Is Jesus FULLY God & Praying

[By Grace]

So he didn't empty himself? He added to himself? If you have issues with the words in the Bible, you need to take it up with the translators, not with me.

Remember it is you who asked the question.

I am sorry if you do not like the answer I give. If you do not want an answer, then please do not ask questions, or make accusations about someone who is attempting to give you the most accurate answer possible.

 

[Brother Mike]

Or Jesus has always been a firstborn Son (before the world began)

Well, your right that the Bible does not use any Greek for Triune, or that any god is a 3 part being or 1 with many personalties (Oneness doctrine and Modelism) The scripture is very clear both are Gods, but one is subject to the other (Until Rev where Jesus was given all things making us a Join Heir)

So, God is a class of something and not a name of someone. The bible also makes that very clear as even Theos is not a proper Male noun but a deity of uncertain affinity that can have a title such as Father God, or the Lord God.

So one is given the authority to the other. Jesus never made any mention He was greater than God and said He Always does what His father tells him. 1/3 god that makes part of a whole God would never speak this way. (Trinity) 1 God with multiple personalities would not speak this way either (Oneness, Sabellianism, Modelist)

Jesus asked His father to give him the same Glory He once had before the foundation of the World. So any begotten of God would be in reference to Jesus coming to earth as a baby by the Spoken Word.

In other words we have two God's, that have always been here one called the other Father.

Trinity is actually a Latin word and any concept of it is not found in the bible. It took years of confusion to decided that the Latin word should have been added but was somehow forgotten by the Apostles and OT prophets, How embarrassing.

Tpiac means set of 3 in Greek. The Holy Spirit never mentioned that word either to describe God. In fact the Word was never used once by the Holy Spirit for anything. The Holy Spirit must have forgotten that God is a triune being. The word means Triad, trinity in English.

That is why I don't buy into something that is not there. Something that would have been defined and not left out. Something that would have been stated over and over to describe our God being important to our understanding. Nope!!! It's a doctrine of men first fully Published by the Roman Catholic church once they removed the pagan parts they did not like. That is factual History that is ignored today.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We believe that there is only one God, who is eternal and immutable, and manifests Himself in three distinct Persons; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

That is (Oneness, Sabellianism, Modelist) Which one of those does this web site subscribe to since the Web site is not Trinitarian? I thought we agreed on the Trinity Doctrine?? Now I am confused.

I posted the Trinity Scutum Fidei. God is not 1 person with multiple personalities but 3 real separate people in the Trinity.



Mike.

 

[Randy]

Or Jesus has always been a firstborn Son (before the world began)

Well, your right that the Bible does not use any Greek for Triune, or that any god is a 3 part being or 1 with many personalties (Oneness doctrine and Modelism) The scripture is very clear both are Gods, but one is subject to the other (Until Rev where Jesus was given all things making us a Join Heir)


Mike.

Scripture is clear - Jesus is all that the Father is but there is only One God.

The fullness of the Deity in the Son (The Father is in Him)
The Holy Spirit (The Fathers to give and take) Spirit of Sovereign Lord also called the Spirit of Truth as that Spirit conveys the mind of the Spirit
The One true God per Jesus (The Father)

There is only One God (first and last) just as Jesus is the One and Only Son (first and last)

1 Corinthians 8:6 (New Revised Standard Version)
yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

God (from whom) spoke/worked through (through whom) the Son. Even Rev was given to the Son by God to give to the church. Jesus should have a name like "The Word of God". (smile)

God has tied our lives to Jesus. So as the Son lives by the living Father we live by Jesus in us. (through whom) As I read.

 

[Brother Mike]

1 Corinthians 8:6 (New Revised Standard Version)
yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

I count two there the Father, creator by whom are all things made and One Lord Jesus by whom all things were made through. But hey, It could be I don't count so well.

Mike.

 

[Free]

Paul does not contrast "being in the form of God with God himself." Not at all. Rather he clearly contrasts being "in the form of God" with "taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men" and "being found in human form." This is why I have asked you to define what is meant by "human form."

Paul said, 'though he was in the form of God, he did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.' This was before he took our form. So he is not contrasting our form and his form. He is comparing Christ, who was in the form of God before he took our form, with God himself. That's what the word equal suggests.

Paul is contrasting the form of Jesus as God with his form of being human. That is a significant point of Paul's argument. He isn't contrasting being in the "form of God" with God, since it does mean that he was, in essence, God. Jesus' not counting "equality with God a thing to be grasped," is clearly where the contrast is being made with his making "himself nothing." Hence the use of "but" between those two statements. That "but" is highly significant.

Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. (ESV)

Clearly contrasting being "in the form of God" with making "himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men."

I would define human form as having the appearance of a human.

The appearance of a human. So, what would it mean to have the appearance of God, since God is spirit and is invisible?

Of course, there is also a philosophical sense of the word, meaning the essence, nature, and character of that to which it is referring. This makes much more sense of the passage. It makes sense when referring to both God and man, whereas being "in the appearance of" makes sense when referring to man but makes the passage difficult when referring to God.

But using your own argument then Jesus was not equal because he emptied himself of equality. Is that your position?

Yes and no. It's a matter of what is meant by "emptied." Can God not be God? Of course not. Paul is speaking of a change of state, a change of form, not a change of nature. The eternally preexistent Son is equal to the Father because they are both God in nature. Jesus was the Son incarnate, the God-man, who submitted himself to the Father. So in one sense is not equal to the Father but yet because he still retains his divine nature, he is equal.

Paul said he emptied himself. The imagery is that of a cup. This imagery is used all throughout the Bible. For example, the vessels of wrath, the vessels of mercy. We are flesh and blood. That is our nature. He partook of our nature. Heb. 2:14

The cup is the form. What is inside the cup is God. [/QUOTE]
Where is any imagery of a cup in this passage? Where does Paul even imply such? Can God become not God? Can that which is in nature God divest itself of that nature and cease to exist as God?

The word 'devine' means 'of God'. If that is what you mean, then I would agree. He was of God, the Son of God. But God dwelt in him. Jesus did not make himself God.

No one is at all suggesting that Jesus made himself God. Either he was God or he was not and never will be.

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of DIVINE

1
a : of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god <divine love>
b : being a deity <the divine Savior>
c : directed to a deity <divine worship>


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/divine

So, although we can say that the Son proceeded from the Father, as the Nicene Creed says, we must understand then that if the Son is divine, he is necessarily God, having divine nature. And as God, he has existed for eternity past, or better, that he has always existed just as the Father has.

From Vincent's Word Studies:

"Made Himself of no reputation (ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν).

Lit., emptied Himself. The general sense is that He divested Himself of that peculiar mode of existence which was proper and peculiar to Him as one with God. He laid aside the form of God. In so doing, He did not divest Himself of His divine nature. The change was a change of state: the form of a servant for the form of God. His personality continued the same. His self-emptying was not self-extinction, nor was the divine Being changed into a mere man. In His humanity He retained the consciousness of deity, and in His incarnate state carried out the mind which animated Him before His incarnation. He was not unable to assert equality with God. He was able not to assert it."

It goes against what Jesus said. He said the Father was the true God. So God did not divest himself of anything. Also Jesus said he was sent, and not of his own accord. John 7:28. There is no equality with God. God has no equal. God the Father sent him. You make it sound like it was Jesus' decision to be sent.

You are using one single verse as though it trumps this passage and many other passages, without any basis whatsoever for doing so. This is a significant error which I have stated several times in this thread.



But of course, this entire discussion is moot since your position is completely unbiblical as you believe in polytheism. I have pointed out significant contradictions in your position which must be addressed before we even discuss Phil 2, but that you have continually ignored.

Please address these contradictions as there cannot be any meaning discussion until you do so.

 

[By Grace]

I count two there the Father, creator by whom are all things made and One Lord Jesus by whom all things were made through. But hey, It could be I don't count so well.

How can you state this stuff above when you also posted that image, and your comment below?

I posted the Trinity Scutum Fidei. God is not 1 person with multiple personalities but 3 real separate people in the Trinity.

Just a slight correction in terms is required. There are no "people" in the Trinity. People are humans; that is why the term "persons" is used.

the image clearly states that EACH divine Person is equally god, and that there is no confusing of the uniqueness of the distinct persons pf the Trinity.

 

[Guest]

There are no "people" in the Trinity. People are humans

But scripture said he lowered himself to the likeness of men. Did Jesus not partake in human suffering on the cross. Was his blood not red.

 

[Sparkey]

Was his blood not red.

Good point, urk.

 

[Randy]

1 Corinthians 8:6 (New Revised Standard Version)
yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

I count two there the Father, creator by whom are all things made and One Lord Jesus by whom all things were made through. But hey, It could be I don't count so well.

Mike.

Who is in the Son? The One in the Son is God Almighty the other witness Jesus spoke of. That is why (the fullness was pleased to dwell in Him) Jesus is the image of the invisible God and the exact representation of the FATHERS being. Because it is the Father in Him without limit. All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge all the fullness of the Deity. Thats One God the Father and One Lord Jesus Christ in whom the fulness of the Deity dwells. Father and Son (two) but only One God the Father. Paul made that distinction in his writings. Jesus as Paul wrote is "The Firstborn of all creation"

Jesus as a Son serves in His Fathers house. The Father (from whom) has places all things in Jesus's hand (through whom). So one might state No one except the Father Himself (who gave Jesus authority and life) rises up or sits down apart from the Sons will. And the Son always does what pleases the Father. Jesus works within the framework of the Fathers will. The beginning and end of the Fathers message (outcome) is stated in REV. A New Jerusalem and one day the Father will make everything new and that Holy City with God will come down to earth and the living water Jesus spoke of is FREE for the asking. Costs less than a soda. Jesus paid the price for the Son loved the sheep and laid down His life for the sheep. In that as stated in REV the Son is worthy of honor and power and glory forever. The Father is the One who glorified the Son to His creation. Even the angels of God were commanded to worship and honor the Son. God has given Jesus a name above all others except Himself.

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. One God the Father, One Lord the Son, One Holy Spirit who is the Fathers to give and take. The Spirit of the sovereign Lord. Jesus also has authority to send that counselor to dwell in us forever by the command of the Father. (God)


Randy

 

[Brother Mike]

How can you state this stuff above when you also posted that image, and your comment below?

I posted the Trinity Scutum Fidei. God is not 1 person with multiple personalities but 3 real separate people in the Trinity.
Just a slight correction in terms is required. There are no "people" in the Trinity. People are humans; that is why the term "persons" is used.

the image clearly states that EACH divine Person is equally god, and that there is no confusing of the uniqueness of the distinct persons pf the Trinity.

per·son
/ˈpərsən/
Noun

A human being regarded as an individual.
Used in legal or formal contexts to refer to an unspecified individual.

Synonyms
man - individual - personage - character - figure

Merriam Webster, Dict.com................... Person= human- one

3 people in the trinity 3 different persons............

Now unless they changed the definition of Person to monkey or something a person is a Human.

How can you state this stuff above when you also posted that image, and your comment below?

Scutum Fidei is a symbol of Trinity Doctrine. Most so called Trinity Doctrines are from folks like many Charismatics who don't really have a doctrine but use the term Trinity very loosely with no idea what they believe. When Watching TBN (Trinity Broadcast Network) I hear a whole bunch of folks that don't seem to know much of anything (Not all of them, and not giving names of the ones that don't)

Reba busted someone out with that Statement of faith again, but that statement of faith is Not Trinity. I assumed the Website supported the Trinity Doctrine, and have had the conversation before, but to no avail I guess. So, I asked Reba what exactly does the Website believe.

Even through all these Pages Grace Folks come up to defend the Trinity, but quote Oneness or something else that is not the Trinity Doctrine. Each one is vastly different and it's hard to tell who believes what.

I keep my stance. Jesus is fully God, is not 1/3 of a God machine (Trinity) is not a split personality of a God machine (Oneness, Modelist) He was here, has been and is now the King of Kings, Lord of Lords who was Honored by His Father as he stated before the foundation of the Earth's creation, and given all majesty in all things now. He is a real son, real (Person) and really the Son of God, is God and not a personality of God, a piece of God, or 1/3 of a god.

Paul made that distinction in his writings. Jesus as Paul wrote is "The Firstborn of all creation"

Read Rev..... Jesus said I am Alpha and Omega....... the first and Last...... keep reading Rev 1 the first born of the dead, the first resurrected. I see no creation date for Jesus anywhere though. He has always been, always was, and always will be. All references to begotten are tied to him coming from Mary in child birth but here long before and always here.



Mike.

 

[WIP]

There are no "people" in the Trinity. People are humans

But scripture said he lowered himself to the likeness of men. Did Jesus not partake in human suffering on the cross. Was his blood not red.

Is Jesus human today?

 

[reba]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Originally Posted by reba


We believe that there is only one God, who is eternal and immutable, and manifests Himself in three distinct Persons; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.



That is (Oneness, Sabellianism, Modelist) Which one of those does this web site subscribe to since the Web site is not Trinitarian? I thought we agreed on the Trinity Doctrine?? Now I am confused.

I posted the Trinity Scutum Fidei. God is not 1 person with multiple personalities but 3 real separate people in the Trinity.



Mike.

Because a person or persons drop a subject does not imply agreement.

 

[By Grace]

Is Jesus human today?

My point (as well as my orthodoxy ) became obscured when I answered brother mike:

I posted the Trinity Scutum Fidei. God is not 1 person with multiple personalities but 3 real separate people in the Trinity. (emphasis added)

To which I replied:
Just a slight correction in terms is required. There are no "people" in the Trinity. People are humans; that is why the term "persons" is used.

Earlier, I used the term, "HYPOSTATIC UNION" to indicate that Jesus remains one Divine Person having two distinct natures. He is100% human, and 100% God without any mixture or confusing of either nature.

 

[Brother Mike]

Because a person or persons drop a subject does not imply agreement.

I understand Reba but the word "Person of" is only written by a man, and there are several different versions (Creed's) of the Trinity Doctrine. So people, Person would not matter as it's not scripture to begin with. The Trinity define 3 persons in the Creed itself depending on which one you use. The Niacian Creed which was somewhat first adopted by Rome (Not us) used all 3 are God, of God. Later others came in to define it more clearly, some not using the Word person but entity.

The other question I had was, you posted a Oneness type statement of faith. That is not even close to the Trinity Doctrine. Oneness, Modelist leave way to many scripture contradictions and does not adhere to the Trinity Creed itself. Such as this statement..........

Earlier, I used the term, "HYPOSTATIC UNION" to indicate that Jesus remains one Divine Person having two distinct natures. He is100% human, and 100% God without any mixture or confusing of either nature.

Grace quotes that Jesus has two distinct natures. Jesus was always God, a very short time in a human body, now glorified body. Well, sort of........... He was God on earth with a human body. He never said he was Human though but the Son of God, making him God (a god) but not really in the Human class. It is true that he had to operate just as we do, had to know things just as we do through the Holy Spirit, but................... look at the understanding he gained even as a child. He was very different and walked as God on earth. A flesh body is just something to house you in so you can move around on Earth.

I don't see anything wrong with Grace's statement, but I look at it a bit different. We spend years to be like He is, and was.

Mike.

 

[reba]

I have not discussed the topic of Trinity. Posting the SoF of the site is not discussion to me.... Just letting members know where the site stands on the subject.


Section 2: Specific Rules and Guidelines (the 'meat' of the ToS)

2.1: This is a Christian site, therefore, any attempt to put down Christianity (or declare that it is false) and the basic tenets of our Faith will be considered a hostile act. Please read: Statement of Faith





Doctrinal Statement

We believe that the Bible is inspired by God in its entirety, and is without error in the original autographs, a complete and final written revelation from God.

We believe that there is only one God, who is eternal and immutable, and manifests Himself in three distinct Persons; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

We believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Messiah, born of a virgin, totally without sin, God in human flesh, the One Who died on the cross for our sins, was buried, rose again from the dead on the third day, and ascended to the right hand of the Father in heaven, where He now intercedes for us who believe in Him.

We believe that all humanity is lost and born with a sinful nature, and can only be saved by a personal faith in the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and not by any human merit or performance.

We believe in a personal devil, called Satan, who, along with all his angels, called demons or evil spirits, are destined to spend eternity in hell, and now seek to deceive the world, defeat the believers, and destroy the work of God, but can be resisted by believers, who are protected by God and the intercession of Jesus Christ our Lord.

We believe that heaven is a real place where the saved will dwell forever, and that hell is a literal place of torment where unbelievers will be punished.

We believe that genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God, and are indwelt, baptized into the body of Christ, the true church, and sealed by the Holy Spirit, and thus, unable to be separated from the love of Jesus Christ.

We believe that all believers need to be filled and empowered by the Holy Spirit to live a godly life and to be bold in our witness for the Lord.

We believe in the spiritual unity of all genuine believers in the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Guest]

There are no "people" in the Trinity. People are humans

But scripture said he lowered himself to the likeness of men. Did Jesus not partake in human suffering on the cross. Was his blood not red.

Is Jesus human today?

Yes he is. Wouldn't he have to be to be the intercessor for humanity. Notice the word human in the word "humanity". If he wasn't human he wouldn't be very good at his job and know the desires of our hearts.

 

[jasoncran]

urk, if jesus is human that well makes him less then a god. he cant be human. he was never only human in the first place. we cant worship a human.

 

[MarkT]

Paul is contrasting the form of Jesus as God with his form of being human. That is a significant point of Paul's argument. He isn't contrasting being in the "form of God" with God, since it does mean that he was, in essence, God. Jesus' not counting "equality with God a thing to be grasped," is clearly where the contrast is being made with his making "himself nothing." Hence the use of "but" between those two statements. That "but" is highly significant.

He didn't say 'the form of Jesus as God'. You can't say it, as if that is what Paul said, means he was in essence God. And Paul is not arguing anything. Being in the form of God and being God are two different things. That is what Paul is suggesting. Being in the form of God, Christ did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped but emptied himself in obedience to God.

Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. (ESV)

Clearly contrasting being "in the form of God" with making "himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men."

The issue is equality. The gospel is the truth. Jesus said the Father is greater than I. Paul can not say they were equal or he would not be telling the truth.

The appearance of a human. So, what would it mean to have the appearance of God, since God is spirit and is invisible?

Invisible to us but not to the Son. The Son has seen the Father and he who has seen the Son has seen the Father.

But using your own argument then Jesus was not equal because he emptied himself of equality. Is that your position?

Yes and no. It's a matter of what is meant by "emptied." Can God not be God? Of course not. Paul is speaking of a change of state, a change of form, not a change of nature. The eternally preexistent Son is equal to the Father because they are both God in nature. Jesus was the Son incarnate, the God-man, who submitted himself to the Father. So in one sense is not equal to the Father but yet because he still retains his divine nature, he is equal.

Paul said he emptied himself. The imagery is that of a cup. This imagery is used all throughout the Bible. For example, the vessels of wrath, the vessels of mercy. We are flesh and blood. That is our nature. He partook of our nature. Heb. 2:14

The cup is the form. What is inside the cup is God. [/QUOTE]

Where is any imagery of a cup in this passage? Where does Paul even imply such? Can God become not God? Can that which is in nature God divest itself of that nature and cease to exist as God?

Paul said Christ emptied himself. Of what, he doesn't say. But one thing we do know, Jesus was mortal. You could say he emptied himself of the glory he had with God in the beginning, became a man, took a drop in rank, became lower than the angels. A cup in the form of God is not something you can see in the light of the Trinity I suppose.

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of DIVINE

1
a : of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god <divine love>
b : being a deity <the divine Savior>
c : directed to a deity <divine worship>


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/divine

So, although we can say that the Son proceeded from the Father, as the Nicene Creed says, we must understand then that if the Son is divine, he is necessarily God, having divine nature. And as God, he has existed for eternity past, or better, that he has always existed just as the Father has.

The Nicene Creed says light from light. Incorrect. God dwells in unapproachable light. Jesus was sent as the light from the Father. I would say 'of God' is a better definition. What does a dictionary know anyways?

From Vincent's Word Studies:

"Made Himself of no reputation (ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν).

Lit., emptied Himself. The general sense is that He divested Himself of that peculiar mode of existence which was proper and peculiar to Him as one with God. He laid aside the form of God. In so doing, He did not divest Himself of His divine nature. The change was a change of state: the form of a servant for the form of God. His personality continued the same. His self-emptying was not self-extinction, nor was the divine Being changed into a mere man. In His humanity He retained the consciousness of deity, and in His incarnate state carried out the mind which animated Him before His incarnation. He was not unable to assert equality with God. He was able not to assert it."

It goes against what Jesus said. He said the Father was the true God. So God did not divest himself of anything. Also Jesus said he was sent, and not of his own accord. John 7:28. There is no equality with God. God has no equal. God the Father sent him. You make it sound like it was Jesus' decision to be sent.

You are using one single verse as though it trumps this passage and many other passages, without any basis whatsoever for doing so. This is a significant error which I have stated several times in this thread.

Exactly right. The word of God by Jesus destroys strongholds.

But of course, this entire discussion is moot since your position is completely unbiblical as you believe in polytheism. I have pointed out significant contradictions in your position which must be addressed before we even discuss Phil 2, but that you have continually ignored.

Please address these contradictions as there cannot be any meaning discussion until you do so.

I don't know what you mean by polytheism. I guess you would be resistant to the idea that he was a son before he left his father's house. The sons of God are mentioned in the Bible.

I believe in the Father, the Creator, the source of all things and God overall and the Son, the heir of all things, who is my Lord and Master, the Rock I take refuge in.

You either believe the Father is greater than the Son, what Jesus said, or they are equal, what the Trinity says.

 

[Free]

His deity is not the issue. The issue is the co-equal part. I agree he was the God of Israel. The thing is the Father is greater. The Father is the true God.

Jesus is our Lord and God but God the Father is God overall including Jesus. God the Father gave Jesus life.

Looking at what the Bible says (all ESV):

Exo 20:1 And God spoke all these words, saying,
Exo 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
Exo 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before me.
Exo 20:4 "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Exo 20:5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me,
Exo 20:6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Deu 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.

Isa 43:10-11, 10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. 11 I, I am the LORD, and besides me there is no savior.

Isa 44:6-8, 6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god. 7 Who is like me? Let him proclaim it. Let him declare and set it before me, since I appointed an ancient people. Let them declare what is to come, and what will happen. 8 Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any."

Isa 45:18 For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!): "I am the LORD, and there is no other."

Isa 45:21 Declare and present your case; let them take counsel together! Who told this long ago? Who declared it of old? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.

Isaiah 46:9 remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me,


These passages all show that if, as you claim, Jesus is the God of Israel but not the one true God, then Jesus was a liar because clearly, as the God of Israel, he was claiming to be the one true God, the Creator. In fact, he makes it abundantly clear that there never has been nor ever will be another God.

There is absolutely no biblical support for saying that Jesus is the God of Israel but the Father is the true God. In fact, the Bible is very much against such a position and the passages I have given completely do away with your position. The God of Israel very much is the one true, creator God.

Not to mention what you have stated above goes against what you stated earlier:

Jesus' function was basically to act as a temple for the living God. Jesus was fully a man. Can we say that? Yes. Otherwise how could we hope to be like him. I would not dispute Jesus was God's way of teaching us, in effect, God's way of communicating with man, but the basic truth of Christianity is Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. To say Jesus was God or he was making himself God or equal to God dismisses what he said about himself with respect to the Father.

Was he fully a man and that's it? If I say that Jesus was God am I actually dismissing "what he said about himself with respect to the Father"? Your position is contradictory. You cannot rationally hold to a position which states that Jesus is only a man and that we cannot say he is God, and yet states that he is God, much less the God of Israel but not the one true God.

 

[Brother Mike]

We believe that there is only one God, who is eternal and immutable, and manifests Himself in three distinct Persons; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

OK, everything else seems in place but that statement here. A doctrine invented in 1914 by Oneness Pentecostals. We are talking mostly Trinity doctrine in this thread, not Oneness or Modelist doctrine. If I had to choose though, it would be Trinity Doctrine. There are 3 that bare witness and record that are ONE. Not One that becomes 3 or manifest as 3. The Trinity Creed makes a whole lot more sense, just say'in.

I break down the Trinity Creed without using anyones specific Doctrine, and split the difference between Oneness and Trinity Here.

Defending the Trinitarian Creed:
http://www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=52964


Mike.