that Jesus is the Son of GOD, is because of the miracle that GOD caused in the womb of Mary by His spirit, His power.

Hence Matt 1.18 Now the birth (genesis) of Jesus Christ was on this wise: ... she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

... the child was a result of the spirit of GOD ...
that is all that she was found with child of the Holy Ghost means!
The foetus in Mary's womb came about by the power, by the spirit of GOD; the very same spirit that moved in Genesis 1 and cause the creation of our world.

The Holy Spirit is the power of GOD. Therefore, GOD is truly the GOD & Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Remember, GOD is spirit [John 4.24] and GOD is holy.
Hope this clarifies ...

[Aineo]

TRINITY

(trin'-i-ti)

For the outline to this article, see Trinity


1. The Term "Trinity": The term "Trinity" is not a Biblical term, and we are not using Biblical language when we define what is expressed by it as the doctrine that there is one only and true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence. A doctrine so defined can be spoken of as a Biblical doctrine only on the principle that the sense of Scripture is Scripture. And the definition of a Biblical doctrine in such un-Biblical language can be justified only on the principle that it is better to preserve the truth of Scripture than the words of Scripture. The doctrine of the Trinity lies in Scripture in solution; when it is crystallized from its solvent it does not cease to be Scriptural, but only comes into clearer view. Or, to speak without figure, the doctrine of the Trinity is given to us in Scripture, not in formulated definition, but in fragmentary allusions; when we assemble the disjecta membra into their organic unity, we are not passing from Scripture, but entering more thoroughly into the meaning of Scripture. We may state the doctrine in technical terms, supplied by philosophical reflection; but the doctrine stated is a genuinely Scriptural doctrine.
(from International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Electronic Database Copyright (c)1996 by Biblesoft)

22. Formulation of the Doctrine:

The determining impulse to the formulation of the doctrine of the Trinity in the church was the church's profound conviction of the absolute Deity of Christ, on which as on a pivot the whole Christian conception of God from the first origins of Christianity turned. The guiding principle in the formulation of the doctrine was supplied by the Baptismal Formula announced by Jesus (Matthew 28:19), from which was derived the ground-plan of the baptismal confessions and "rules of faith" which very soon began to be framed all over the church. It was by these two fundamental principia--the true Deity of Christ and the Baptismal Formula--that all attempts to formulate the Christian doctrine of God were tested, and by their molding power that the church at length found itself in possession of a form of statement which did full justice to the data of the redemptive revelation as reflected in the New Testament and the demands of the Christian heart under the experience of salvation.

In the nature of the case the formulated doctrine was of slow attainment. The influence of inherited conceptions and of current philosophies inevitably showed itself in the efforts to construe to the intellect the immanent faith of Christians. In the 2nd century the dominant neo-Stoic and neo-Platonic ideas deflected Christian thought into subordinationist channels, and produced what is known as the Logos-Christology, which looks upon the Son as a prolation of Deity reduced to such dimensions as comported with relations with a world of time and space; meanwhile, to a great extent, the Spirit was neglected altogether. A reaction which, under the name of Monarchianism, identified the Father, Son, and Spirit so completely that they were thought of only as different aspects or different moments in the life of the one Divine Person, called now Father, now Son, now Spirit, as His several activities came successively into view, almost succeeded in establishing itself in the 3rd century as the doctrine of the church at large. In the conflict between these two opposite tendencies the church gradually found its way, under the guidance of the Baptismal Formula elaborated into a "Rule of Faith," to a better and more well-balanced conception, until a real doctrine of the Trinity at length came to expression, particularly in the West, through the brilliant dialectic of Tertullian. It was thus ready at hand, when, in the early years of the 4th century, the Logos-Christology, in opposition to dominant Sabellian tendencies, ran to seed in what is known as Arianism, to which the Son was a creature, though exalted above all other creatures as their Creator and Lord; and the church was thus prepared to assert its settled faith in a Triune God, one in being, but in whose unity there subsisted three consubstantial Persons. Under the leadership of Athanasius this doctrine was proclaimed as the faith of the church at the Council of Nice in 325 AD, and by his strenuous labors and those of "the three great Cappadocians," the two Gregories and Basil, it gradually won its way to the actual acceptance of the entire church. It was at the hands of Augustine, however, a century later, that the doctrine thus become the church doctrine in fact as well as in theory, received its most complete elaboration and most carefully grounded statement. In the form which he gave it, and which is embodied in that "battle-hymn of the early church," the so-called Athanasian Creed, it has retained its place as the fit expression of the faith of the church as to the nature of its God until today. The language in which it is couched, even in this final declaration, still retains elements of speech which owe their origin to the modes of thought characteristic of the Logos-Christology of the 2nd century, fixed in the nomenclature of the church by the Nicene Creed of 325 AD, though carefully guarded there against the subordinationism inherent in the Logos-Christology, and made the vehicle rather of the Nicene doctrines of the eternal generation of the Son and procession of the Spirit, with the consequent subordination of the Son and Spirit to the Father in modes of subsistence as well as of operation. In the Athanasian Creed, however, the principle of the equalization of the three Persons, which was already the dominant motive of the Nicene Creed--the homoousia--is so strongly emphasized as practically to push out of sight, if not quite out of existence, these remanent suggestions of derivation and subordination. It has been found necessary, nevertheless, from time to time, vigorously to reassert the principle of equalization, over against a tendency unduly to emphasize the elements of subordinationism which still hold a place thus in the traditional language in which the church states its doctrine of the Trinity. In particular, it fell to Calvin, in the interests of the true Deity of Christ--the constant motive of the whole body of Trinitarian thought--to reassert and make good the attribute of self-existence (autotheotos) for the Son. Thus Calvin takes his place, alongside of Tertullian, Athanasius and Augustine, as one of the chief contributors to the exact and vital statement of the Christian doctrine of the Triune God.

LITERATURE.

F. C. Baur, Die christliche Lehre von der Dreieinigkeit Gottea, 3 volumes, Tubingen, 1841-43; Dionysius Petavius, De Trinitate (vol II, of De Theologicis Dogmaticis, Paris, 1647); G. Bull, A Defence of the Nicene Creed (1685), 2 volumes, Oxford, 1851; G. S. Faber, The Apostolicity of Trinitarianism, 2 volumes, 1832; Augustine, On the Holy Trinity (Volume III of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, 1-228), New York, 1887; Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, I, chapter xiii; C. Hodge, Systematic Theology and Index, I, New York, 1873, 442-82; H. Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmatick(2), II, Kampen, 1908, 260-347 (gives excellent references to literature); S. Harris, God, Creator, and Lord of All, New York, 1896; R. Rocholl, Der christliche Gottesbegriff, Gottingen, 1900; W. F. Adeney, The Christian Conception of God, London, 1909, 215-46; J. Lebreton, Lea origines du dogme de la Trinite, Paris, 1910; J. C. K. Hofmann, Der Schriftbeweis(2), Nordlingen, 1857-60, I, 85-111; J. L. S. Lutz, Biblische Dogmatik, Pforzheim, 1817, 319-94; R. W. Landis, A Plea for the Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity, Philadelphia, 1832; E. H. Bickersteth, The Rock of Ages, etc., London, 1860, New York, 1861; E. Riggenbach, "Der trinitarische Taufbefehl, Matthew 28:19" (in Schlatter and Cremer, Beitrage zur Forderung christlicher Theologie, 1903, VII; also 1906, X); F. J. Hall, The Trinity, London and New York, 1910, 100-141; J. Pearson, An Exposition of the Creed, edition Chevallier and Sinker, Cambridge, 1899; J. Howe," Calm Discourse on the Trinity," in Works, edition Hunt, London, 1810-22; J. Owen, `Vindication of the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity," and" Saint's Fellowship with the Trinity," in Works, Gould's edition, London, 1850-55; J. Edwards, Observations concerning the Scripture Economy of the Trinity, etc., New York, 1880, also An Unpublished Essay on the Trinity, New York, 1903; J. R. Illingworth, The Doctrine of the Trinity Apologetically Considered, London and New York, 1907; A. F. W. Ingrain, The Love of the Trinity, New York, 1908.

(NOTE.--In this article the author has usually given his own renderings of original passages, and not those of any particular version--EDITORS.)

Benjamin B. Warfield

http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T8915
http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T8916

[burwelm]

here are another 2 verses that depict the trinity I found:

Matthew 3:16-17- And Jesus, when he was baptized, went straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

[Huldah]

That sounds awfully like a cop out to me. Either He was or He wasn't.

Really? Then let me answer your question with a question and then maybe we can discern some truth.

Nope, I don't accept that - I asked a question first and you haven't answered it. You're not Jesus, and you're not going to get out of answering my question. Either you answer it or I'll have no choice but to assume that you actually do believe that YHWH was the suffering servant but don't want to say for some reason.

However, if you do answer my question, then I'll be happy to answer your question.

[Aineo]

Getting a bit testy aren't you? Jesus is the suffering Messiah of Isaiah 53. Jesus is God. Draw your own conclusions. However, since you can't answer my question why should I answer yours?

God told Moses that no man could look at His face and live; Jesus said no man has seen the Father so who was the Yehovah that spoke with Abraham and lived? You can't say you believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and then start back peddling when Scripture points out the error of your thinking.

[Huldah]

I didn't say I couldn't answer your question but it certainly appears that you don't want to answer mine!

I said that as I asked first, I expect an answer first. Then I said I'd answer your question - as my post above explained quite simply.

I don't know why you think it is alright to expect an answer from me before you answer my question! You've got it the wrong way round!!

However, as you are claiming that I "can't" answer your question (which I can actually), perhaps you are thinking that because you "can't" answer mine!!!

[Aineo]

I have answered your question. Jesus the Son of God is the suffering Messiah of Isaiah 53. Jesus is God. Now is that so diffuclt to understand? Or is your poor attempt at Gnosis falling apart?

[Huldah]

'tis not what I asked.

I asked if you believed that YHWH was the suffering servant. Which you still haven't answered!

[burwelm]

Aineo wrote:

Who was the Yehovah that spoke with Abraham and lived?

I don't think anyone ever saw the face of Jehovah and lived except for Jacob:

Genesis 32:30- And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

[hisway]

Re: Who Is The Servant In Isaiah 52:13-53:2?

Can we let the Creator of heaven and earth answer?

In verse 13: "Behold, my servant" in the Hebrew text after "hineh" starting with the first letter of every seventh word the following words emerge from the Hebrew text:

"Yeshua simon lemo"

Thus, the suffering servant is none other than:

"Yeshua simon lemo" which is translated to say:

"Yeshua (Jesus) is appointed to be him."

However, Evangelion has well proved their point regarding the word "echad" thereby punching yet another hole in the erroneous doctrine of the trinity.

[hisway]

Aineo wrote:

Who was the Yehovah that spoke with Abraham and lived?

I don't think anyone ever saw the face of Jehovah and lived except for Jacob:

Genesis 32:30- And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

This is typical of the contradictions the trinity doctrine produces in Scripture. God is not the author of confusion. Jacob saw God in a manisfestation. God reveals Himself by manifestations in order to be seen in creation. That is way Jesus said to Philip, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that has seen me hath seen the Father; and howest sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"(John 14:9)

Jesus was God manifest in the flesh - not a second member in a trinity nor a junior god - but the One True God revealed in bodily form. If you what to know and see the Father simply look to Jesus.

"For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him..." (Colossians 2:9, 10)

[burwelm]

Jesus and God are separate people. If they were the same person they could not talk to each other. Jesus has all the power and understanding and is just like God- but he is God's son- he cannot be the son and the father at the same time- Jesus is the son of man- God is no the son of man.

[Aineo]

So we have two cults both of which started at about the same time trying to show Scripture is full of contradictions. God told Moses that no man could look upon Him and live; Jacob states he saw God face to face and Jesus stated that no man has seen the Father. So what is the logical understanding of these verses? God does not exist as a singularity or the whole Bible is a myth.

[hisway]

Jesus and God are separate people. If they were the same person they could not talk to each other. Jesus has all the power and understanding and is just like God- but he is God's son- he cannot be the son and the father at the same time- Jesus is the son of man- God is no the son of man.

A man, John Doe, has a wife and has a son. He is a husband to his wife and a father to his son. He also has a father and is a son in relation to his father. His name is John Doe, one person who has one name yet he is a father to his own son and a son to his own father at the same time. Is John Doe two different and distinct persons? According to the trinity doctrine he is. That is how ridiculous the trinity doctrine is. God is a Spirit with no physical limitations. He can manifest Himself as the Angel of Lord, as a man in the flesh and if He desired to - a flame in a burning bush. He could do all those simultaneously if He choose. Jesus said wherever two or three are gathered in His name He is there in their midst. What if you have a group in New York, another group in Seattle, and another group in China all gathered together at the same time? Would Jesus be in the midst of one group at a time or all at the same time? Would each group have to book an appointment with the Lord?

As for Jesus as a man talking to the Father is no great mystery. Jesus as a man had a dual nature - fully God and fully man together at the same time. As God He had the authority to forgive sins. As a man (flesh) He would pray to the Father (Spirit). God is God alone and beside Him there is no Saviour. (Isaiah 43:11). There was no God formed before Him neither shall there be after Him. (Isaiah 43:10) If Jesus pre-existed as the Son then Isaiah must be a false prophet. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not separate persons but rather One God revealed in different roles and manifestations.

[Hannibal]

tl;dr but is that kinda like the "my sister is my mother is my aunt" kinda thing??/

[hisway]

:D So we have two cults both of which started at about the same time trying to show Scripture is full of contradictions. God told Moses that no man could look upon Him and live; Jacob states he saw God face to face and Jesus stated that no man has seen the Father. So what is the logical understanding of these verses? God does not exist as a singularity or the whole Bible is a myth.

The Oneness Apostolic Church started long before your watered-down denominational Christianity. I have dealt with that topic in the Religious Cult & False Prophets Forum in my post: "Modalism: Heresy or Catholic Persecution Of Truth". It is historical fact that the early Church was Oneness Apostolic and they were "startled" by the new doctrine of the trinity that was imposed upon them by the Catholic Church.

As for your statement quoted above shows only a great lack of knowing New Testament Truth and a great darkness of mind to say "God does not exist as a singularity" - if you would quit trying to fit God into the box you want to put Him in and become child-like in seeking truth, God will show you the Truth. The ones that have so much trouble with this truth are also the ones who have never received the baptism of the Holy Ghost evidenced with speaking in tongues. When God told Moses no man can look upon God and live He simply meant no one can look upon God as Omnipresent Spirit. That is why God reveals Himself in manifestations. Jacob saw God as a manifestation. Jesus when He said no one has seen the Father meant the same thing as God told Moses - God cannot be seen as Spirit. The problem you have is with the word "manifestation" as if it implies something that is not real or tangible. Jesus said, "If ye had known me, ye should have known the Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him." (John 14:7) Why did Jesus say that without contradicting Himself? Because Jesus in the flesh was everything the Father could be as a man - God manifest in the flesh. The glorious truth is God became a man so we could see Him and know Him in a real and tangible way. That is also the way Jacob could say he saw God face to face - God manifested Himself in angelic form that Jacob could see and feel; but if God would have revealed Himself as Spirit to Jacob, Jacob would have dropped dead on the spot. That is the Jesus I know. And to know Jesus as a second person in a trinity is not to know Him. Notice what Jesus said to Philip, "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?" (John 14:9) Jesus could ask that same question to millions of professing Christians today.

Many professing Christians who have professed their faith for years are just like Philip - still they have not known Him. They know about Him but they do not know Him. It is like knowing President Bush - I know about him, I could quote some of his statements he made publically, I could study a biography about him, but I don't know the man. The trinity doctrine is a stumbling block to knowing the Lord Jesus Christ for who He really is. This Truth of the Oneness of God is what will separate the goats from the sheep in these end times. As Jesus told Peter, 'Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee but the Father in heaven; this Truth is only revealed to the hungry and thirsty. It was never intended for the mocker nor the scoffer. Neither was it intended for the wise and prudent but unto babes.

[Hannibal]

omgomgomgomg!!! you double posted and used my post as an excuse and didnt answer my question!!

*omg - oh my goodness in case you didnt get it okiedokie

is that right?

[hisway]

omgomgomgomg!!! you double posted and used my post as an excuse and didnt answer my question!!

*omg - oh my goodness in case you didnt get it okiedokie

is that right?

I did not intentionally double post if I did - I'm not sure what you mean by that. I would be happy to answer your question by I'm not clear what it was. Perhaps you could clarify it for me.

[Aineo]

tl;dr but is that kinda like the "my sister is my mother is my aunt" kinda thing??/

Hisway’s explanation sound like the good old song “I am my own grandpa”.

A man, John Doe, has a wife and has a son. He is a husband to his wife and a father to his son. He also has a father and is a son in relation to his father. His name is John Doe, one person who has one name yet he is a father to his own son and a son to his own father at the same time.

But John Doe is a son to his father and the father of his son. So you have three people - John Doe, his father, and his son since John Doe cannot be his own father or his own son.

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct entities with three distinct roles and all three are one God. I suppose what hisway is trying to convey is what we label a hologram. The only problem is a hologram cannot eat as Abrahams guest did or dislocate a hip like Jacob’s angel did. God appeared to Moses in a burning bush God was not the burning bush. Your manifestations are nothing more than Gnosticism dressed in 20th costumes.

A manifestation is a representation or a picture of the reality. I really doubt God would label an “image” of Himself with His own name. So your explanation for Abraham’s visitor not only begs the question but also violates God’s own law!

Hisway, I have already addressed your heretical belief that tongues is the only sign of baptism in the Holy Spirit on another thread, a thread you abandoned when you could not refute what I posted.

Modalism is probably the most common theological error concerning the nature of God. It is a denial of the Trinity which states that God is a single person who, throughout biblical history, has revealed Himself in three consecutive modes, or forms. Thus, God is a single person who first manifested himself in the mode of the Father in Old Testament times. At the incarnation, the mode was the Son. After Jesus' ascension, the mode is the Holy Spirit. These modes are consecutive and never simultaneous. In other words, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit never all exist at the same time, only one after another. Modalism denies the distinctiveness of the three persons in the Trinity even though it retains the divinity of Christ.
Present day groups that hold to this error are the United Pentecostal and United Apostolic Churches. They deny the Trinity, teach that the name of God is Jesus, and require baptism for salvation. These modalist churches often accuse Trinitarians of teaching three gods. This is not what the Trinity is. The correct teaching of the Trinity is one God in three eternal coexistent persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
http://www.carm.org/heresy/modalism.htm

The anti-Trinitarian belief that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are “modes” of God, but not true persons capable of interacting with one another.
http://www.basictheology.com/definitions/Modalism/

This last site has an accurate one line summary of Modalism. The NT reveals the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit interacting with each other as individual entities each with the ability to make decisions independent of the other.

As Jesus told Peter, 'Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee but the Father in heaven; this Truth is only revealed to the hungry and thirsty. It was never intended for the mocker nor the scoffer. Neither was it intended for the wise and prudent but unto babes.

What did Peter say?

Matthew 16:15-20
15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 And Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it. 19 "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." 20 Then He warned the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ. NAS

Peter acknowledged that Jesus is the Messiah (Christ) the savior expected by the Hebrews.

Isaiah 45:21
21 "Declare and set forth your case;
Indeed, let them consult together.
Who has announced this from of old?
Who has long since declared it?
Is it not I, the LORD?
And there is no other God besides Me,
A righteous God and a Savior;
There is none except Me. NAS

Not a manifestation but God in the flesh!

Galatians 4:6-7
6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!" 7 Therefore you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God. NAS

If the Son is a manifestation of God then how does a manifestation have a spirit God can send forth into our hearts? Your Gnostic logic breaks down under Biblical truth because if Jesus was a manifestation His spirit and God who is spirit cannot be divided as Paul teaches it is. And this hisway answers your question about Christians throughout the world having Jesus in their midst. His spirit is omnipresent, which is a characteristic of God, and the Holy Spirit.

Genesis 1:2 tells us the God and the Spirit are two distinct forces or entities.

Genesis 1:1-2
1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. NAS

God is spirit so why do you have God’s spirit “moving over the surface of the waters”? Is it your contention that God’s spirit has a spirit?

The Trinity is a Biblical fact easily discerned by anyone who comes to God’s truth with childlike understanding, not Aristotlian logic.

[kingzson]

Aineo,Burwelm and the others,
How can you blast Hisway for his opinion when his is the only logical one i have read so far in this debate........You guys have not answered any of his questions he has asked and you have not adressed the scriptures he uses at all.........and when you try to it is a lame attempt to try to prove this trinitarien false doctrine.
Also according to history the form of salvation was REPENTANCE,BAPTISM,and the INFILLING OF THE HOLY GHOST........that dogma/doctrine was preached in the name JESUS up until 325A.D when constatine tried to legitimize that heresy TRINITY.

[kingzson]

PS:so if all of you are such great lovers of truth as you profess than check out history and try not to be so biased in your study's.
oh and by the way the oness teaching has been around sense the beginning (it was taught by the apostles).
give me dates on when this trinity opinion actually came into being.
And if you will take an honest look the trinity was never brought fully into the open until 325A.D. when the attempt was made to make it a world wide organization instead of the splinter group it started out as.

[burwelm]

Jesus and the Holy Ghost are definitely separate:

Matthew 12:32- And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

The trinity is a mystery. It is not something we can understand. I believe that Jesus, God the Father, and the Holy Ghost all share the same mind- they are of the same mind but they have their own separate experiences and separate jobs and are separate spirits- why would Jesus have said- "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me- when he died- it was because he took upon himself all the sins of the world and God cannot look at sin so God turned His back on Jesus for that moment- it is the same concept as a cell dividing and becoming two cells and then one of those dividing and becoming three cells in all- the cell duplicated itself twice- the cells are exactly the same but they are separate- each its own cell.
In the beginning they were all one but as God grew he separated himself into three- he wasn't always three but he is now.

[burwelm]

God is one God but three separate people. Three states of consciousness coexisting at the same time. The three are all the same God but they are separate people.

[Aineo]

The oneness of God (“the Lord your God is one) has indeed been around since the beginning but the apostles did not teach the idea that the Son and Spirit are manifestations. Any school child with a modicum of intelligence can discern the NT treats the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three entities not as manifestations of God.

Hisway quoted from John whose gospel not only tells us that the Word and God are one but they existed together before the beginning – separately. The NT writers go to great pains to distinguish between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinity is not three gods it is as hisway tried to show in his metaphor one God in three persons or personalities. There is no way you can escape the truth of the Trinity without denying the inerrancy of the NT.

BTW, Kingzson I notice all you are doing is being critical without offering to respond to my last post.

P.S. I have studied history for decades. Modalism has always been viewed as a heretical teaching and does not match God’s revealed truth. Maybe you should study the roots of Gnosticism and how Greek logic violates Hebrew theology then just maybe you will come to understand Christianity whose roots are Hebrew not Greek.

[BradtheImpaler]

Since Evangelion and Adampastor have so aptly demonstrated the Trinitarian argument concerning "echad" and "elohim" is totally false, you'd think that some Trins would at least become a little suspicious that maybe they have been the victim of propoganda in their programming? But no, you just "sweep all that under the carpet" and plunge ahead to another point. What if you are wrong? Do you ever entertain that possibility? [/i]

[Evangelion]

Hi there Brad, nice to see you again.

[Aineo]

Since Evangelion and Adampastor have so aptly demonstrated the Trinitarian argument concerning "echad" and "elohim" is totally false, you'd think that some Trins would at least become a little suspicious that maybe they have been the victim of propoganda in their programming? But no, you just "sweep all that under the carpet" and plunge ahead to another point. What if you are wrong? Do you ever entertain that possibility? [/i]

It may come as a surprise to some of you non-Trinitarians but some of us have actually studied the Bible and the concepts taught by Christians since the first century to see if they are true. Evangelion, Huldah, and Adampastor have correctly shown that “elohiym” does not always indicate plurality in Hebrew grammar, however, they have yet to address the simple fact that even in the OT God’s Spirit is portrayed as a separate force or personality as shown in Genesis 1:2. Also they have not shown that “echad” only means one since it can also mean a “compound unity”. One (echad) of grapes is a compound unity of multiple grapes; one (echad) herd is a compound unity of many animals.

com·pound1 P Pronunciation Key (k m-pound , k m-, k m pound )
v. com·pound·ed, com·pound·ing, com·pounds
v. tr.
1. To combine so as to form a whole; mix.
2. To produce or create by combining two or more ingredients or parts: pharmacists compounding prescriptions.
3. To settle (a debt, for example) by agreeing on an amount less than the claim; adjust.
4. To compute (interest) on the principal and accrued interest.
5. To add to; increase: High winds compounded the difficulties of the firefighters.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search? ... ompounding
u·ni·ty P Pronunciation Key (y n -t )
n. pl. u·ni·ties
1. The state or quality of being one; singleness.
2. The state or quality of being in accord; harmony.
3.
a. The combination or arrangement of parts into a whole; unification.
b. A combination or union thus formed.
4. Singleness or constancy of purpose or action; continuity: “In an army you need unity of purpose” (Emmeline Pankhurst).
5.
a. An ordering of all elements in a work of art or literature so that each contributes to a unified aesthetic effect.
b. The effect thus produced.
6. One of the three principles of dramatic structure derived by French neoclassicists from Aristotle's Poetics, stating that a drama should have but one plot, which should take place in a single day and be confined to a single locale.
7. Mathematics.
a. The number 1.
b. See identity element.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=unity

The phrasing of Deuteronomy 6:4 is interesting.

Deuteronomy 6:4

This does not mean Jehovah is one God, Jehovah alone (Abenezra), for in that case lªbadow (OT:905) yªhaaowh (OT:3068 ) would be used instead of 'echaad (OT:259) yªhaaowh (OT:3068 ); still less Jehovah our God, namely, Jehovah is one (J. H. Michaelis). 'echaad (OT:259) yªhaaowh (OT:3068) together form the predicate of the sentence. The idea is not, Jehovah our God is one (the only) God, but "one (or the only) Jehovah:" not in this sense, however, that "He has not adopted one mode of revelation or appearance here and another there, but one mode only, viz., the revelation which Israel had received" (Schultz); for Jehovah never denotes merely a mode in which the true God is revealed or appears, but God as the absolute, unconditioned, or God according to the absolute independence and constancy of His actions (see pp. 45-47). Hence what is predicated here of Jehovah (Jehovah one) does not relate to the unity of God, but simply states that it is to Him alone that the name Jehovah rightfully belongs, that He is the one absolute God, to whom no other Elohim can be compared. This is also the meaning of the same expression in Zechariah 14:9, where the words added, "and His name one," can only signify that in the future Jehovah would be acknowledged as the one absolute God, as King over all the earth. This clause not merely precludes polytheism, but also syncretism, which reduces the one absolute God to a national deity, a Baal (Hosea 2:18 ), and in fact every form of theism and deism, which creates for itself a supreme God according to philosophical abstractions and ideas. For Jehovah, although the absolute One, is not an abstract notion like "absolute being" or "the absolute idea," but the absolutely living God, as He made Himself known in His deeds in Israel for the salvation of the whole world.
(from Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament: New Updated Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1996 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.)

Acts 5:28-32
29 But Peter and the apostles answered and said, "We must obey God rather than men. 30 "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. 31 "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 "And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him."
NAS

Acts 13:23-24
23 "From the offspring of this man, according to promise, God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, 24 after John had proclaimed before His coming a baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel. NAS

Titus 1:1-4
1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness, 2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago, 3 but at the proper time manifested, even His word, in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior; 4 to Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior. NAS

Titus 3:4-7
4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, 5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that being justified by His grace we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. NAS

2 Peter 1:1-3
1:1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ: 2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord; 3 seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence. NAS

Jude 24-25

24 Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, 25 to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. NAS

The Bible authors call God and Jesus our Savior - interchangeably. The fact is the NT demonstrates that the Godhead is not only “echad” but also a compound unity composed of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

The Pharisees understood that Yehovah has no equal, which is why they sought to stone Jesus when He said, “before Abraham was I AM. The Pharisees understood Jesus said He was equal to Yehovah, and that Jesus was saying He is God.

BTW, why elevate a “manifestation” to the right hand of the Father if the manifestation is not a person?

[Evangelion]

:D So we have two cults both of which started at about the same time trying to show Scripture is full of contradictions. God told Moses that no man could look upon Him and live; Jacob states he saw God face to face and Jesus stated that no man has seen the Father. So what is the logical understanding of these verses? God does not exist as a singularity or the whole Bible is a myth.

The logical understanding of these verses is that Jacob saw a representative of God.

And if Jesus is God, then you have a contradiction because the Bible says:

• John 1:18
  No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
  
  
• I Timothy 6:15-16
  Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
  Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.
  
  
• I John 4:12
  No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

[Evangelion]

Evangelion, Huldah, and Adampastor have correctly shown that “elohiym” does not always indicate plurality in Hebrew grammar, however, they have yet to address the simple fact that even in the OT God’s Spirit is portrayed as a separate force or personality as shown in Genesis 1:2.

Genesis 1:2 does not show that the Spirit of God is a "separate force of personality."

Also they have not shown that “echad” only means one since it can also mean a “compound unity”.

Show me the place where echad means "compound unity."

One (echad) of grapes is a compound unity of multiple grapes;

Um, the Bible doesn't say "One [echad]) of grapes", it says "One [echad] bunch of grapes." The plurality is in bunch, meaning a group of grapes.

one (echad) herd is a compound unity of many animals.

Here the plurality is in herd, meaning a group of animals.

com·pound1 P Pronunciation Key (k m-pound , k m-, k m pound )
v. com·pound·ed, com·pound·ing, com·pounds
v. tr.
1. To combine so as to form a whole; mix.
2. To produce or create by combining two or more ingredients or parts: pharmacists compounding prescriptions.
3. To settle (a debt, for example) by agreeing on an amount less than the claim; adjust.
4. To compute (interest) on the principal and accrued interest.
5. To add to; increase: High winds compounded the difficulties of the firefighters.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search? ... ompounding
u·ni·ty P Pronunciation Key (y n -t )
n. pl. u·ni·ties
1. The state or quality of being one; singleness.
2. The state or quality of being in accord; harmony.
3.
a. The combination or arrangement of parts into a whole; unification.
b. A combination or union thus formed.
4. Singleness or constancy of purpose or action; continuity: “In an army you need unity of purpose” (Emmeline Pankhurst).
5.
a. An ordering of all elements in a work of art or literature so that each contributes to a unified aesthetic effect.
b. The effect thus produced.
6. One of the three principles of dramatic structure derived by French neoclassicists from Aristotle's Poetics, stating that a drama should have but one plot, which should take place in a single day and be confined to a single locale.
7. Mathematics.
a. The number 1.
b. See identity element.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=unity

This adds absolutely nothing to the debate because it is totally irrelevant.

The phrasing of Deuteronomy 6:4 is interesting.

I suppose it might be interesting to somebody who doesn't really know much about Hebrew.

Deuteronomy 6:4

This does not mean Jehovah is one God, Jehovah alone (Abenezra), for in that case lªbadow (OT:905) yªhaaowh (OT:3068 ) would be used instead of 'echaad (OT:259) yªhaaowh (OT:3068 ); still less Jehovah our God, namely, Jehovah is one (J. H. Michaelis). 'echaad (OT:259) yªhaaowh (OT:3068) together form the predicate of the sentence. The idea is not, Jehovah our God is one (the only) God, but "one (or the only) Jehovah:" not in this sense, however, that "He has not adopted one mode of revelation or appearance here and another there, but one mode only, viz., the revelation which Israel had received" (Schultz); for Jehovah never denotes merely a mode in which the true God is revealed or appears, but God as the absolute, unconditioned, or God according to the absolute independence and constancy of His actions (see pp. 45-47). Hence what is predicated here of Jehovah (Jehovah one) does not relate to the unity of God, but simply states that it is to Him alone that the name Jehovah rightfully belongs, that He is the one absolute God, to whom no other Elohim can be compared. This is also the meaning of the same expression in Zechariah 14:9, where the words added, "and His name one," can only signify that in the future Jehovah would be acknowledged as the one absolute God, as King over all the earth. This clause not merely precludes polytheism, but also syncretism, which reduces the one absolute God to a national deity, a Baal (Hosea 2:18 ), and in fact every form of theism and deism, which creates for itself a supreme God according to philosophical abstractions and ideas. For Jehovah, although the absolute One, is not an abstract notion like "absolute being" or "the absolute idea," but the absolutely living God, as He made Himself known in His deeds in Israel for the salvation of the whole world.
(from Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament: New Updated Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1996 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.)

This is equally irrelevant.

Acts 5:28-32
29 But Peter and the apostles answered and said, "We must obey God rather than men. 30 "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. 31 "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 "And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him."
NAS

Acts 13:23-24
23 "From the offspring of this man, according to promise, God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, 24 after John had proclaimed before His coming a baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel. NAS

Titus 1:1-4
1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness, 2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago, 3 but at the proper time manifested, even His word, in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior; 4 to Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior. NAS

Titus 3:4-7
4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, 5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that being justified by His grace we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. NAS

2 Peter 1:1-3
1:1 Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ: 2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord; 3 seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence. NAS

Jude 24-25

24 Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, 25 to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. NAS

The Bible authors call God and Jesus our Savior - interchangeably.

No, they call God and Jesus "our Saviour" individually.

This is because they both share a salvic role. The Father is our ultimate Saviour, for He provided both the sacrifice and the means of forgiveness; the Son is also our Saviour, for he died in order to achieve our atonement.

And what are you going to do with these...?

• Nehemiah 9:27
  Therefore thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies, who vexed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and according to thy manifold mercies thou gavest them saviours, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies.
  
  
• Obadiah 1:21
  And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD'S.

The fact is the NT demonstrates that the Godhead is not only “echad” but also a compound unity composed of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Where does the Bible say that the Godhead is a compound unity composed of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

The Pharisees understood that Yehovah has no equal, which is why they sought to stone Jesus when He said, “before Abraham was I AM. The Pharisees understood Jesus said He was equal to Yehovah, and that Jesus was saying He is God.

Click here.

BTW, why elevate a “manifestation” to the right hand of the Father if the manifestation is not a person?

I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

We believe that Jesus is a person. He is the only-begotten Son of the Father, immortal and perfect, who died for our sins.

[Aineo]

Evangelion, then we have even more apparent contradictions in the Bible because if you took the time to read my prior post Jesus is referred to as God in more than one Scripture. If Jacob saw a "representation" of Yehovah then Jacob did not actually see Yehovah and any "image" of Yehovah is a violation of the 2nd Commandment.

Since you seem to find the original language so helpful what exactly is the phrasing in Genesis 32:30?

Genesis 32:30

And called 7121
Jacob 3290
the name of 8034
the place 4725
Peniel: 6439
for 3588
I have seen 7200
God 430
face 6440
to 413
face, 6440
and is preserved. 5337
my life 5315
(Interlinear Transliterated Bible. Copyright (c) 1994 by Biblesoft)

"Eloyhim" not "Yehovah" is the word translated God.

Genesis 32:24-30

Verse 30. Jacob called the name of the place Peniel (Penuel) - i.e., Face of God. Though here and elsewhere in Scripture mention is made of manifestations of the Divine Being to particular persons, it must be borne in mind that it was not the real (John 1:18 ), but only the substituted face-the reflected image of the Deity; not the full splendour of His transcendent glory, but such a display of it as the human faculties in their present state can bear (cf. Exodus 33:20); and so He was revealed with chastened radiance, in the character of Him who was "the express image of His person."

For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. There was a prevailing belief that man, in a state of sin, could not survive any direct vision of the Divine Being; because to such God is a consuming fire. This is evidently alluded to (Exodus 20:19; Deuteronomy 4:4; Hebrews 12:29), and it forms the ground of the joyful surprise which is expressed by Jacob.
(from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft)

In other words the "man" Jacob wrestled with is how the NT describes Jesus.

[hisway]

The oneness of God (“the Lord your God is one) has indeed been around since the beginning but the apostles did not teach the idea that the Son and Spirit are manifestations. Any school child with a modicum of intelligence can discern the NT treats the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three entities not as manifestations of God.

Hisway quoted from John whose gospel not only tells us that the Word and God are one but they existed together before the beginning – separately. The NT writers go to great pains to distinguish between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinity is not three gods it is as hisway tried to show in his metaphor one God in three persons or personalities. There is no way you can escape the truth of the Trinity without denying the inerrancy of the NT.

BTW, Kingzson I notice all you are doing is being critical without offering to respond to my last post.

P.S. I have studied history for decades. Modalism has always been viewed as a heretical teaching and does not match God’s revealed truth. Maybe you should study the roots of Gnosticism and how Greek logic violates Hebrew theology then just maybe you will come to understand Christianity whose roots are Hebrew not Greek.

I have addressed the argument for Modalism in my post in the Religious Cult & False Prophets Forum. Yes, Modalism has always been viewed as a heretical teaching by none other than the Catholics which makes your argument moot. And how quickly you seem to have forgotten my post reply in "ONE GOD-ONE NAME" about Gnosticism which also makes your argument moot. And since you talk about Christianity whose roots are Hebrew not Greek then you should examine your trinity doctrine for it plainly violates Hebrew theology of ONE God. Furthermore, the trinity doctrine is antisemetic in origin. The heretics Ambrose, Origen and Augustine brought in false teachings to purge Christianity of its Hebrew roots by allogorizing Scripture. Since they blamed the Jews for Jesus' death the Catholics later used this to justify sending crusaders to Palestine to murder Jews with the blessing of the Pope who forgave the crusaders of their sins in advance. And it should also be said it here; Pope Pius XII during WWII made a pact with Hitler wherein the Pope offered Hitler full Catholic support upon him winning the war if he would make Catholicism the official religion of the state. Therefore, you should be ashamed to join the Catholics in their persecution of God's people.

[kingzson]

OK Aineo here is my argument for modelism:
God manifested(shown) in 3 modes
1)Father in creation
2)Son in redemption
3)Holy Spirit in infilling emanation/Regeneration

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-10,key verse 10

COLOSSIANS 1:20

1TIMOTHY 3:16..........This plainly shows how God was manifested in the mode of Son.


Please respond to the scriptures and show me how oness can be a false doctrine...............By these scriptures we are shown what the apostles believed and preached and that my friend was not a trinity.

[Evangelion]

Evangelion, then we have even more apparent contradictions in the Bible

Ah, but they're only apparent contraditions, Aineo. The good Bible student know show to resolve them.

because if you took the time to read my prior post Jesus is referred to as God in more than one Scripture.

Oh really? Give me a list, please.

If Jacob saw a "representation" of Yehovah then Jacob did not actually see Yehovah

Of course he didn't; the reference is purely figurative anyway. What he saw was one of God's representatives. To see a representative of God, is to see God in a certain sense.

Even Jesus used this same language:

John 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?

Now, according to your logic, Jesus is claiming to be the Father! But we know that he is not the Father; he is the Son. How, then, can he say "He who hath seen me hath seen the Father"?

Because he is the representative of the Father, bearing His name to the world.

Another good example is found here:

John 4:1-3.
When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
He left Judea, and departed again into Galilee.

The very first verse of this chapter turns upon the issue of representation. It enables us to explain how certain acts which are attributed to God, can also be attributed to His representatives - just as acts which were performed by Jesus' representatives could be attributed to him..

This is more easily seen when we break the passage into separate verses:

John 4:1.
When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

Here we are told that Jesus baptised more disciples than John. But is that really what John is trying to tell us?

Let's look again:

John 4:2.
(Though Jesus baptised not, but his disciples)

Here we have the explanation of the original verse. Jesus himself was not the one who was literally baptising; it was his disciples who performed this work. But the ritual was performed in Jesus' name and under his auspices - and for this reason, it is legitimately ascribed to him.

Adam Clarke's Commentary has:

Joh 4:2 - Jesus himself baptized not -
See Joh_3:22.

Crossing to Clarke's notes on John 3:22, we find:

And baptized -
It is not clear that Christ did baptize any with water, but his disciples did - Joh_4:2; and what they did, by his authority and command, is attributed to himself. It is a common custom, in all countries and in all languages, to attribute the operations of those who are under the government and direction of another to him by whom they are directed and governed.

Some however suppose that Christ at first did baptize; but, when he got disciples, he left this work to them: and thus these two places are to be understood: -

1. this place, of Christ’s baptizing before he called the twelve disciples; and
2. Joh_4:2, of the baptism administered by the disciples, after they had been called to the work by Christ.

and any "image" of Yehovah is a violation of the 2nd Commandment.

Um, that's a reference to the graven image, not a person who represents God.

Since you seem to find the original language so helpful what exactly is the phrasing in Genesis 32:30?

Genesis 32:30

And called 7121
Jacob 3290
the name of 8034
the place 4725
Peniel: 6439
for 3588
I have seen 7200
God 430
face 6440
to 413
face, 6440
and is preserved. 5337
my life 5315
(Interlinear Transliterated Bible. Copyright (c) 1994 by Biblesoft)

"Eloyhim" not "Yehovah" is the word translated God.

Genesis 32:24-30

So what?

Verse 30. Jacob called the name of the place Peniel (Penuel) - i.e., Face of God. Though here and elsewhere in Scripture mention is made of manifestations of the Divine Being to particular persons, it must be borne in mind that it was not the real (John 1:18 ), but only the substituted face-the reflected image of the Deity; not the full splendour of His transcendent glory, but such a display of it as the human faculties in their present state can bear (cf. Exodus 33:20); and so He was revealed with chastened radiance, in the character of Him who was "the express image of His person."

For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. There was a prevailing belief that man, in a state of sin, could not survive any direct vision of the Divine Being; because to such God is a consuming fire. This is evidently alluded to (Exodus 20:19; Deuteronomy 4:4; Hebrews 12:29), and it forms the ground of the joyful surprise which is expressed by Jacob.
(from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1997 by Biblesoft)

Uh... relevance? This proves nothing.

In other words the "man" Jacob wrestled with is how the NT describes Jesus.

Oh really? Where does the Bible say it was Jesus?

You might want to click here.

[burwelm]

If God is only one why does God refer to himself as "us"

Genesis 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.

[Aineo]

OK Aineo here is my argument for modelism:
God manifested(shown) in 3 modes
1)Father in creation
2)Son in redemption
3)Holy Spirit in infilling emanation/Regeneration

PHILIPPIANS 2:5-10,key verse 10

COLOSSIANS 1:20

1TIMOTHY 3:16..........This plainly shows how God was manifested in the mode of Son.


Please respond to the scriptures and show me how oness can be a false doctrine...............By these scriptures we are shown what the apostles believed and preached and that my friend was not a trinity.

Your 3 modes are 3 persons with all the characteristics of personality including the ability to make decisions.

Philippians 2:5-11
5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
NAS

Jesus can make decisions on His own in obedience to the Father as well as to accomplish His purpose for taking on a body of flesh:

John 10:18
18 "No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father."
NAS

John 15:16
16 "You did not choose Me, but I chose you, and appointed you, that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask of the Father in My name, He may give to you. NAS

The Holy Spirit has discretion to do as He wills:

1 Corinthians 12:11
11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. NAS

Modes or manifestations do not have independent wills. God is omnipotent as are the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of the Son.

You may object to the term "Trinity" however the tri-unity of God is clearly taught and displayed in the NT teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.

Hisway, as to your comment concerning the Catholic Church and modalism, I get my information from non-Catholic sources. The history of Christianity is filled with eminent scholars who are not Catholics. Your own adherence to your own philosophy has blinded you to the truth.

I posted a link to an excellent discussion of the Trinity, which you have not bothered to comment on. It seems you and the other non-Trinitarians would rather appeal to your own message boards than discuss the issues by the use of independent scholars and authorities.

Evangelion, the reason I used the word “apparent” is because I fully understand that a full study and understanding of the Bible removes all “apparent” discrepancies.

[(Omega)]

Jesus and God are separate people. If they were the same person they could not talk to each other. Jesus has all the power and understanding and is just like God- but he is God's son- he cannot be the son and the father at the same time- Jesus is the son of man- God is no the son of man.

A man, John Doe, has a wife and has a son. He is a husband to his wife and a father to his son. He also has a father and is a son in relation to his father. His name is John Doe, one person who has one name yet he is a father to his own son and a son to his own father at the same time. Is John Doe two different and distinct persons? According to the trinity doctrine he is. That is how ridiculous the trinity doctrine is. God is a Spirit with no physical limitations. He can manifest Himself as the Angel of Lord, as a man in the flesh and if He desired to - a flame in a burning bush. He could do all those simultaneously if He choose. Jesus said wherever two or three are gathered in His name He is there in their midst. What if you have a group in New York, another group in Seattle, and another group in China all gathered together at the same time? Would Jesus be in the midst of one group at a time or all at the same time? Would each group have to book an appointment with the Lord?

As for Jesus as a man talking to the Father is no great mystery. Jesus as a man had a dual nature - fully God and fully man together at the same time. As God He had the authority to forgive sins. As a man (flesh) He would pray to the Father (Spirit). God is God alone and beside Him there is no Saviour. (Isaiah 43:11). There was no God formed before Him neither shall there be after Him. (Isaiah 43:10) If Jesus pre-existed as the Son then Isaiah must be a false prophet. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not separate persons but rather One God revealed in different roles and manifestations.

Your argument about John Doe is flawed in asking whether John Doe, who is a Father and a son, is two separate people. No, he isn't. He is ONE person. But when John talks to his son, or to his father, THEN there are 2 people involved, not just one.

Likewise when Jesus prays to the Father, there are two persons involved. They are both God, but they inhabit different places (one in Heaven, and one on Earth).

Please read the following description of the end, where Jesus will deliver up to the Father, the kingdom. And in verse 27, The Father put all things under Jesus feet, with the exception of the Father himself. And in the end, (verse 28) Jesus will be subject to the Father, who originally put all things under Jesus feet.

If these Gods were all the same person, at the same time, these verses makes NO sense at all. But if we take the position that God is manifested in three persons, the Godhead, and all are distinct from each other, then all three of them can interact with each other, and the verse makes sense.


1 Corinthians 15:23-25
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
(KJV)

1 Corinthians 15:27-28
27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
28 And 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.
(KJV)

God Bless!

[BradtheImpaler]

If God is only one why does God refer to himself as "us"

Do you believe there is only one God? Then why do you argue that God is not "only one"? Is he one or not? (If I believe there is only one Burwelm, would I argue that this Burhelm is NOT one?) If something is not "only one", then it is MORE than one, and more than one is two or more.

Why would you glance past the hundreds (thousands?) of times the bible refers to God (or God, in the bible, refers to himself) as "I/me/myself/he/him", and seize this verse ("us") to prove that God is not really "only one"? Wouldn't an analytical and unbiased mind, rather ask why, if God is really 3 persons, they don't refer to themselves as "we" or "us" hundreds or thousands of times, and possibly leave a handful of "I/me/myself" exceptions which to reconcile?

But to answer your question, see this -

http://www.thechristadelphians.org/foru ... topic=3267

Gen.1:26 has even been abandoned by many Trinitarian scholars and authors as an indication of a tri-unity in God.

[BradtheImpaler]

Hi there Brad, nice to see you again.

[burwelm]

When the Bible says there is only one God it means that the "gods" that other people worshiped are not God. God is one because of the singleness of mind and heart.

Revelation 21:21- And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty AND the lamb are the temple of it.

In the new heaven and new earth Jesus and God will be two distinct separate people.

Psalm 110:1- The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstill.

One of theses is God and one is Jesus. God is talking to Jesus.

[BradtheImpaler]

When the Bible says there is only one God it means that the "gods" that other people worshiped are not God. God is one because of the singleness of mind and heart.

Revelation 21:21- And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty AND the lamb are the temple of it.

So the Trinitarian version of monotheism is the same, in essence, as polytheism, as long as the divine entities involved share a "singleness of mind and heart"? I.E. - if the gods of Mt. Olympus found themselves in total agreement, we could call them "one God"?

In the new heaven and new earth Jesus and God will be two distinct separate people

Jesus and God are 2 seperate people, so Jesus ISN'T God. Think it through...

Psalm 110:1- The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstill.

One of theses is God and one is Jesus. God is talking to Jesus.

You continue to demonstrate that Jesus and God are SEPERATE ENTITIES, this is all that needs be shown to prove that either -

a) Jesus is not God

or...

b) there is MORE than one God

Choose ONE...can't have both!

[BradtheImpaler]

I thought trinitarians didn't mind being called trinitarians!! I should know, I've been out with two of them!!

I said it to give the person anonymity on this thread.

Dating Trinitarians

...say 20 "Our Fathers" and 20 "Hail Marys" for penance!

(then consider giving a Unitarian guy like me a chance? )

[BradtheImpaler]

here are another 2 verses that depict the trinity I found:

Matthew 3:16-17- And Jesus, when he was baptized, went straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

If the Father/Son/Spirit are each Deity, then there is no escaping that this baptism scenario is polytheistic in nature. Ask yourself this question - if these 3 are all deity, and yet if this illustration does not depict 3 Gods, how much more seperate would these 3 have to be to qualify as "3 GODS"?

Conversely...

If the Greeks claimed that Apollos stood in the water while Zeus spoke about him from heaven (as his "beloved son") and Aphrodite drifted down from heaven to anoint him, what would you think - one God or 3? [/i]

[burwelm]

Let me give another illustration: The egg- It is one egg but it has a shell, a yolk, and the egg white part. It is one egg and all of it is called "egg" but it consists of three separate parts. The shell is not the yolk, the white is not the yolk, the white is not the shell.

[Huldah]

The egg analogy? S'pose it'll be steam, water & ice next!

Give us a break we're talking scripture here.

[burwelm]

What is this whole ridiculous "believing in the trinity is a cult thing". I am a Christian as long as I believe that Jesus is the Christ. Lets just agree to disagree on this subject without trying to discredit anyone else as not being a real Christian. This is doctrine, not faith.

Philippians 2:14- Do all things without murmurings and disputings: That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation among whom ye shine as lights in the world: Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.

[Aineo]

:lol:

The egg analogy? S'pose it'll be steam, water & ice next!

Give us a break we're talking scripture here.

Makes as much sense as hisway's John Doe analogy, which was so flawed as to be illogical.

As to the baptismal formula you seem to being missing or ignoring part of Jesus' instructions. "Baptize them in the name, not names of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

How come one of you oneness people has not responded to the Biblical fact that your "modes" or "manifestations" make decisions individually?

[adampastor]

Psalm 110:1- The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstill.

One of these is God and one is Jesus. God is talking to Jesus.

Exactly! Burwelm

Therefore since there is simply ONE TRUE ALMIGHTY GOD,
anyone other than Him is NOT GOD Almighty!!
Therefore, Jesus is NOT Almighty GOD, since, as you so rightly pointed
out, Almighty GOD is talking about Jesus; hence Jesus isn't Almighty GOD.

It is that simple!!

Jesus after affirming the monotheistic (nontrinitarian) doctrine and scriptural creed of the ONE GOD using the Sh'ma [Deut 6.4] in Mark 12:28-34; then identifies himself as the 'lord' whom the ONE GOD was prophetically speaking of in Psalms 110.1 ... see Mark 12:35-37

The common people heard him gladly! They understood what he was saying. He had just affirmed the Shema, and declared that YAHWEH GOD was the sole Almighty GOD. The scribe rightly understood him to mean that "there is one God; and there is none other but He"

There is no way the scribe or anyone else would have perceived that Jesus was a trinitarian. Also, obviously, the scribe wasn't a trinitarian.
Both Jesus & the scribe believed that ONE Being, ONE Person was Almighty GOD; namely YAHWEH.

Then, after affirming the scriptural monotheistic faith, Jesus quotes Psalms 110:1, where the ONE GOD, YAHWEH, speaks to another whom David calls my lord; this 'lord', YAHWEH GOD invites to sit at His right hand. Since there is solely ONE Almighty GOD; this 'lord' cannot therefore be Almighty GOD!!

This was a prophecy that was to be fulfilled at the ascension of the Lord Messiah.
Jesus of Nazareth in Mark 12:35ff identifies himself as this 'lord'
The 'lord' who was destined to sit at the right hand of the ONE GOD.
Psalms 110:1 is the most quoted OT verse in the NT; it identifies who Jesus is; and it defines what is meant when he is called 'lord'.

The Hebrew word used here for 'lord' is adoni
Therefore, YAHWEH said to adoni

The Hebrew word 'adoni' occurs 195 times in the OT; it is NEVER EVER used in ref. to Almighty GOD; it is solely used in ref. to beings who are NOT Almighty GOD i.e. humans & occasionally angels.
(Of course, Jesus is not an angelic being; he is a human being)

Therefore, there are 195 clues in the Hebrew Bible alone to indicate to the reader that the Messiah is NOT Almighty GOD!!

Jesus of Nazareth is the Lord Messiah NOT the Lord GOD
He is Lord ... the Lord Messiah [Luke 2.11, Col 3.24]

Be Berean. Check the above assertions for yourself!!

[Aineo]

Psalms 8:1
8:1 To the chief Musician upon Git'-tith, A Psalm of David.

O LORD our Lord (adoni), how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens.
KJV
Isaiah 10:33

33 Behold, the Lord (adoni), the LORD of hosts, shall lop the bough with terror: and the high ones of stature shall be hewn down, and the haughty shall be humbled. KJV
Isaiah 19:4

4 And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord (adoni), the LORD of hosts. KJV

Zechariah 6:5

5 And the angel answered and said unto me, These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord (adoni) of all the earth. KJV

Adampastor, I hate to burst your bubble but your comment concerning "adoni" is false. I did not try to find all examples so I might have missed a few where "adoni" is your in reference to Yehovah.

If you have taken the time to read the article I posted on the Trinity you will find the evidence that the concept of the Trinity is a revealed truth of the NT.

It appears you oneness people refuse to read anything that refutes your denial of the Trinity.

And BTW the Hebrew word "adoni" is found 324 times in the OT.

[burwelm]

The Hebrew word adonai means "one who rules" or "one who owns." When used referring to God the Father it translates LORD, when used referring to Jesus it translates Lord, and when used referring to man it translates lord.

Yeah, and in Matthew 28:19 Jesus says:

[/quote]Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, AND of the Son, AND of the Holy Ghost.

These three are always true- they can be trusted in every way- they are pure good, they are light, love, truth, and right- they are equal - they are all three God and all three the same, and all three different - deserving each its own identity apart from the others along with an identity as part of the others.

[BradtheImpaler]

Let me give another illustration: The egg- It is one egg but it has a shell, a yolk, and the egg white part. It is one egg and all of it is called "egg" but it consists of three separate parts. The shell is not the yolk, the white is not the yolk, the white is not the shell.

But if I claim that this makes each person of the Trinity a "part" of God, or "1/3rd" of God, the Trinitarian will say that is incorrect. The problem is, that to qualify as a "person", one must be a self-contained, autonomous personal entity. As such, a person can not be part of anything except a council or committee or any such group of persons. We may speak of parts of a person, but that is only because each part doesn't qualify as a whole person in and of itself. So the doctrine of the Trinity comes with it's own "Catch 22", and is irreversably self-contradictory. That is, the only way 3 persons can add up to one being, is if they each, by themselves, do not qualify as a whole being. But if they do not each qualify as a whole being, then they do not each qualify as whole persons either because a person IS a being.

[Aineo]

BradtheImpaler, do you suppose you can get past semantics and address God's revealed truth? So far all you oneness people have done is wrangle over words.

2 Timothy 2:14-17

14 Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless, and leads to the ruin of the hearers. 15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth. 16 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness, 17 and their talk will spread like gangrene. NAS

Oneness has been proven false many times in the last 1900 years. Oneness is nothing more than Gnosticism without the name.

[Huldah]

Might I remind you that not all non-trinitarians are Oneness people!

Evangelion, Dave Hudson and I are Christadelphians - we're different to the Oneness group. We're not modalists.

Like Adam Pastor and Brad the Impaler, we're 'Biblical Unitarians' (as opposed to Universal Unitarians) - in terms of how we view the nature of God and Jesus.

Oh, and just to make it clear, we're not Arians or JWs either. That's different too.

[Huldah]

The Hebrew word adonai means "one who rules" or "one who owns." When used referring to God the Father it translates LORD, when used referring to Jesus it translates Lord, and when used referring to man it translates lord.

Incorrect.

Adonai translates as Lord (capital L lower case ord)
YHWH translates as LORD (all in capitals to indicate that it is translated from the tetragrammaton).

[Aineo]

Okay then all you oneness and Christadelphians want to do is wrangle about words. The word translated Lord or lord in Scripture (depending on who is being referred to) and means:

OT:113

'adown (or , shortened, 'adon)--


firm, strong, lord, master
1) lord, master
a) referring to men:

1) a superintendant of a household, a superintendant of affairs
2) a master
3) a king
b) referring to God:

1) the Lord God
2) the Lord of the whole earth
2) lords, kings
a) referring to men:
1) a proprietor of a hill of Samaria
2) a master
3) a husband
4) a prophet
5) a governor
6) a prince
7) a king
b) referring to God: the Lord of lords (probably = "your husband, Yahweh")
3) my lord, my master
a) referring to men:
1) a master
2) a husband
3) a prophet
4) a prince
5) a king
6) a father
7) Moses
8 ) a priest
9) a theophanic angel
10) a captain
11) general recognition of superiority
b) referring to God:
1) my Lord, my Lord and my God
2) Adonai (parallel with Yahweh)
(from The Online Bible Thayer's Greek Lexicon and Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon, Copyright (c)1993, Woodside Bible Fellowship, Ontario, Canada. Licensed from the Institute for Creation Research.)

The Word translated LORD is Yahovah in some passages and in others is:

OT:136

'Adonay (ad-o-noy'); am emphatic form of OT:113; the Lord (used as a proper name of God only):


KJV - (my) Lord.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

ADONAI

(a-do'-ni), (ad-o-na'-i) ('adhonay): A Divine name, translated "Lord," and signifying, from its derivation, "sovereignty." Its vowels are found in the Massoretic Text with the unpronounceable tetragrammaton YHWH; and when the Hebrew reader came to these letters, he always substituted in pronunciation the word " 'adhonay." Its vowels combined with the tetragrammaton form the word "Yahweh (Jehovah)." See GOD, NAMES OF.
(from International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Electronic Database Copyright (c)1996 by Biblesoft)

In some passages ADONIA is rendered Lord and in others LORD.

[adampastor]

Psalms 8:1
8:1 To the chief Musician upon Git'-tith, A Psalm of David.

O LORD our Lord (adon), how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens.
KJV

Isaiah 10:33

33 Behold, the Lord (adon), the LORD of hosts, shall lop the bough with terror: and the high ones of stature shall be hewn down, and the haughty shall be humbled. KJV

Isaiah 19:4

4 And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord (adon), the LORD of hosts. KJV

Zechariah 6:5

5 And the angel answered and said unto me, These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord (adon) of all the earth. KJV

Sorry to be the one to 'burst' your bubble, Aineo
You obviously don't know Hebrew (not that I am a Hebrew scholar myself)
The verses you quoted use the word adon, the root Hebrew word behind both Adoni & Adonai

This Hebrew word also means 'lord', 'master' (& 'owner')
It is used in ref. to both GOD & Man; as you have correctly pointed out.

I however, discussed the Hebrew word, adoni
'Adoni' NOT 'Adon'
Two similar yet distinct Hebrew words.

Adoni appears 195 times and is solely used to denote lords who are NON-deity i.e. humans and angels.
Incidentally, Adonai is used for Almighty GOD whilst Adoni is used for someone who is NOT Almighty GOD.

Adon is the general common Hebrew word for 'lord'
Used in regard to denote GOD (as in the verses you pointed out)
and man e.g. Abraham [Gen 24.9], Pharaoh [Gen 40.1], Joseph [Gen 42.30], etc.

Aineo, I am no Hebrew expert, but I have been Berean about this particular subject. I have checked to see that these things are so, considering the implications thereby.

Strong's altho' helpful, doesn't show the distinction between Adoni and Adon. It uses the number 113 to denote both distinct Hebrew words.
This may be the reason behind your mistake.

Software such as 'Bibleworks' will show you the distinction.
Or even ask someone who knows Hebrew! They should also be able to show you the difference.

Hoped I have clarified things!

[BradtheImpaler]

Okay then all you oneness and Christadelphians want to do is wrangle about words

Well, what else is there to do but "wrangle about words" when deciding what the bible teaches or doesn't teach? The scriptures are composed of words, and whether we have the correct understanding of the definitions of those words and the correct context they are used in is the whole ball game, isn't it?

[adampastor]

The Hebrew word adonai means "one who rules" or "one who owns." When used referring to God the Father it translates LORD, when used referring to Jesus it translates Lord, and when used referring to man it translates lord.

Burwelm, you really don't know Hebrew (I am no expert myself)
GOD's name YAHWEH is the word translated in our English Bibles as LORD, all capitals.

In general, GOD's title, Adonai, is denoted 'Lord'

Also there are two other Hebrew words, translated as 'lord' (sometimes with a capital L, sometimes not) in our English Bibles;
that is Adon & Adoni

See also
http://www.planetkc.com/stm/lord,_lord,_lord.htm
http://www.thechristadelphians.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=398

[Aineo]

Adampastor, I guess you need to post your sources as I did. Adonia is only used in the OT for Yehova, 'adown, 'adon, and adoni are the same Hebrew word and can apply to God, men, and angels. I can post all 5000 Scriptures that use Yehova as well as all 324 Scriptures that use 'adown, and all 449 Scriptures that use Adonia from the KJV version is you like to show you that Adonai is not always translated LORD and is in fact translated Lord in some places. The ones I did post use 'adown with Adonia or Yehova in reference to God.

BTW, if you bothered to check my source I use Biblesoft's PC Study Bible software.

Like you I am not a Hebrew scholar but I have the intelligence to use dictionaries and concordances. The fact is you made a false statement, which I demonstrated to be false. You also seem to be basing your statements on the Massoretic text and the KJ translation of the Bible.

[adampastor]

Didn't say Adonai is always translated 'LORD'
I said GOD's Name YAHWEH (Strong's 3068,3069) is translated 'LORD'

Adonai (Strong's 136) on the other hand is generally translated 'Lord'
in the majority of the case;
Yes I am talking about the KJV English translation.


'adown (Strong's 113) is used in ref. to GOD & men.

'adoni' solely used in ref. to men & angels.

I have never used Biblesoft; if it uses Strong's numbering system, Strong's does not show the distinction between 'adoni' & 'adown

Yep! I am talking about the Masoretic Scriptures.
Since all 4 words: YAHWEH, Adonai, adon & adoni
have different pronunciations, different vowel points;
and esp. adoni denotes human beings and angels and NOT GOD.
Even the LXX shows this distinction


I used Bibleworks to search for the Hebrew word 'adoni'
As for sources, I guess you could begin with:

http://www.planetkc.com/stm/lord,_lord,_lord.htm
http://www.thechristadelphians.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=398
http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/adonai.htm
http://www.geocities.com/yhwhbible/adoni.htm
http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/adoni.htm

[Aineo]

Didn't say Adonai is always translated 'LORD'
I said GOD's Name YAHWEH (Strong's 3068,3069) is translated 'LORD'

Go back and reread my post because I did not post that Adoniai is always translated 'LORD'.

Adonai (Strong's 136) on the other hand is generally translated 'Lord'
in the majority of the case;
Yes I am talking about the KJV English translation.

I know this to be true, which is what I posted.

'adown (Strong's 113) is used in ref. to GOD & men.

'adoni' solely used in ref. to men & angels.

I have never used Biblesoft; if it uses Strong's numbering system, Strong's does not show the distinction between 'adoni' & 'adown

Then post your source. If you took the time to check out my posts I did not always use Strong's definitions.

Yep! I am talking about the Masoretic Scriptures.
Since all 4 words: YAHWEH, Adonai, adon & adoni
have different pronunciations, different vowel points;
and esp. adoni denotes human beings and angels and NOT GOD.
Even the LXX shows this distinction

The LXX is written in Greek not Hebrew. Again what is your source?

I used Bibleworks to search for the Hebrew word 'adoni'
As for sources, I guess you could begin with:

http://www.planetkc.com/stm/lord,_lord,_lord.htm
http://www.thechristadelphians.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=398
http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/adonai.htm
http://www.geocities.com/yhwhbible/adoni.htm
http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/adoni.htm

I am not asking for opinions I am asking for scholarly sources I can check out for myself. I understand Strong's is not the best source for in depth study. I also understand that the Massoretic has some spurious passages, which is why I don't use the KJV.

[adampastor]

The source material were in the links I posted ...
Anyways, if you are interested, you can start of with these:

“The form ADONI (‘my lord’), a royal title (I Sam. 29:8 ), is to be carefully distinguished from the divine title ADONAI (‘my Lord’) used of Yahweh.”
“ADONAI — the special plural form [the divine title] distinguishes it from adonai [with short vowel] = my lords”
(International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, “Lord,” p. 157).

“Lord in the OT is used to translate ADONAI when applied to the Divine Being. The [Hebrew] word…has a suffix [with special pointing] presumably for the sake of distinction…between divine and human appellative”
(Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, “Lord,” Vol. 3, p. 137).

“Hebrew Adonai exclusively denotes the God of Israel. It is attested about 450 times in the OT…Adoni [is] addressed to human beings (Gen. 44:7, Num. 32:25, II Kings 2:19 [etc.]). We have to assume that the word adonai received its special form to distinguish it from the secular use of adon [i.e., adoni]. The reason why [God is addressed] as adonai, [with long vowel] instead of the normal adon, adoni or adonai [with short vowel] may have been to distinguish Yahweh from other gods and from human lords”
(Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, p. 531).

"Adonai and Adoni are variations of pointing to distinguish divine reference from human"
(Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Brown, Driver, Briggs, under adon)

“The form ‘to my lord,’ l’adoni, is never used in the OT as a divine reference…the generally accepted fact that the masoretic pointing distinguishes divine references (adonai) from human references (adoni)”
(Wigram, The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of the OT, p. 22)
(Herbert Bateman, “Psalm 110:1 and the NT,” Bibliothecra Sacra, Oct.-Dec., 1992, p. 438).

For an analysis of the occurrences of adoni, see Herbert Bateman’s “Psalm 110:1 and the New Testament”, Bibliotheca Sacra 149, (1992) pages 438-453.
The author, a Trinitarian, argues that the Psalm cannot apply primarily to Jesus because adoni describes a human Messiah! Bateman’s Trinitarianism causes him to dismiss the obvious direct Messianic reference of this Psalm.

Aineo, GODSPEED with your research!
Adieu

[Aineo]

Again if you had taken the time to read what I posted concerning ADONAI is was from the New International Bible Encyclopedia, which can be accessed online. I would prefer the name of the Hebrew Lexicon you are using. The following three articles or portions of articles are from your source, which is available online:

ADONAI
a-do'-ni, ad-o-na'-i ('adhonay):

A Divine name, translated "Lord," and signifying, from its derivation, "sovereignty." Its vowels are found in the Massoretic Text with the unpronounceable tetragrammaton " YHWH "; and when the Hebrew reader came to these letters, he always substituted in pronunciation the word " 'adhonay." Its vowels combined with the tetragrammaton form the word "Yahweh (Yahweh)."
http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T214

See GOD, NAMES OF.

Personal names of God

4. 'Adhon, 'Adhonay:

An attributive name, which in prehistoric Hebrew had already passed over into a generic name of God, is 'Adhon, 'Adhonay, the latter formed from the former, being the construct plural, 'adhone, with the 1st person ending -ay, which has been lengthened to ay and so retained as characteristic of the proper name and distinguishing it from the possessive "my Lord." the King James Version does not distinguish, but renders both as possessive, "my Lord" (Judges 6:15; 13:8), and as personal name (Psalms 2:4); the Revised Version (British and American) also, in Psalms 16:2, is in doubt, giving "my Lord," possessive, in text and "the Lord" in the margin. 'Adhonay, as a name of Deity, emphasizes His sovereignty (Psalms 2:4; Isaiah 7:7), and corresponds closely to Kurios of the New Testament. It is frequently combined with Yahweh (Genesis 15:8; Isaiah 7:7, etc.) and with 'Elohim (Psalms 86:12). Its most significant service in Massoretic Text is the use of its vowels to point the unpronounceable tetragrammaton YHWH, indicating that the word "'Adhonay" should be spoken aloud instead of "Yah-weh." This combination of vowels and consonants gives the transliteration "Yahweh," adopted by the American Standard Revised Version, while the other English Versions of the Bible, since Coverdale, represents the combination by the capitals LORD. Septuagint represents it by Kurios.

http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T3851

The Aramaic designation, Mare', occurs only in Da (e.g. 2:47; 5:23), and the same word refers to a man (4:24).

Of the Greek words, Kurios is freely used of both the Deity and men. Despotes, of men in classic usage, occurs only of God, including the ascended Jesus, and is employed only 5 times. Megistanes (plural) is found once, of men (Mark 6:21). Rabboni (Hebrew in Greek letters) is applied only to the Christ, and is simply transliterated in the Revised Version (British and American), but rendered "Lord" in the King James Version (compare Mark 10:51).

Our English versions distinguish the 3 main uses of the term thus:

(1) "LORD" represents the Hebrew Yahweh, Septuagint Kurios, except where 'Adhonay or 'Adhon is combined with Yahweh (= "Lord God"); the American Standard Revised Version has in these examples employed the name as it is found in the Hebrew, simply transliterated.

(2) "Lord" corresponds to 'Adhonay, 'Adhon, Mare', also Greek Kurios (see (1)), and Despotes, for which the American Standard Revised Version has always "Master" in either the text or the margin.

(3) "Lord" ("lord") translates all the remaining 8 Hebrew words and the Greek words except Despotes. It is thus seen that Kurios corresponds to all three forms of writing the English term.
http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T5578

Since I prefer the NAS over the KJV I also prefer the Brown, Driver, Briggs and Gesenius Hebrew Lexicon. This link will take you to the Crosswalk.com entry for Adonai which has this information:

Lord 456, lord 1, lords 2
http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Heb ... ersion=nas

Adonai is not used for God in three OT passages.