Is the one God the trinity or the Father?

[wavy]

I can only find support for the latter:

Malachi 2:10; Ephesians 4:6; 1 Corinthians 8:6.

Not to say the title elohim/theos is not applied to Yeshua and the Spirit (a different subject), but that that when the "one God" is discussed in scripture, it is evidently referring to the Father. It is he that is supreme and over and above all (John 10:29; Ephesians 4:6).

Other supportive "one God" passages indicative of the Father include John 17:3 (Yeshua speaking to the Father); 1 Timothy 1:17 (only the Father is invisible), 1 Timothy 2:5 ("God" here cannot = trinity as Yeshua said he was the way to the Father [John 14:6 -- his role as a mediator] not the way to the trinity), and 1 John 5:20 (where John refers back to what occured in John 17:3).

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+


It should pointed out that according to trinitarian theology their is only one God.

However, to beleive in the Trinity is to beleive in one God in three Divine Persons.

Their are arguments like "Well, how can the Son come after the Father?
If Jesus is God then he could not have been created. "

LOL.. If you were asking me to explain God's eternity..You'd be asking the wrong guy. In the book of Revelation, however, we read that the Lord God is the "beginning and the end" and later Jesus says to John, "I am the beginning and the end."

Another thing to consider, why would Jesus tell us to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."? Why not, "Baptize in the name of God the Father" Their is a unity here.

 

[JM]

"...let US create man in OUR image..." The Hebrew is plural and it should be noted that no major translation parts from the plural meaning. Jesus speaks from both His divine nature and His humanity, we need to remember this in context..."I thrust" God doesn't thrust...but the man Christ Jesus did...

 

[wavy]

It should pointed out that according to trinitarian theology their is only one God.

And according to scripture, that one God is the Father...

However, to beleive in the Trinity is to beleive in one God in three Divine Persons.

Above.

Their are arguments like "Well, how can the Son come after the Father?
If Jesus is God then he could not have been created. "

LOL.. If you were asking me to explain God's eternity..You'd be asking the wrong guy. In the book of Revelation, however, we read that the Lord God is the "beginning and the end" and later Jesus says to John, "I am the beginning and the end."

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying Yeshua was created. I am saying he is not the "one God". He came from within the Father (John 16:27).

The purpose of Yeshua is to direct all glory to the Father and lead us to the Father (John 14:6). Not to understand his "tri-unity". One thing I would ask a trinitarian is, "why is the goal to find a way to the Father?"

Another thing to consider, why would Jesus tell us to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."? Why not, "Baptize in the name of God the Father" Their is a unity here.

Perhaps. But nothing here indicates "3 co-equal distinct persons in a Godhead that are of one substance and nature called the 'trinity'".

 

[mutzrein]

"...let US create man in OUR image..." The Hebrew is plural and it should be noted that no major translation parts from the plural meaning. Jesus speaks from both His divine nature and His humanity, we need to remember this in context..."I thrust" God doesn't thrust...but the man Christ Jesus did...

I can't quite get the drift of what you are saying here JM. Would you mind expanding for one unlearned wretch such as me.
Thanks

 

[thessalonian]

How many of these threads, denying the truth of who God is do we need on this board?

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the word WAS GOD!

And the Word BECAME FLESH and dwelt among us.

Now quite clearly the Word that was with God and was God was Jesus who became flesh. Now I don't really care if you don't like the word Trinity. Near as I can tell you believe that Jesus and the Father are not the same so your not a modalist, which has it's problems with many other passages, but Jesus was God and God is etenal, not created. All this passage says is that the God who always existed took on flesh and became one of us. Why did the spirit of Christ have to begin when Christ was born?

So if you don't like the word trinity don't use it but realize that Jesus is eternal God, the Father is eternal God, and the Holy Spirit is Eternal God, but unlike the natures of creatures in visible creation, these three are one God. I won't claim it's easy to grasp but that is the only way the Bible works out and I trust God and his revelation that has been passed down for 2000 years on the matter.

Blessings

 

[Sothenes]

The purpose of Yeshua is to direct all glory to the Father and lead us to the Father (John 14:6). Not to understand his "tri-unity". One thing I would ask a trinitarian is, "why is the goal to find a way to the Father?"

"But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear."-Isaiah 59:2

If your iniquities have separated you from God then your goal is to find a way to the Father. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."-John 14:6

You said that the purpose of Yeshua is to direct all glory to the Father, but that is partially true because the Bible says,"And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one."-John 17:22

 

[Sothenes]

Another thing to consider, why would Jesus tell us to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."? Why not, "Baptize in the name of God the Father" Their is a unity here.

One better is Acts 2:38 which says,"..be baptized....in the name of Jesus Christ...."

 

[Sothenes]

How many of these threads, denying the truth of who God is do we need on this board?

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the word WAS GOD!

And the Word BECAME FLESH and dwelt among us.

Now quite clearly the Word that was with God and was God was Jesus who became flesh.

"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."-Matthew 1:23

It is really simple that the Bible calls Jesus "God with us" and they don't believe the Bible or else they would believe that Jesus is "God with us". Jehovah said,"before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me." (Isaiah 43:10) so either Jesus is God or Jehovah is the first God and Jesus is the second God but Isaiah says that there is no God formed before Jehovah or after which means that the only possibility of the scriptures being correct is if Jesus is God. What are you going to do with this Jesus? The others in this forum are saying that Jesus and God are not the same "Person" which is true but they mean "Person" to mean that Jesus isn't God which is false. They are saying that Jesus was created but the fact is that Satan said,"In view of the fact that you are Son of God by virtue of your participation in the divine essence of deity, speak, to the end that these stones become loaves of bread."-Matthew 4:3 Kenneth Wuest Translation

Read "The Diety of Jesus Christ" by Dr. Walter Martin and scroll down the link until you find it.

http://www.waltermartin.org/jehwit.html#diety

 

[mutzrein]

How many of these threads, denying the truth of who God is do we need on this board?

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the word WAS GOD!

And the Word BECAME FLESH and dwelt among us.

Now quite clearly the Word that was with God and was God was Jesus who became flesh. Now I don't really care if you don't like the word Trinity. Near as I can tell you believe that Jesus and the Father are not the same so your not a modalist, which has it's problems with many other passages, but Jesus was God and God is etenal, not created. All this passage says is that the God who always existed took on flesh and became one of us. Why did the spirit of Christ have to begin when Christ was born?

So if you don't like the word trinity don't use it but realize that Jesus is eternal God, the Father is eternal God, and the Holy Spirit is Eternal God, but unlike the natures of creatures in visible creation, these three are one God. I won't claim it's easy to grasp but that is the only way the Bible works out and I trust God and his revelation that has been passed down for 2000 years on the matter.

Blessings

Thess.

People like myself who deny the doctrine that you espouse, do so, not to deny the truth of who God is, but to show it.

Jesus, the son of God, says that He is the truth . . . and whom the Son sets free is free indeed. Now I can tell you that I have been set free. Free from the bondage of sin. Free from the grip of death. Free to walk in the newness of life that can only come by the power of the Holy Spirit through Christ my Lord. I am free from the doctrines and traditions of man that seek to keep him under bondage. I am free to worship my Heavenly Father in Spirit and in Truth.

Your comment about Jesus being the Word and the Word being God is not understood, it seems, by the many. Now I am not 'educated' in the ways of man so to speak, but I can assure you of this, God by His grace has taught me much. In sincerity and humililty I can say that God has revealed to me the things needful for me to understand at the time he chooses and I can say with absolute certainty that there is no conflict in that John 1 statement which seems to be used as one of the mainstays of trinitarians.

As far as your other comments are concerned they are just the result of a doctrine that has been built on a wrong premise.

 

[Sothenes]

How many of these threads, denying the truth of who God is do we need on this board?

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the word WAS GOD!

And the Word BECAME FLESH and dwelt among us.

Now quite clearly the Word that was with God and was God was Jesus who became flesh.

Thess.

People like myself who deny the doctrine that you espouse, do so, not to deny the truth of who God is, but to show it.

Jesus, the son of God, says that He is the truth . . . and whom the Son sets free is free indeed. Now I can tell you that I have been set free. Free from the bondage of sin. Free from the grip of death. Free to walk in the newness of life that can only come by the power of the Holy Spirit through Christ my Lord. I am free from the doctrines and traditions of man that seek to keep him under bondage. I am free to worship my Heavenly Father in Spirit and in Truth.

Your comment about Jesus being the Word and the Word being God is not understood, it seems, by the many. Now I am not 'educated' in the ways of man so to speak, but I can assure you of this, God by His grace has taught me much. In sincerity and humililty I can say that God has revealed to me the things needful for me to understand at the time he chooses and I can say with absolute certainty that there is no conflict in that John 1 statement which seems to be used as one of the mainstays of trinitarians.

As far as your other comments are concerned they are just the result of a doctrine that has been built on a wrong premise.

Jesus is the "Word" and the "Word" is translated "Logos". Vine's says that it means 'the expression of thought" in connection with (2) the phrase "the word of the Lord", i.e., "the revealed will of God" is "used of a direct revelation given by Christ, 1 Thess. 4:15 of the gospel."

Something which is self explanatory is that behind every thought is that there is a thinker. Are we getting somewhere?

 

[BradtheImpaler]

"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."-Matthew 1:23

Jehu means "Yahweh is he". Did that make anyone named Jehu GOD IN THE FLESH? I don't think so. Names that contained or referred to the name of God in that culture were given out of reverance for the Creator, not to imply that the child actually was somehow God himself - the very notion of which would be blasphemous and absurd.

Oh, BTW, the other problem is Jesus was not named Emmanuel anyhow. Funny how that doesn't occur to most? Most people only see what they want to see, and they only want to see what they've been indoctrinated with.

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

Jehu means "Yahweh is he". Did that make anyone named Jehu GOD IN THE FLESH? I don't think so. Names that contained or referred to the name of God in that culture were given out of reverance for the Creator, not to imply that the child actually was somehow God himself - the very notion of which would be blasphemous and absurd.

Except that Jeus wasn't name by Mary or Joseph. He was name Jesus by the command of the Father. THis wasn't a case of, "I think we'll name Him Jesus".
The Gospels clearly assert that Jesus was so name by the messege of an angel.

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

[quote:c1bdb]Fulton Sheen's Warrior wrote:
It should pointed out that according to trinitarian theology their is only one God.

And according to scripture, that one God is the Father...

[/quote:c1bdb]

"For I and my Father are one and the same"
"He who sees me sees the Father"

The purpose of Yeshua is to direct all glory to the Father and lead us to the Father (John 14:6). Not to understand his "tri-unity". One thing I would ask a trinitarian is, "why is the goal to find a way to the Father?"

The Tri-unity of God is not something to be understood, but to be adored.

By the first sin of our first parents we were separated from God. The Son (The mediator) was sent to bridge the gap so to speak.
Now, according to Scripture, to see Christ is to see the Father. So by leading us to the Father we are being led to the Son by the Son.
In sared Scripture their is a noticeable unity between the Father and the Son. For instance, Christ's prayer in the garden of Gethsamene (Let them be one as you and I are one). Am I not a son of God? Yes, I am. Yet, if Christ is human than why is he called "The Son of God". Why not a Son of God? Their is a unity the Son has with the Father that we do not.

 

[Sothenes]

"And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and they shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God saith unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you."-Exodus 3:13-14

Jhn 6:48 I am that bread of life.

Jhn 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

Jhn 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Jhn 10:9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

Jhn 10:11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

Jhn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

 

[Sothenes]

+JMJ+

Jehu means "Yahweh is he". Did that make anyone named Jehu GOD IN THE FLESH? I don't think so. Names that contained or referred to the name of God in that culture were given out of reverance for the Creator, not to imply that the child actually was somehow God himself - the very notion of which would be blasphemous and absurd.

Except that Jeus wasn't name by Mary or Joseph. He was name Jesus by the command of the Father. THis wasn't a case of, "I think we'll name Him Jesus".
The Gospels clearly assert that Jesus was so name by the messege of an angel.

How would this come about? The Virgin Mary was told that, "Behold the Virgin shall be with Child, and shall bear a Son, and they shall call his name "Emmanuel", which translated means "GOD WITH US". [Matthew 1:23].

Jesus means Jehovah (our) Salvation which isn't any different than saying God with us because Jehovah is our Salvation because Emmanuel is more of a title and a description. When we accept Jesus Christ into our lives then it is Jehovah with us or God with us (Emmanuel).

 

[Fulton Sheen's Warrior]

+JMJ+

Mathew 1:21- "She will bear a son and you are to name him, Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."

What I'm saying is that it wasn't Mary or Joseph who decided to name Him Jesus, it was a command. God commanded the name for His Son incarnate to be "Jehova", a name reserved for God (For that is who Christ is).

 

[JM]

"...let US create man in OUR image..." The Hebrew is plural and it should be noted that no major translation parts from the plural meaning. Jesus speaks from both His divine nature and His humanity, we need to remember this in context..."I thirst" God doesn't thrust...but the man Christ Jesus did...

I can't quite get the drift of what you are saying here JM. Would you mind expanding for one unlearned wretch such as me.
Thanks

We find the plurial nature of God in Gen. 1:26, 19:24, Amos 4, Isaiah 44 and 48...to give a few references...

["thurst is a typo, it should be thirst : ]

When I wrote about Christ thirsting [Joh 19:28], I refer to the hypostatic union of the two natures...Jesus Christ is fully divine where we find He was worshipped [Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33] and fully man to the point of saying "I thirst."

Sorry for the confussion...

jm

 

[BradtheImpaler]

+JMJ+

Mathew 1:21- "She will bear a son and you are to name him, Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."

What I'm saying is that it wasn't Mary or Joseph who decided to name Him Jesus, it was a command

"Jesus" was a very common name of the time, comparable to "Joe" or "John" today in our language/culture. And what difference is it that Joseph/Mary were "commanded" to name him this?

God commanded the name for His Son incarnate to be "Jehova", a name reserved for God (For that is who Christ is).

No, you BEGIN believing Christ is Jehovah, then you read this type of thing back into the text. That's what you're doing. Many Jewish names were a derivative of Jehovah - "Jehovah does this...Jehovah does that". It does not imply the bearer IS Jehovah. And besides, God did not command that he be named "Jehovah", but "Jehovah SAVES", or, "Jehovah has become my salvation". Your statement is misleading. If Jesus is saviour, then he is HOW Jehovah saves, therefore the name Jesus is appropriate because Jesus was the MEANS by which God saves, not that Jesus IS God because his name contains a reference to Jehovah.

Secondly, you missed the entire point concerning "Emmanuel". The claim was that Jesus is God because "his name will be called Emmanuel which means GOD WITH US". You then went on to make that claim in reference to the name Jesus.

 

[wavy]

And according to scripture, that one God is the Father...

"For I and my Father are one and the same"
"He who sees me sees the Father"

We are also one as they are one (John 17:21-22). This does not make us the one true God.

And seeing Yeshua manifesting the Father pertains to nature and character, not the Father's position as the ultimate authority.

But I agree that Messiah has a "unique sonship".