"I and the Father are One."

[Thunderz7]

Once in a discussion on this topic, I commented that GOD is a triune GOD and man is created in HIS likeness and image.
I went on to say I am one person, but I am a father, I am a son, and I am a husband.
Then It was pointed out that I wasn't my own father.
And there it was, Jesus is something none of us could ever be.
We try to describe it in so many ways, but all of them come up short.
Trinity theory = lacking
Oneness doctrine = lacking
Triune GOD thoughts = lacking
as are all other described by human words.

 

[watchman F]

Once in a discussion on this topic, I commented that GOD is a triune GOD and man is created in HIS likeness and image.
I went on to say I am one person, but I am a father, I am a son, and I am a husband.
Then It was pointed out that I wasn't my own father.
And there it was, Jesus is something none of us could ever be.
We try to describe it in so many ways, but all of them come up short.
Trinity theory = lacking
Oneness doctrine = lacking
Triune GOD thoughts = lacking
as are all other described by human words.

I agree with this post 100% God is beyond are comprehension. Beyond anything thing we could explain. However as you say Jesus is His own Father, and therefore Oneness is the closest to biblical reality we have seen thus far in these discussions

 

[Danus]

I'd like to pose a question for you guys since this thread is new.

If there is one God, then who was Jesus?


These trinity discussions get pretty hairy,

I do not think elijah is promoting the trinity but Oneness.

#1 The Father is God, Jesus is God, The Holy Spirit is God.
#2 However Jesus Christ is also the Father and the Father is the Holy Spirit.
#3 In other words there is one God the Father, who came in a body (the Son) and who is the Eternal Spirit (the Holy Spirit). So we teach that the Father came in the flesh as Jesus, and is a Spirit ''The Holy Spirit''.
#4 So it is similar to the Trinity doctrine in that we have 3 who are one, but Oneness doctrine says that the 3 ''persons'' are not separate, but actually the same 1, who is God.

How about God the son then?

I think your question should read Danus.

I the only true God is the Father, and Jesus was not god the Father in the flesh, then who was Jesus?

God cannot be an answer.

How about God the son then?

 

[watchman F]

I'd like to pose a question for you guys since this thread is new.

If there is one God, then who was Jesus?


These trinity discussions get pretty hairy,

I do not think elijah is promoting the trinity but Oneness.

#1 The Father is God, Jesus is God, The Holy Spirit is God.
#2 However Jesus Christ is also the Father and the Father is the Holy Spirit.
#3 In other words there is one God the Father, who came in a body (the Son) and who is the Eternal Spirit (the Holy Spirit). So we teach that the Father came in the flesh as Jesus, and is a Spirit ''The Holy Spirit''.
#4 So it is similar to the Trinity doctrine in that we have 3 who are one, but Oneness doctrine says that the 3 ''persons'' are not separate, but actually the same 1, who is God.

How about God the son then?

I think your question should read Danus.

I the only true God is the Father, and Jesus was not god the Father in the flesh, then who was Jesus?

God cannot be an answer.

How about God the son then?

That is a man made term never found in the scripture Paul as well as Jesus him declare that the Father is the only true God.

1st Corinthians 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.
And when Jesus was praying to His Father He said this.
John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

These scripture confirm that there is but one god the Father so once again if the deity of Christ is not the Father, then Christ is not deity.

P.S. Of course scripture tells us He is God so...???

 

[elijah23]

I'd like to pose a question for you guys since this thread is new.

If there is one God, then who was Jesus?

God decided to come to earth as a man, I believe. That man was Jesus.

 

[elijah23]

You are still trying to accommodate your own man-made doctrine. I cannot communicate with you either because you are oneness; I cannot communicate with watchmanF either, You guys going in circular arguments without end.

take care.

I don’t think Watchman F and I are the first to believe there is only one God.

 

[Mysteryman]

Hi Danus :

LOL - Oh, I saw your # 3, which you could be suggesting angels , that would fit this # 3. Angels are sons of God as well , and they fit your # 3 correctly. However, God didn't send an angel. He sent his only begotten Son, and only # 4 fits perfectly.

Fair enough. I can go with your specific wording and replace 3 with it, or add it to the list as 4. We still have to use it to answer the question, and while I realize it dose sort of answer the question in saying Jesus was the Son of God, I need to get my head around what that means. I either have to place him on the same level as God, or place him less than God.

If I place him on the same level I bring into question of one God. One God or two? If I place him below God then I question if validity to do what he did. ....what to do? My only other option is to place him as God. That would solve the problem, but doe it pass the test?

I can except that Jesus was the son of God, but I see him as part of the God head which is one God. This gets us into that crazy mind-bending thing where we try to conceptualize what it is to be separate but one. I'm not sure its humanly possible to do it. .......it's like that old joke of placing a someone in a round room and telling then to stand in the corner. So what then becomes the best possible alternative based on all we know? What fits the best?

Hi Danus :

I think you need to pray and ask God to answer your question. I see that you are looking at this and considering things at this time.

I encourage you to just keep studying and praying.

Take care

 

[Danus]

Hi Danus :

I think you need to pray and ask God to answer your question. I see that you are looking at this and considering things at this time.

I encourage you to just keep studying and praying.

Take care

I can appreciate what your saying, but I'm cool with what I have of it. I was just fishing for thoughts. I've done some study on this, but I never get too far with it because there seem to be so many alt. views.

Thanks again.

 

[watchman F]

You are still trying to accommodate your own man-made doctrine. I cannot communicate with you either because you are oneness; I cannot communicate with watchmanF either, You guys going in circular arguments without end.

take care.

Sounds like you hate Oneness believers even more than you hate trinitarians? Do you simply hate all who accept the truth about Jesus' deity? I bet you would have really hated Thomas?

John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.

 

[Drew]

Jesus said:

“I and the Father are one.†John 10:30 RSV

Is this helpful in understanding who Jesus is?

Well, yes and no.

This text is often taken a clear statement of divinity on Jesus' part. That is not a correct interpretation. In Jesus' culture, it was not uncommon for someone who felt themselves to be acting in accordance with Israel's God to make such a statement.

It is not a statement of divinity - it is a statement of shared purpose.

Now, if anyone says that I am denying Jesus' divinity, I am most certainly doing no such thing.

I am merely pointing out that this particular statement is not really a claim to divinity.

 

[watchman F]

Jesus said:

“I and the Father are one.†John 10:30 RSV

Is this helpful in understanding who Jesus is?

Well, yes and no.

This text is often taken a clear statement of divinity on Jesus' part. That is not a correct interpretation. In Jesus' culture, it was not uncommon for someone who felt themselves to be acting in accordance with Israel's God to make such a statement.

It is not a statement of divinity - it is a statement of shared purpose.

Now, if anyone says that I am denying Jesus' divinity, I am most certainly doing no such thing.

I am merely pointing out that this particular statement is not really a claim to divinity.

I wouldn't totally disagree with you about that. That is why when giving a list of scripture that clearly show Jesus as God i leave John 10:30 out

Here is that list.
John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
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.

John 14
7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
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, Show us the Father?

John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.

Philippians 2
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

1st Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

1st John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

The Father Himself calls Jesus God in Hebrews
Hebrews 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

 

[elijah23]

Well, yes and no.

This text is often taken a clear statement of divinity on Jesus' part. That is not a correct interpretation. In Jesus' culture, it was not uncommon for someone who felt themselves to be acting in accordance with Israel's God to make such a statement.

It is not a statement of divinity - it is a statement of shared purpose.

Now, if anyone says that I am denying Jesus' divinity, I am most certainly doing no such thing.

I am merely pointing out that this particular statement is not really a claim to divinity.

My understanding is that this statement says that Jesus is God in flesh.

 

[Drew]

My understanding is that this statement says that Jesus is God in flesh.

I think you need to try to think like a first century Jew. The historical record shows that a statement of this kind was made my many people who felt they were acting on behalf of God.

But such people had no pretensions of divinity.

History matters. Culture matters. There many "messianic" movements in the period from about 100 BC to 130 AD. It was common for the leaders of such movement to claim that they were "one with God".

But, as far as we know, none of them were claiming to be "God in the flesh".

 

[elijah23]

My understanding is that this statement says that Jesus is God in flesh.

I think you need to try to think like a first century Jew. The historical record shows that a statement of this kind was made my many people who felt they were acting on behalf of God.

But such people had no pretensions of divinity.

History matters. Culture matters. There many "messianic" movements in the period from about 100 BC to 130 AD. It was common for the leaders of such movement to claim that they were "one with God".

But, as far as we know, none of them were claiming to be "God in the flesh".

I think the idea of “God in the flesh†might come from this Scripture:

[23] "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
and his name shall be called Emmanuel"
(which means, God with us). Matt 1:23 RSV

 

[Drew]

I think the idea of “God in the flesh†might come from this Scripture:

[23] "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
and his name shall be called Emmanuel"
(which means, God with us). Matt 1:23 RSV

Well, I would agree that this text - the Matthew 1:23 one, probably endorses the divinity of Jesus.

I am the last person who would deny the divinity of Jesus. I am merely suggesting that the "I and the Father are One" teaching does not establish Jesus' divinity.

 

[rosswell]

John 1

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 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.

 

[Ashua]

The problem is with the Hebrew words Elohiym and echad.

Deuteronomy 6:4
?????? ?????????? ?????? ?????????? ?????? ???????

Hear O Israel: YHVH thy God (elohiym) is one (echad) YHVH.

Elohiym:

The root El means "mighty one" or simply"God" the suffix "iym" in Hebrew denotes plurality. It is equivalent to the English "S" or "ES" (Boats, horses, etc)

However, the Hebrew Elohiym is ambiguous as it can be plural or singular.

1) (plural)

a) rulers, judges

b) divine ones

c) angels

d) gods

2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)

a) god, goddess

b) godlike one

c) works or special possessions of God

d) the (true) God

e) God

The second part of this equation is Echad

1) one (number)

a) one (number)

b) each, every

c) a certain

d) an (indefinite article)

e) only, once, once for all

f) one...another, the one...the other, one after another, one by one

g) first

h) eleven (in combination), eleventh (ordinal)


Looking at this verse alone would suggest that God is numerically one.

Looking at how echad is used throughout the scriptures, it is normally used in the absolute form of one: HOWEVER there are some strange instances where it is used to unify more than one.

Example:

Genesis 2:24

24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be (echad) one flesh.

Colossians 2:9

For in him dwelleth all the fulness of divinity bodily.

If he is only 1/3 of Elohiym, why is it that the FULLNESS of divinity is within him?

Anyways the whole trinity concept is strangely not something the new testament covers head on. I'm not sure we should teach it or dispel it. God will reveal his mysteries one day. Until then, except he open my eyes: I am content to worship God almighty through Yeshua the Messiah, the son of the living God.

 

[Pard]

The idea of a Triune God is not foreign to the Tanakh.

Where do we see YWHW in the plural?

Gen. 1:26 "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."'

(We also see this in Gen. 2:22 and 11:7)

Isiah 6:8 "Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?"

And I said, "Here am I. Send me!"'

(We also see this in Isiah 48:16 and 61:1)

There are other passages, I just felt six was enough .

The very first line of the Bible reads: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Now, the translation confusion is rather simple. The word God is singular in our English translation, but if we go to the Hebrew translation we see it is actually the plural word for God, i.e. Gods (Actually, the word is "Elohiym" in Hebrew and it refers to more than two gods).

How do we know that there are not just multiple gods? (This is just for the sake of making it known, we all know their is only one God!) We turn to Deuteronomy 6:4 and it explicitly tells us that the Lord of Israel is the ONE God.

It would appear that there is a contradiction in the Tanakh and until Christ came along and the NT clarified this that contradiction remained, but this is not so! Genesis 1:2 reads: "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. "It says "Spirit of God", we as Christians know this as the Holy Spirit, our gift from God for accepting Jesus as our Lord and Savior. So there we have it, God the Father was at least accompanied by one other form, God the Spirit (And we know from the Hebrew word "Elohim" that there has to be MORE than 2 so...).

Next we go to the very next line, again! Genesis 1:3 reads: "Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. " You see, the line that says "God said", that means Jesus. How do we know this? Because Jesus is the Word of God (John 1:1-3). Whenever we see the Lord speaking int he Old Testament, we as Christians know that it is Christ who is speaking, because He is the Word. But, how would the Jews know? We turn again to Isiah for that,

Isiah 48:1 "'Come near me and listen to this:
"From the first announcement I have not spoken in secret;
at the time it happens, I am there."
And now the Sovereign Lord has sent me,
with his Spirit.'"

Now, I'll be yelled at for "twisting" scripture, and hopefully that person will just up and block me. Though, I must wonder, is it possible to look at the Tanakh and fully understand it without the Gospel? We are often told that the Jews are the first and last say on the Tanakh, however if they have not read the Gospel, are they really all that "enlightened" in all the intricate workings of the Tanakh? I'd like to get a messianic Jew's take on what I have said above.

Also, for the person who does say that the Jews know so much more about the Tanakh, I'd like to point out that they spend FAR more time reading the Talmud than they do the Tanakh. If you do not understand what I just said... Imagine, instead of reading the Bible, reading the sparknotes version of the Bible with commentary plus a lot of extra junk added in the last 2000 years

 

[shad]

My understanding is that this statement says that Jesus is God in flesh.

That is not saying that Jesus is God:

Jesus is God's Representative and He does the will of His Father. So it is the same as Father Himself giving us the messages. Jesus is not merely a representative, He was sent to be the Lamb; this makes totally different from other God's messengers.

 

[Oats]

Jesus is clearly God...I don't even see a need to argue it...