Do you need to believe Jesus is God to be saved?

[Alfred Persson]

19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 "teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. (Matt. 28:19-20 NKJ)

9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame." (Rom. 10:9-11 NKJ)

We are commanded to make disciples, people who confess the LORD Jesus, that He owns everything we have, that He is above everyone in our life, and even our lives. That we will obey His teachings unto martyrdom if need be. WE sell all we own and give it to Him, so He can guide us in how be occupied with His business, till He comes.

In my opinion, its more important people know Jesus is the only way to salvation, and His offer of salvation is the pearl of great price we should give all we own, to possess. Christ as LORD of all we are and have is more valuable than life itself.

Then when public confession is made that Jesus is LORD, the Son of God and that He was raised from the dead, God will clarify any confusion about Him being God, God the Son.

I know that's what happened to me. And it would be absurd to suppose only those theologically trained can become disciples. Rather, disciples are made by the Holy Spirit after conversion, after they publicly proclaim they want Jesus to be their LORD and Master MORE than life itself.

An excellent treatment of this truth can be found here:

The Gospel According to Jesus: What Is Authentic Faith? Kindle Edition​

by John F. MacArthur (Author) F

Amazon.com

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Fastfred0,

White/Tuggy Debate: Is Jesus Yahweh? 2:15 minutes long

I have now listened to the debate and it covers much of what has been discussed on some threads in this forum. It certainly was at a high level of scholarship, and some aspects I found difficult. I endorse most of what Dr. Tuggy stated, and disagree with much of what Dr. White stated. Dr. White was much more assertive and used to debates, but I liked what Dr. Tuggy quietly asserted, and mostly endorsed that what he said was true Biblical teaching.

I consider that Dr. Tuggy gave partial answers to two of the most prominent features of Dr. White's claims concerning Isaiah 6 and the "I AM" statements of John's Gospel, but he could have been much more comprehensive, and I strongly reject Dr. White's positions on these two aspects. If anyone would like to discuss these two items in greater detail, I would like to present what I consider the Bible teaching on these. For starters, I consider the vision of Jesus is a future vision of Christ enthroned in Temple Throne of David in the Millennial Kingdom of God, and is in many respects parallel to the vision of Isaiah 2. Dr. White did not in any way hint at this, and Dr. Tuggy did not in any way answer in this fashion.

Isaiah 6 was part of my earliest interest in Isaiah as a whole. I attended a home study class on Isaiah. They had a rotation of Senior Brothers doing one chapter each evening, and comments were allowed at the end of each class. The speaker on Isaiah 6 did not mention this in his exposition, but I drew attention to the reference in John 12 stating that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus in his Isaiah 6 vision. My understanding of Isaiah has grown much since my early 20's and I have spent much time on this remarkable book. Our Senior Expositor (we are a lay movement) concluded his series on Isaiah over many years, about four chapters each year, by considering Isaiah 66 last Wednesday Bible Class. I am the Librarian and have a recording of all his talks, many in mp3, but now more recently in video mp4. I also have another similar series by a prominent speaker at an interstate meeting. Each give a slightly different perspective on some chapters.

My favourite portions of Isaiah is Isaiah 6 and the Four Servant Songs, but I have grown to appreciate the flow of the whole book as a result of our Wednesday Night studies.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

I consider the vision of Jesus is a future vision of Christ enthroned in Temple Throne of David in the Millennial Kingdom of God, and is in many respects parallel to the vision of Isaiah 2. Dr. White did not in any way hint at this, and Dr. Tuggy did not in any way answer in this fashion.

That's impossible, the aorist is in the "indicative", Isaiah SAW Jesus' glory, it was a glory that existed in John's past, Isaiah's present:

ROT John 12:41 These things, said Isaiah, because he saw his glory, and spake concerning him.
BYZ John 12:41 Ταῦτα εἶπεν Ἠσαΐας, ὅτε εἶδεν (aorist indicative) τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐλάλησεν περὶ αὐτοῦ.

The aorist is a "snap shot" of the verb's action, but when indicative it denotes past time.

But in reference to the OP, you and Dr. Tuggy are part of the reason why I think it just and right God gives people who die unsaved a judgment, to see if they will confess Jesus is LORD Yahweh after they died and are in Hades.

If they repent and believe they eagerly wait for the second coming of Christ to be raised up from Hades, to meet Christ in the air with the rest of the church.

27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,
28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation. (Heb. 9:27-28 NKJ)

Until then, they "live according to God in the Spirit" protected from any torments.

5 They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.
6 For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. (1 Pet. 4:5-6 NKJ)

Because it wouldn't be just moral people end up eternally punished just because they didn't understand the scriptures.

It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment (Heb. 9:27 KJV) | End Time News

Universal Opportunity for Salvation in Christ: A Theological Examination of Salvation Beyond Temporal and Geographical Boundaries Abstract This paper explores the theological question of salvation for those who, due to the limitations of time and place, have not had direct access to the message...

endtimenews.net

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Alfred Persson,

That's impossible, the aorist is in the "indicative", Isaiah SAW Jesus' glory, it was a glory that existed in John's past, Isaiah's present:
ROT John 12:41 These things, said Isaiah, because he saw his glory, and spake concerning him.
BYZ John 12:41 Ταῦτα εἶπεν Ἠσαΐας, ὅτε εἶδεν (aorist indicative) τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐλάλησεν περὶ αὐτοῦ.
The aorist is a "snap shot" of the verb's action, but when indicative it denotes past time.

This is an interesting observation but I differ. I am not particularly interested in your Greek grammar. First consider the following:
Isaiah 2:1–4 (KJV): 1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. 2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. 3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

What Isaiah saw was a vision, of a future event, and although we do not know exactly how or what he "saw", he gives an overall description or summary of the vision. This is one reason why prophets are called "seers".

I do not know if you have examined the sequence of the Book of Isaiah, but I believe that we have a few time stamps that help to give better understanding of the context of when Isaiah gave his various prophecies. We have the indication that Isaiah prophesied during the reigns of four Kings of Judah:
Isaiah 1:1 (KJV): The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.
Again we encounter the word "saw", and many of the visions, such as the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 have both future tenses, and also the prophetic past, as if these events have already occurred.

Could I ask you how you understand the following, which is written in the prophetic past:
Psalm 110:1 (KJV): The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
When did Yahweh address Jesus and invite Him to be seated at God the Father's right hand, in God the Father's Throne. Please note, it does not say, in some future time, Yahweh will invite Jesus to sit at His Right Hand.

Getting back to time stamps, we have one of these in Isaiah 6, and also we have the word "saw":
Isaiah 6:1 (KJV): In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
Is there any relevance to the mention of Uzziah? Yes, he tried to usurp the role of the priest and entered into the Holy Place and tried to offer incense, only to be opposed by the Priests and was smitten by God with leprosy. He died without being cured. In contrast Isaiah sees in vision the FUTURE King / Priest, who will sit upon the Davidic Throne in the Temple at Jerusalem. This is NOT a vision of Jesus in heaven in Isaiah's own time, despite the fact that Isaiah "saw" Jesus then. It is a vision by contrast to Uzziah, when the true Davidic King and High Priest after the order of Melchizedek will replace the Ark of the Covenant and Mercy Seat in the Most Holy. The static Cherubim that surround the Ark are replaced by active Seraphim, fulfilling the work of Jesus, in purifying a remnant.

If it is a vision of Jesus on a throne in Heaven, where is God the Father, or God the Holy Spirit. The vision we have of Jesus in Heaven is Psalm 110:1, and this is different to Isaiah 6.

But in reference to the OP, you and Dr. Tuggy are part of the reason why I think it just and right God gives people who die unsaved a judgment, to see if they will confess Jesus is LORD Yahweh after they died and are in Hades.
If they repent and believe they eagerly wait for the second coming of Christ to be raised up from Hades, to meet Christ in the air with the rest of the church.

I hope you come to a better understanding of the Bible and this prophecy before the Coming of Christ, rather than your present idle threats against me and Dr. Twiggy. I do not know the full range of Dr. Twiggy's beliefs, as it is the first time I have encountered him, but Dr. White has challenged a few other Biblical Unitarians.

One aspect of Isaiah 6 that has interested me over the years is the action of the Seraphim and their wings, with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he did fly. I gave an explanation to two of my mates how I understand the action of these wings. One mate changed the subject, and on another occasion with another he looked the other way with a slightly glazed look. I will not share it with you as yet, because you might send me to hell again for ever.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Alfred Persson,

That's impossible, the aorist is in the "indicative", Isaiah SAW Jesus' glory, it was a glory that existed in John's past, Isaiah's present

I would like to expound all of Isaiah 6 one day, but possibly these forums and even some of the debates often only skim the surface as in the case of Dr. White's claims on Isaiah 6, and Dr. Tuggy's failure to properly respond. Also these forums often attract participants that only use a few texts to "prove" their shallow theology. Sometimes some Commentaries go a little further, but can lack a proper doctrinal basis to understand some of this. I consider Isaiah 6 as one of the most difficult chapters because it appears to have many layers and also the interaction of Isaiah himself within the vision.

I would like to add a few observations on Isaiah 2. I consider the early chapters of Isaiah are sequential, that is Isaiah starting at chapter 2 and say up to Isaiah 12. For this reason, I consider Isaiah 2 as the first major vision given by God to Isaiah and as such it's importance cannot be ignored, as Isaiah is the first and considered the most important of the writing prophets. My impression is that Isaiah was only one of the many prophets in the (or a) School of the Prophets under the tutelage of Zechariah the prophet. Uzziah gave heed to the counsel of Zechariah, but when Zechariah passed from the scene Uzziah became proud and lifted up. Isaiah would have been one of the prophets in the King's Court, but Uzziah did not listen to Isaiah even after the vision of Isaiah 2.

Isaiah 2 has Uzziah's reign written all over it. In contrast to Uzziah's obsession with weapons of warfare, and his great military prowess, Isaiah speaks of a time of peace and cessation of warfare and the turning of the weapons of war into agricultural instruments. Isaiah 2 sets the pattern for many prophecies, in that the final result is shown first, and then this is followed by some of the detail that occurs to bring about the end result. In the case of Uzziah, his pride was smitten and the Land suffered a major earthquake. The earthquake was so significant that it is mentioned in Zechariah 14.

Actually this gives a clue to the layers in Isaiah 2. The obsession with weapons of war in Uzziah's time and his trust in these, rather than his trust in God brought upon his own personal failure and also the degradation of the nation. The modern day equivalent is Israel in the Land today, their reliance more on their military expertise and skill, rather than their trust in God. They too will suffer greatly, not only by a northern invader, but also by a great earthquake, and only then will a significant remnant turn to God and accept Jesus when he returns and stands again on the Mount of Olives.

Now Isaiah 2 is parallel with Isaiah 6, but Isaiah 6 is remarkably personal to Isaiah, a greater vision opening up the Most Holy of the Temple, and his humbling, and his special personal commissioning. But I suggest we have the same structure as Isaiah 2. Here is the King that will sit upon the Throne of Isaiah 2 in the 1000 years. Isaiah 2 is the opening vision, but Isaiah 6 adds more detail. Similar to Isaiah 2 with the humbling of the proud, and the earthquake, we are given some of the detail and method whereby this final vision of Isaiah 6 would be accomplished. I suggest we have in rather difficult figures, aspects of the Ministry of Jesus, and this is one reason why John quotes Isaiah 6 and Isaiah 53 in John 12.

As well as the wings of the Seraphim, you could also possibly consider, "Why Seraphim?" and why not "Cherubim" and how are they different. And how and why are the Living Creatures of Revelation 4 different again. These are some of the questions I have contemplated over the years, and have come to a reasonable conclusion, but possibly not agreed to even by my spiritual mates in the meeting, and I doubt very few would agree here.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greetings Alfred Persson,

This is an interesting observation but I differ. I am not particularly interested in your Greek grammar.

Its God's grammar, not mine. Greek is a very precise language, God chose it to communicate His will. To ignore the grammar is to ignore the revelation of scripture written by God through men.

Another flaw in your interpretation, you assume Isaiah 2 and 6 are parallels. The context is against that, one is a vision of a future kingdom, the other a vision of God to Isaiah. They aren't the same, and not the same time frame.

You have an unsupported theory you overlaid upon the text, to deny the revelation Jesus is Yahweh and that Isaiah saw Jesus' glory just as the apostle John says. If John hadn't repeatedly shown Jesus is God (John 1:1, 14 etc), then one might dispute the grammar. But the revelation is consistent with his entire gospel and his epistles.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Alfred Persson,

Another flaw in your interpretation, you assume Isaiah 2 and 6 are parallels. The context is against that, one is a vision of a future kingdom, the other a vision of God to Isaiah. They aren't the same, and not the same time frame.

Despite your Greek, I will hold to the view that they are parallel. It is not a vision of God, or of your Trinity God as there is only one Person. It is a vision of Jesus exalted and representing God in the Future Age and provides a picture of some of the detail missing in Isaiah 2.

1. Is there such a Temple in Heaven? If Jesus is sitting upon the Throne, where is God the Father - Compare Psalm 110:1 where we have two Beings?
2. Do you believe that the Seraphim are a different order of Angels, similar to the Cherubim, or some other creation? Like the Cherubim of Ezekiel 1, do they have four different faces each? or the Living Ones of Revelation 4, which have only one face each, but the four are each different from the others? What are the wings of the Seraphim of Isaiah 6 indicating? Why do the Seraphim and Living Ones have six wings each, but the Cherubim have only four wings?

Isaiah 6:1–4 (KJV): 1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. 2 Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. 3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. 4 And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke.

Looking at the text above for additional detail:
3. Why does it say "the whole earth is full of his glory"? Was that in the time of Isaiah, or is it relating to the Kingdom Age:
Numbers 14:21 (KJV): But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD.
Isaiah 11:9 (KJV): They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.
Habakkuk 2:14 (KJV): For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.

4. And did the Temple in Heaven become filled with smoke?

Isaiah 6:6 (KJV): Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar:
5. Is there an Altar of Burnt Offering adjacent to the Temple in Heaven?
6. Did the individual Seraphim fly all the way from this Altar in Heaven and literally burn or cleanse Isaiah's lips with this coal? are there tongs in Heaven? Is this vision a mixture of a Temple in heaven and an Altar on earth?

When you answer most of the above sensibly, then I will open my Greek Grammar, J.W. Wenham The Elements of NT Greek, which is a bit dusty at the moment and took a fair while to find.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greetings Alfred Persson,

Despite your Greek, I will hold to the view that they are parallel. It is not a vision of God, or of your Trinity God as there is only one Person. It is a vision of Jesus exalted and representing God in the Future Age and provides a picture of some of the detail missing in Isaiah 2.

1. Is there such a Temple in Heaven? If Jesus is sitting upon the Throne, where is God the Father - Compare Psalm 110:1 where we have two Beings?
2. Do you believe that the Seraphim are a different order of Angels, similar to the Cherubim, or some other creation? Like the Cherubim of Ezekiel 1, do they have four different faces each? or the Living Ones of Revelation 4, which have only one face each, but the four are each different from the others? What are the wings of the Seraphim of Isaiah 6 indicating? Why do the Seraphim and Living Ones have six wings each, but the Cherubim have only four wings?

Isaiah 6:1–4 (KJV): 1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. 2 Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. 3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. 4 And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke.

Looking at the text above for additional detail:
3. Why does it say "the whole earth is full of his glory"? Was that in the time of Isaiah, or is it relating to the Kingdom Age:
Numbers 14:21 (KJV): But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD.
Isaiah 11:9 (KJV): They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.
Habakkuk 2:14 (KJV): For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.

4. And did the Temple in Heaven become filled with smoke?

Isaiah 6:6 (KJV): Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar:
5. Is there an Altar of Burnt Offering adjacent to the Temple in Heaven?
6. Did the individual Seraphim fly all the way from this Altar in Heaven and literally burn or cleanse Isaiah's lips with this coal? are there tongs in Heaven? Is this vision a mixture of a Temple in heaven and an Altar on earth?

When you answer most of the above sensibly, then I will open my Greek Grammar, J.W. Wenham The Elements of NT Greek, which is a bit dusty at the moment and took a fair while to find.

Kind regards
Trevor

"Holy Holy Holy" arises because God is Three Divine Persons in One.

Of course God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are in Jesus, and He in them. They are One.

You agree its a vision of Jesus, but project it far into the future with no indication in the text that is true. Everything naturally read, indicates its a vision of Jesus THEN, not in the future.

 

[Josef]

Greetings Alfred Persson,

Despite your Greek, I will hold to the view that they are parallel. It is not a vision of God, or of your Trinity God as there is only one Person. It is a vision of Jesus exalted and representing God in the Future Age and provides a picture of some of the detail missing in Isaiah 2.

1. Is there such a Temple in Heaven? If Jesus is sitting upon the Throne, where is God the Father - Compare Psalm 110:1 where we have two Beings?
2. Do you believe that the Seraphim are a different order of Angels, similar to the Cherubim, or some other creation? Like the Cherubim of Ezekiel 1, do they have four different faces each? or the Living Ones of Revelation 4, which have only one face each, but the four are each different from the others? What are the wings of the Seraphim of Isaiah 6 indicating? Why do the Seraphim and Living Ones have six wings each, but the Cherubim have only four wings?

Isaiah 6:1–4 (KJV): 1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. 2 Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. 3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. 4 And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke.

Looking at the text above for additional detail:
3. Why does it say "the whole earth is full of his glory"? Was that in the time of Isaiah, or is it relating to the Kingdom Age:
Numbers 14:21 (KJV): But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD.
Isaiah 11:9 (KJV): They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.
Habakkuk 2:14 (KJV): For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.

4. And did the Temple in Heaven become filled with smoke?

Isaiah 6:6 (KJV): Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar:
5. Is there an Altar of Burnt Offering adjacent to the Temple in Heaven?
6. Did the individual Seraphim fly all the way from this Altar in Heaven and literally burn or cleanse Isaiah's lips with this coal? are there tongs in Heaven? Is this vision a mixture of a Temple in heaven and an Altar on earth?

When you answer most of the above sensibly, then I will open my Greek Grammar, J.W. Wenham The Elements of NT Greek, which is a bit dusty at the moment and took a fair while to find.

Kind regards
Trevor

Hey All,
TrevorL, why is it impossible for God to appear as three distinctually different personalities? What prohibits an all powerful God from doing this without violating God's nature? Just because we don't understand this doesn't mean that God cannot do this.
In the New Testament I read that the God has the ability to portray Himself in three distinctually different personalities that the Bible calls God, yet they still remain the one God.

Luke 3:22
And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

We see the three different personalities interacting differently, but in coequal agreement.

The Father is called God and that is without question.

John called Jesus God. All of the dancing around the Greek doesn't change the accepted english.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Was the Word (separate), the Word was with God (separate), the Word was God (same as).

John 1:2-3 The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

It is clear that Jesus was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by Him (Jesus).
Nothing was made without Him (Jesus).
Therefore If Jesus made all things, He did not make Himself.
He (Jesus) had to exist before all things, in order to make all things.
This is clear

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

And the Word was made flesh -- which carries with it the truth that Jesus existed before He was made flesh.
His glory was equal to the Father's. (Same as)

If Jesus is equal to God, then He is God.

Acts 5:3-4 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.

Luke called the Holy Spirit God directly.
This is clear.

Thus all three personalities make up the one God.

How do you come up with a different conclusion?

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz

 

[Smidge]

My experience is that the simplest and most logical explanation of things is ususally the correct one. The Trinity graph proves how llogical and incoherent it is. Trinitarians can't admit that the doctrine originated from Catholicism, a Church they often label as false and anti-Christ.

Google Image Result for https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/Moonity.png

The hypostatic union basically whitewashes all the contradictions of co-equality. Why not just believe Jesus when he said he doesn't know when he'll return or that the Father is greater?

AnotherOne major contradiction is the problem that 'if' Jesus was God and we know God cannot be tempted and cannot sin, that means that Jesus "being God" could not have been tempted to sin anyway because after all - he's God! That alone makes the cross a hoax and of no effect and makes Jesus is a fraud. Jesus was anointed but fully man.

Hebrews 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like them,[k] FULLY HUMAN IN EVERY WAY, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Alfred Persson and Josef,

"Holy Holy Holy" arises because God is Three Divine Persons in One.

My tentative understanding of this is that it is speaking about the Most Holy portion of the Temple. Isaiah in vision looked into the Temple, and the Vail was drawn aside, and instead of seeing the Ark of the Covenant with the Mercy Seat and the static golden Cherubim protecting and observing and the Shekinah Glory in the midst, he sees Jesus in glory sitting upon the Davidic Throne surrounded by active Seraphim.

Of course God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are in Jesus, and He in them. They are One.

Yes, but not one Person or one Being John 10:30, John 17. You have not explained where you consider God the Father is located when Isaiah sees Jesus in Heaven on the Throne. Does Jesus have a separate Throne in Heaven, or is Psalm 110:1 the true picture, and this only after the resurrection? Or do you consider Psalm 110:1 current in David's day as he "heard" God the Father, Yahweh invite Jesus to sit in His Throne "Yahweh said", not "Yahweh will say". Psalm 8 also has "the Prophetic Past", but Psalm 8 is not really considered by Trinitarians.

You agree its a vision of Jesus, but project it far into the future with no indication in the text that is true. Everything naturally read, indicates its a vision of Jesus THEN, not in the future.

I suggest that it is parallel with Isaiah 2 and has the same structure, with verses after the initial vision explaining how this end vision will be accomplished. In Isaiah 6 the end result of Jesus shown in glory in the Kingdom, is initially by Isaiah responding to the call to go and preach against Judah, who would in the process resist his preaching, and they would become deaf, blind and hard of heart, and would be because of Manasseh go into captivity. Isaiah's name represents "The Salvation of Yah" and he opened up the greatest prophecies concerning the future Messiah, so much so that his Book is sometimes called the Fifth gospel. This is the first layer, or as it was fulfilled in Isaiah's day.

But the N.T. reveals that this is prophetic of the Ministry of Jesus and their rejection of him, resulting in him being lifted up in crucifixion and the overthrow of Judah and Jerusalem and the Mosaic system of things in AD 70. It is interesting to consider the quotation of Isaiah 6:9-10 in the NT as it shows this gradual rejection of Jesus, culminating in the decision by Caiaphas to crucify Jesus, and hence the quotation in John 12. Isaiah 6:9-10 is also quoted in Acts where the majority of the Jews in Rome rejected Paul's testimony. Thus Isaiah 6 is the same structure as Isaiah 2, and is a basis of this genre of prophetic method.

TrevorL, why is it impossible for God to appear as three distinctually different personalities?

I feel that I have adequately answered the Trinity position and not willing to spend more time, as I have to do the shopping and other duties this morning. I find the Trinity position so obviously empty.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Whatever]

God is immutable. He never "becomes something".

But that is not what John says.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
But then at a specific time
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . . . .

For eternity past, the Word existed without flesh. Then at a time in history, the Word became flesh.
The Godhead is immutable, but the second person of the trinity took on flesh, and now is in Heaven as a resurrected human being.

1Co_15:49 And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
1Timothy_2:5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

The second person of the trinity was never a man before. Now He is.

I know, the divine and human natures are separate, but they constitute a unique person now. That person is King of kings and Lord or lords, and I don't see how the Word can ever now just leave the "flesh" He became and go back to being non flesh.

 

[Fastfredy0]

But that is not what John says.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
But then at a specific time
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . . . .

For eternity past, the Word existed without flesh. Then at a time in history, the Word became flesh.
The Godhead is immutable, but the second person of the trinity took on flesh, and now is in Heaven as a resurrected human being.

I think I see the point you are making. We have an apparent contradiction in the Bible. We have:
1) God is immutable (Malachi 3:6a For I the Lord do not change; Hebrews 13:8; James 1:17; Job 23:13; etc.
2) Verses like you mentioned in which God "becomes" something .... or God relented

My solution is the say the point 1) is true and that point 2) can be explained by
... verses like God relented are anthropormorphic
... verses that say God became something is God using a second nature to communicate to man and accomplish His
purpose (hypostatic union). It's like me putting on a suit. I do not change but I look different.

For eternity past, the Word existed without flesh. Then at a time in history, the Word became flesh.
The Godhead is immutable, but the second person of the trinity took on flesh, and now is in Heaven as a resurrected human being.

There is a another theory ... that God is simultaneously in all points of time. Thus, God is not resisted by time. Now, this is getting above my pay grade.

The second person of the trinity was never a man before. Now He is.

I hear you. But it is incumbent upon you to explain what it means when God says He is immutable. I gave my understanding.
Your understanding also results in another biblical contradiction. If God changes then He is not eternal for what He was is not what He becomes and if what He was not longer exists then that contradicts the idea of the eternality of God.

I know, the divine and human natures are separate, but they constitute a unique person now. That person is King of kings and Lord or lords, and I don't see how the Word can ever now just leave the "flesh" He became and go back to being non flesh.

I have some difficulties with it too.
God is everywhere and just because He decides to wear a suit (a human nature) that is time and space constricted doesn't mean He is not still omnipresent .. or not immutable ... or not eternal .... or changed by plan or anything else about His nature.
Just because He causes thunder one moment and the next moment or controls a human nature in time does not mean He's changed. God is invisible too and just because He is controlling a human nature while He is doing a billion other things does not mean He has become something He was not before. Just because I hold a hammer in my hand doesn't mean I've changed.

There was no change in God when he began to create the world in time. The creation was a real change, but the change was not subjectively in God, but in the creature; the creature began to be what it was not before. Creation is considered as active or passive. Active creation is the will and power of God to create. This is from eternity, because God willed from eternity to create in time; this never had beginning, for God never began in time to understand anything, to will anything, or to be able to do anything; but he always understood and always willed those things which he determined from eternity to produce in time. The decree of God may be taken for the act decreeing, that is eternal and the same, or for the object decreed, that is in time; so that there may be a change in the object, but not in the will whereby the object doth exist. There was no change in God by the act of creation, because there was no new will in him. There was no new act of his will which was not before. The creation began in time, but the will of creating was from eternity (Ephesians 1:9, 11b). The work was new, but the decree whence that new work sprung was as ancient as the Ancient of Days. So when God is the author of a new work, he is not changed, because he works it by an eternal will and an eternal power.

There was no change in the Divine nature of the Son, when he assumed human nature. There was an union of the two natures, but no change of the Deity into the humanity, or of the humanity into the Deity: both preserved their peculiar properties. The humanity was changed by a communication of excellent gifts from the divine nature, not by being brought into an equality with it, for that was impossible that a creature should become equal to the Creator. He took the “form of a servant,” but he lost not the form of God; he despoiled not himself of the perfections of the Deity, he was indeed emptied, “and became of no reputation” (Philippians 2:7); but he did not cease to be God, though he was reputed to be only a man. The glory of his divinity was not extinguished nor diminished, though it was obscured and darkened, under the veil of our infirmities; but there was no more change in the hiding of it, than there is in the body of the sun when it is shadowed by the interposition of a cloud. When the soul is united to the body, doth it lose any of those perfections that are proper to its nature? Is there any change either in the substance or qualities of it? No; but it makes a change in the body, and of a dull lump it makes it a living mass, conveys vigor and strength to it, and, by its power, quickens it to sense and motion, so did the divine nature and human remain entire; there was no change of the one into the other. Stephen Charnock

...anyways ... that's my view point

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greetings again Alfred Persson and Josef,

My tentative understanding of this is that it is speaking about the Most Holy portion of the Temple. Isaiah in vision looked into the Temple, and the Vail was drawn aside, and instead of seeing the Ark of the Covenant with the Mercy Seat and the static golden Cherubim protecting and observing and the Shekinah Glory in the midst, he sees Jesus in glory sitting upon the Davidic Throne surrounded by active Seraphim.

Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. (Rev. 20:11 NKJ)

The Son is the Judge so here it is God the Son seated on the throne:

"For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, (Jn. 5:22 NKJ)

There is only one Throne, One God. In heaven God is manifested to finite angels and men in a "form" and usually its Jesus who is speaking, He is the Word of God:

5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
(Phil. 2:5-7 NKJ)

The Father also speaks from this "form of God" (a localized presence of the infinite Godhead Father Son Holy Spirit), and sometimes the Holy Spirit speaks from the four horns of the golden altar:

Then the sixth angel sounded: And I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, (Rev. 9:13 NKJ)

Therefore, the incarnate Son of God, Jesus the Christ in human nature, can be seated at the right hand of God the Father seated on His throne.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Yes, but not one Person or one Being John 10:30, John 17. You have not explained where you consider God the Father is located when Isaiah sees Jesus in Heaven on the Throne. Does Jesus have a separate Throne in Heaven, or is Psalm 110:1 the true picture, and this only after the resurrection? Or do you consider Psalm 110:1 current in David's day as he "heard" God the Father, Yahweh invite Jesus to sit in His Throne "Yahweh said", not "Yahweh will say". Psalm 8 also has "the Prophetic Past", but Psalm 8 is not really considered by Trinitarians.

I consider your question a "red herring". Infinite God is everywhere. He manifests a localized presence to finite creatures, angels and men. However, the entire metaverse (heaven and the heaven of heavens and the earth) consist and have their being in God the Son:

16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.
18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell,
20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. (Col. 1:16-20 NKJ)


As I explained in the post above this, there is only One Throne the One God sits in, revealing Himself to His finite creatures in heaven.

The Father can be seated on this throne, and the incarnate Jesus at His right hand, without contradiction or the addition of thrones.

When Isaiah saw the "form of God" on His throne he was looking at Jesus, as John the apostle reveals by Holy Spirit.

It is the "form of God" so both the Father and Holy Spirit manifest themselves through it also. However, as Jesus is the Word of God its usually Him speaking. Same is true everywhere we see the divine name Yahweh used. A thorough study of the tetragrammaton YHWH indicates it appears wherever God is entering into our sphere of existence, in a personal way with emotions etc., not just as transcendent Deity.

The Incarnation of Jesus is an "organic development" from the appearance of the "form of God" in heaven, the appearances of the "angel of YHWH" and tetragrammaton in the OT. When God reveals Himself to man, its as if the infinite is "sinking down" into our sphere of existence, while God is making Himself known in a localized personal way.

As Jesus did as the Voice of God walking in the Garden of Eden, the Word reveals the "glory of God" in the "face of Jesus Christ" the man:


5 For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus' sake.
6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. (2 Cor. 4:5-6 NKJ)

Therefore, if you see Jesus you see God:

8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us."
9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say,`Show us the Father '?
10 "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.
11 "Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. (Jn. 14:8-11 NKJ)

 

[Free]

Smidge You seem to have overlooked my response to you HERE.

My experience is that the simplest and most logical explanation of things is ususally the correct one.

And what would that be?

The Trinity graph proves how llogical and incoherent it is.

Are you referring to the diagram you link to below? What, specifically, is illogical about it?

Trinitarians can't admit that the doctrine originated from Catholicism, a Church they often label as false and anti-Christ.

This is know as poisoning the well. The doctrine of the Trinity originates in Scripture. The three, basic foundations of the Trinity are there and are continued in writings from the second century onwards. That it was more formally brought together in later centuries, whether by Catholics or others, is not relevant as to the truth of the matter.

The hypostatic union basically whitewashes all the contradictions of co-equality. Why not just believe Jesus when he said he doesn't know when he'll return or that the Father is greater?

AnotherOne major contradiction is the problem that 'if' Jesus was God and we know God cannot be tempted and cannot sin, that means that Jesus "being God" could not have been tempted to sin anyway because after all - he's God! That alone makes the cross a hoax and of no effect and makes Jesus is a fraud. Jesus was anointed but fully man.

Phil 2:5-8 is key here.

Hebrews 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like them,[k] FULLY HUMAN IN EVERY WAY, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

Given that that is just one passage of many that speaks of Christ, that is to take it out of context, including but not limited to, what is stated prior to that in Hebrews itself.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Alfred Persson,

As I explained in the post above this, there is only One Throne the One God sits in, revealing Himself to His finite creatures in heaven.
The Father can be seated on this throne, and the incarnate Jesus at His right hand, without contradiction or the addition of thrones.

No, I believe that the vision given in Psalm 110:1 contradicts your assessment. In Isaiah 6 Jesus is sitting on the future Davidic Temple Throne in Jerusalem.
Revelation 3:21–22 (KJV): 21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. 22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greetings again Alfred Persson,

No, I believe that the vision given in Psalm 110:1 contradicts your assessment. In Isaiah 6 Jesus is sitting on the future Davidic Temple Throne in Jerusalem.
Revelation 3:21–22 (KJV): 21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. 22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Kind regards
Trevor

Revelation teaches via symbols. The teaching communicated by a Throne is authority, just as Christ has the Father's authority ruling in His name, so also will the church seated with Christ. Its not about thrones, its about Christ is King and the church His kings and priests:

Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years. (Rev. 20:6 NKJ)

Psalm 110 is describing events before the Millennial Reign of Christ, during the crushing of Gog and Magog, and the Beast and his armies at Armageddon:

NKJ Psalm 110:1 <A Psalm of David.> The LORD said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool."
2 The LORD shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion. Rule in the midst of Your enemies!
3 Your people shall be volunteers In the day of Your power; In the beauties of holiness, from the womb of the morning, You have the dew of Your youth.
4 The LORD has sworn And will not relent, "You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek."
5 The Lord is at Your right hand; He shall execute kings in the day of His wrath.
6 He shall judge among the nations, He shall fill the places with dead bodies, He shall execute the heads of many countries.
7 He shall drink of the brook by the wayside; Therefore He shall lift up the head. (Ps. 110:1-111:1 NKJ)

After the rapture many volunteer joining Christ's holy myriads as they descend upon the earth to destroy all of God's enemies:

14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus.
15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep.
16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.
17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.
18 Therefore comfort one another with these words. (1 Thess. 4:14-18 NKJ)

The rapture happens before the bowls of wrath are poured out upon the Beast and his kingdom, during the time the "sign of Christ's presence" appears in the sky, an opening or Portal into the dimension of heaven through which Christ and His Holy Myriads will enter our sphere of existence. So there is some time between the rapture and Christ's descent, how much is unknown. Perhaps enough time for some "basic training":

14 Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat One like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle.
15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, "Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come for You to reap, for the harvest of the earth is ripe."
16 So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped. (Rev. 14:14-16 NKJ)

But the church doesn't play harps on clouds, they join Christ's Army to get a piece of the action:

11 Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war.
12 His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself.
13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses.
15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, "Come and gather together for the supper of the great God,
18 "that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great."
19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army.
20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.
21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh. (Rev. 19:11-20:1 NKJ)

Confirming an opening in the sky is the sign of Christ's coming (Mt. 24:3, 30) is in a first century text the Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles says:

And then the signs of the truth shall appear: first, a sign of an opening in heaven; then a sign of the sound of a trumpet; and the third sign, the resurrection of the dead. Now, not all of the dead but as was said, the Lord shall come and all the holy ones with him. Then the world will see the Lord coming upon the clouds of heaven.-Brannan, R. (Trans.). (2012). The Apostolic Fathers in English. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Who knows what the "opening in the sky" will look like, but it will be flashing lightning from east to west:

"For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. (Matt. 24:27 NKJ)

 

[Josef]

My experience is that the simplest and most logical explanation of things is ususally the correct one. The Trinity graph proves how llogical and incoherent it is. Trinitarians can't admit that the doctrine originated from Catholicism, a Church they often label as false and anti-Christ.

Google Image Result for https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/Moonity.png

The hypostatic union basically whitewashes all the contradictions of co-equality. Why not just believe Jesus when he said he doesn't know when he'll return or that the Father is greater?

AnotherOne major contradiction is the problem that 'if' Jesus was God and we know God cannot be tempted and cannot sin, that means that Jesus "being God" could not have been tempted to sin anyway because after all - he's God! That alone makes the cross a hoax and of no effect and makes Jesus is a fraud. Jesus was anointed but fully man.

Hebrews 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like them,[k] FULLY HUMAN IN EVERY WAY, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

Hey All,
Where is it written that God has to act logical?
If God can do anything that does not violate His nature, why is it not possible for Him to operate within three separate personalities, but still be the One God. We clearly see three separate persona being called God by the Bible. I admit I do not understand all of it. But I can read what the Bible says.

I have used this as an example before. Let's see if we can plug it in here:

Trinity is a word used to express the doctrine of the oneness of God as existing within the three distinct Persons (or personalities) of the one God. It is originates from the Greek word "trias." The first time "trias" was used was by Theophilus around 168-183 A D. The first time for the Latin term "trinitas" was by Tertullian in 220A.D. to express the Trinity doctrine. We can break down the doctrine to these four points:
1. There is only one God (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29, 32).
2. The Father is God and is a divine Person or Personality distinguishably different from the Son and the Holy Spirit. (Exo. 4:22-24, Isa. 44:6. 1Cor.8:6)
3. Jesus Christ is equally God, and is a divine Person distinguishably different from the Father and the Holy Spirit. (Deut. 18:15, Dan. 3:23-24, John 1.1; 14, John 5:18)
4. The Holy Spirit is equally God and a divine person distinguishably different from the Father and the Son. ( Genesis 1.2, Isa. 63:14, Matthew 28:19, Acts 5:3-4)

The doctrine of the Trinity was developed to help people understand the relationship between God as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Remember that, at this time 168-183 A.D., believers did not have access to a completed Bible as we do. They received their teaching through oral communication. So doctrines were introduced to help believers retain critical information.

So how can three distinct persons be one distinct person? This doesn't seem possible. How can three ones be one in total?

1 • One • I = 1 or One or I.

I can multiply any form of one in any order. Each of the ones are separate, distinct unto itself, yet they all equal each other to the point that any form may be used as the answer. That is probably as close as I can get to explaining the doctrine of the Trinity.

Have I fully explained the Trinity? Of course not. How can the finite (me) fully describe the infinite (God)?

This is not just Catholic Church teaching. This comes from the apostle's gospels, letters, and from Luke.

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz