The Trinity

[JLB]

What part of Jesus descended from above was in that human body if not His own spirit?
What I know -The Son who was, His spirit, was in that body.
"Father into your hands I commit My spirit"

If Jesus had a human spirit and a human body what part of HIM was God?

One God the Father FROM whom ALL things come and for whom we live.

The Father created, His Deity, all things BY/THROUGH/FOR His Son just as HE spoke to us in these last days by His Son.

The Father poured out HIS Spirit in Jesus's name.

Jesus and the Father are one as HE taught not as you believe. The Father in Him and He in us.

The Deity that dwells IN Christ is the Fathers who as Jesus testifies is the only "true" God and Paul wrote one God the Father.

The Father is Deity in Himself as opposed to Deity dwelling in Him and the only true God.
This is not a possible answer -True God from true God. Its God from true God. Its the Fathers Deity always.

His First begotten -Its the Fathers Deity. Jesus spirit, as His first begotten, is not deity in Himself. Jesus's spirit is not human either.
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.

Jesus inherited all things from His God and Father. The Father from whom all things come did not receive anything from any other being.

It's the church of the firstborn from the beginning.

From your perspective why the need?
Hebrews 1:6

Jesus was God (the Son) who became flesh.

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, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:1,14


“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8


If you choose to deny this then that’s on you.

 

[Randy]

Jesus was God (the Son) who became flesh.

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, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:1,14


“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8


If you choose to deny this then that’s on you.

And the Father is the only "true" God.
The Deity in the Firstborn remains the Fathers.

As you believe True God from true God the Father.
As I believe the begotten God from the true unbegotten God.
The only like to like begotten Son of the Father, His spirit-not deity, with the gifting of all the fullness of the Fathers Deity living in Him. God's firstborn. A child of His Father and God. He is one with the Father as HE taught not as you believe. Since He is one with the Father in regard to the fullness of the one deity of God how could He NOT be all that the Father is? God was the Logos.

God was indeed the Logos and the Logos was with the Father in the beginning.

I agree in part.
Begotten of the Father alone before all things but not made.

We will have to agree to disagree.
I hold to the testimony. I prefer truth as given from above.
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

I believe this about the Son.
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

As I have stated.
Is Jesus God?
He never dies
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.

Peace

 

[JLB]

And the Father is the only "true" God.
The Deity in the Firstborn remains the Fathers.

As you believe True God from true God the Father.
As I believe the begotten God from the true unbegotten God.
The only like to like begotten Son of the Father, His spirit-not deity, with the gifting of all the fullness of the Fathers Deity living in Him. God's firstborn. A child of His Father and God. He is one with the Father as HE taught not as you believe. Since He is one with the Father in regard to the fullness of the one deity of God how could He NOT be all that the Father is? God was the Logos.

God was indeed the Logos and the Logos was with the Father in the beginning.

I agree in part.
Begotten of the Father alone before all things but not made.

We will have to agree to disagree.
I hold to the testimony. I prefer truth as given from above.
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

I believe this about the Son.
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

As I have stated.
Is Jesus God?
He never dies
Yes, He is all that the Father is.
No, He has always been the Son.

Peace

Jesus was God (the Son) who became flesh.

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, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:1,14


“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8

The scriptures teach us Jesus is God. You either believe that or not.

Jesus says He is Almighty God.

Do you believe Jesus is Almighty God?

 

[Randy]

Jesus was God (the Son) who became flesh.

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, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:1,14


“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8

The scriptures teach us Jesus is God. You either believe that or not.

Jesus says He is Almighty God.

Do you believe Jesus is Almighty God?

This is true
God was the Logos
This is true
The person of the Father is the only "true" God

I have given you the understanding I received from above how both those statements are true but you can't accept it. Those fine as I have no need to convince you.

Jesus is the first begotten of the Father, His spirit. "In" Him was pleased to dwell all the fullness of the Deity of the only true God the Father. In that unity He is the radiance of the Fathers glory and the imprint of the Fathers very being and one with the Father as He taught not as you believe.

One God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ-the Fathers Son from the beginning and the Fathers Christ who has received the Sovereign authority of God the Father forever. The throne of God and of the lamb. Jesus inherited all things from His God and Father He is not coeternal, but He is all that the Father is.

We will agree to disagree

Peace

 

[Bruce.Leiter]

The Trinity of God Part 1​

Definition of the Trinity

The Trinity of God is a doctrine that is fundamental to the Christian faith; belief or disbelief in the Trinity marks orthodoxy from unorthodoxy. Human reason, however, cannot fathom the Trinity, nor can logic explain it, and, although the word itself is not found in the Scriptures, the doctrine is plainly taught in the Scriptures. The early church was forced to study the subject and affirm its truth because of the heretical teachings that arose opposing the Trinity.

The term Trinity is not the best one because it emphasizes only the three persons but not the unity within the Trinity. The German word Dreieinigkeit (“three-oneness”) better expresses the concept. A proper definition then must include the distinctness and equality of the three persons within the Trinity as well as the unity within the Trinity. The word Triunity may better express the doctrine.45 A proper definition of the Trinity states: “the Trinity is composed of three united Persons without separate existence—so completely united as to form one God. The divine nature subsists in three distinctions—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”46

Misinterpretations of the Trinity

Tri-theism. In early church history men such as John Ascunages and John Philoponus taught that there were three who were God but they were only related in a loose association as, for example, Peter, James, and John were as disciples. The error of this teaching was that its proponents abandoned the unity within the Trinity with the result that they taught there were three Gods rather than three persons within one Godhead.

Sabellianism or Modalism. This teaching, originated by Sabellius (c. a.d. 200), erred in the opposite from that of Tri-theism. Although Sabellius spoke of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, he understood all three as simply three modes of existence or three manifestations of one God. The teaching is thus also known as modalism because it views one God who variously manifests Himself in three modes of existence: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Arianism. Arian doctrine had its roots in Tertullian, who subordinated the Son to the Father. Origen carried Tertullian’s concept further by teaching that the Son was subordinate to the Father “in respect to essence.” This ultimately led to Arianism, which denied the deity of Christ. Arius taught that only God was the uncreated One; because Christ was begotten of the Father it meant Christ was created by the Father. According to Arius there was a time when Christ did not exist. Arius and his teaching were condemned at the Council of Nicea in a.d. 325.

Explanation of the Trinity

God is one in regard to essence. Early in church history the question developed whether Christ was the same as the Father in substance or in essence. Arius taught that Christ was like the Father in substance, yet the Father was greater than Christ; hence, although some equated the terms substance and essence, the proper way to designate the Trinity became “one in essence.” The essential oneness of God is linked to Deuteronomy 6:4, “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! (Heb. echad, “compound unity; united one”). This statement stresses not only the uniqueness of God but also the unity of God (cf. also James 2:19). It means all three Persons possess the summation of the divine attributes but yet the essence of God is undivided. Oneness in essence also emphasizes that the three Persons of the Trinity do not act independently of one another. This was a constant theme of Jesus in rebuffing the charges of the Jews (cf. John 5:19; 8:28; 12:49; 14:10).

God is three with respect to Persons. The word persons tends to detract from the unity of the Trinity, and it is readily recognized that persons is an inadequate term to describe the relationship within the Trinity. Some theologians have opted for the term subsistence, hence, “God has three subsistences.” Other words used to describe the distinctiveness of the Three are: distinction, relation, and mode. The term persons is nonetheless helpful inasmuch as it emphasizes not only a manifestation but also an individual personality. In suggesting God is three with respect to His Persons it is emphasized that (1) each has the same essence as God and (2) each possess the fullness of God. “In God there are no three individuals alongside of, and separate from, one another, but only personal self-distinctions within the Divine essence.”47 This is an important deviation from modalism (or Sabellianism), which teaches that one God merely manifests Himself in three various ways. This unity within three Persons is seen in Old Testament passages such as Isaiah 48:16 where the Father has sent the Messiah and the Spirit to speak to the restored nation. In Isaiah 61:1 the Father has anointed the Messiah with the Spirit for His mission. These references emphasize both the equality and the unity of the three Persons.

The three Persons have distinct relationships. Within the Trinity exists a relationship that is expressed in terms of subsistence. The Father is not begotten nor does He proceed from any person; the Son is eternally begotten from the Father (John 1:18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). The term generation suggests the Trinitarian relationship in that the Son is eternally begotten of the Father. The Holy Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father and the Son (John 14:26; 16:7). The word procession suggests the Trinitarian relationship of the Father and the Son sending the Spirit.48 It is important to note, however, that these terms denote a relationship within the Trinity and do not suggest inferiority in any way. Because the terms can tend to suggest inferiority some theologians deny their usefulness.49

The three Persons are equal in authority. Although terms like generation and procession may be used in referring to the functioning within the Trinity, it is important to realize that the three Persons are equal in authority. The Father is recognized as authoritative and supreme (1 Cor. 8:6); the Son is also recognized as equal to the Father in every respect (John 5:21–23); the Spirit is likewise recognized as equal to the Father and the Son (cf. Matt. 12:31). (This topic will be developed further under the discussion of the deity of Christ and the deity of the Holy Spirit.)

Old Testament Teaching

While there is no definitive or explicit statement in the Old Testament affirming the Trinity, it is fair to say that the Old Testament allows for the Trinity and implies that God is a triune being in a number of passages. In the creation account of Genesis 1 both God the Father and the Holy Spirit are seen in the work of creation. It is stated that God created heaven and earth (Gen. 1:1) while the Holy Spirit hovered over the earth to infuse it with vitality (Gen. 1:2). The term God in Genesis 1:1 is Elohim, which is a plural form for God. Even though this does not explicitly teach the Trinity, it certainly allows for it as seen in the plural pronouns “Us” and “Our” in Genesis 1:26. In Psalm 110:1 David recognized a distinction of persons between “Lord” and “my Lord.” David implies that Messiah is One greater than an ordinary human king because he refers to Messiah with an ascription of deity, “my Lord.” In the prophecy concerning Christ in Isaiah 7:14 the Lord makes it clear that the One born of a virgin will also be Immanuel, “God with us.” It is an attestation to Messiah’s deity. Two additional passages previously mentioned that imply the Trinity are Isaiah 48:16 and 61:1. In both of these passages all three Persons of the Godhead are mentioned and seen as distinct from one another.

The word "Trinity" DOES describe God very well. "Tri-" obviously means three, while "-inity" comes from "unity." I use the term "3-in-1 God" in my writing instead of the Latin "Trinity," though.

 

[RandyK]

I don't agree. I have asked but you continue to ignore. If Jesus had human spirit and a human body what part of Him was God?

I haven't ignored anything. If anything, I may have missed some of your comments. For a while this Forum wasn't working for me, and I went elsewhere. Presently, I'm travelling. But I just now saw this post, and I'll try to briefly answer it.

Your statement betrays a lack of understanding about God's word. Your question is predicated on a false definition of God's word, that it is limited to a single personal revelation of God. Obviously, the entire revelation of Jesus the man--body, soul, and spirit are a "revelation"--not "parts" of God.

Even Jesus' flesh, which was mortal and temporal, was not just a temporary physical attribute of God, but much more--a revelation expressing the eternal God if even in finite realties. Everything God says about Himself, including His revelation as a mortal man, is springing from the eternal God and expresses His eternity in some way, if even as a finite human man--spirit and body.

So, breaking God's revelation as a man into "parts" of God is obviously limiting God's word and how he has chosen to reveal Himsel as a Person in time.

 

[Randy]

I haven't ignored anything. If anything, I may have missed some of your comments. For a while this Forum wasn't working for me, and I went elsewhere. Presently, I'm travelling. But I just now saw this post, and I'll try to briefly answer it.

Your statement betrays a lack of understanding about God's word. Your question is predicated on a false definition of God's word, that it is limited to a single personal revelation of God. Obviously, the entire revelation of Jesus the man--body, soul, and spirit are a "revelation"--not "parts" of God.

Even Jesus' flesh, which was mortal and temporal, was not just a temporary physical attribute of God, but much more--a revelation expressing the eternal God if even in finite realties. Everything God says about Himself, including His revelation as a mortal man, is springing from the eternal God and expresses His eternity in some way, if even as a finite human man--spirit and body.

So, breaking God's revelation as a man into "parts" of God is obviously limiting God's word and how he has chosen to reveal Himsel as a Person in time.

I don't share you opinion. I know my Lord. The OP is about if the Son of Man had the Spirit of a Man. Yes or No.
No matter what your belief its quite clear from His words it was His spirit in that body as I READ.

"Father into your hands I commit MY spirit"

 

[RandyK]

I don't share you opinion. I know my Lord. The OP is about if the Son of Man had the Spirit of a Man. Yes or No.
No matter what your belief its quite clear from His words it was His spirit in that body as I READ.

"Father into your hands I commit MY spirit"

Selecting a few verses here and there doesn't do much good here. You would have to go back to the Creation account in Genesis to recognize that the very definition of "Man," as God created him, required that he be a human spirit encased in a body, presenting an individual human soul, or person.

Like all men were designed to be, Jesus was given God's Spirit, conditioned on his willful submission to God his Father. Of course, it would've been impossible for the Divine Son to fail to be in submission to God his Father, since he was essentially one with Him, both morally and in terms of Divine identity.

 

[Randy]

Selecting a few verses here and there doesn't do much good here. You would have to go back to the Creation account in Genesis to recognize that the very definition of "Man," as God created him, required that he be a human spirit encased in a body, presenting an individual human soul, or person.

Adam became a living soul when God formed the Spirit of man within Him. Jesus was already living before He descended from above. What part of Him that descended from above was in that body if not His own spirit?

Like all men were designed to be, Jesus was given God's Spirit, conditioned on his willful submission to God his Father. Of course, it would've been impossible for the Divine Son to fail to be in submission to God his Father, since he was essentially one with Him, both morally and in terms of Divine identity.

I'm not sure what you state here but the only Spirit of God in the Son of Man was the Fathers. The eternal life in Jesus is the Father. The Son who was, His own unique spirit, descended from above and was in that body. He is Gods firstborn and has always been the Son. The fullness that was gifted to Him, not formed, from the will of another remains the Spirit of the only true God. God our Father. Col 1:19

God from true God not true God from true God.

This is true.
God was the logos.
This is true.
God our Father is the only true unbegotten God.

When speaking of a God such as Himself He stated "No God, was formed, before me"
Therefore, in regard to the Father the only thing I know with certainty is that "if" He has a beginning it could not be by any other being. He alone is unbegotten.

In regard to the Son, I agree in part.
Begotten of the Father alone before all things but not made.

 

[RandyK]

Adam became a living soul when God formed the Spirit of man within Him. Jesus was already living before He descended from above. What part of Him that descended from above was in that body if not His own spirit?

I'm not sure what you state here but the only Spirit of God in the Son of Man was the Fathers. The eternal life in Jesus is the Father. The Son who was, His own unique spirit, descended from above and was in that body. He is Gods firstborn and has always been the Son. The fullness that was gifted to Him, not formed, from the will of another remains the Spirit of the only true God. God our Father. Col 1:19

You are not defining a true man when you deny him a human spirit, as opposed to God's Spirit, which transcends Man. And you are indulging in the heresy of modalism when you confuse the Holy Spirit with the Son of God.

Even worse, you are not properly using English terms when you define Jesus' human spirit as "infinite," or deny him a human spirit entirely. All Christians that I know of recognize that all humans are animated by their own personality and spirit--not by an infinite number of persons or by a transcendent Deity.

Jesus' human spirit, by definition, is limited to his human personality and therefore is not, by definition, "infinite." Jesus, like all men, are animated by their own personality and spirit, and therefore, are finite.

 

[JLB]

In the creation account of Genesis 1 both God the Father and the Holy Spirit are seen in the work of creation. It is stated that God created heaven and earth (Gen. 1:1) while the Holy Spirit hovered over the earth to infuse it with vitality (Gen. 1:2).

So based on this statement you believe the Son was not involved in the creation of the heavens and the earth?

 

[Free]

God from true God not true God from true God.

There is only true God, not God and true God.

When speaking of a God such as Himself He stated "No God, was formed, before me"
Therefore, in regard to the Father the only thing I know with certainty is that "if" He has a beginning it could not be by any other being. He alone is unbegotten.

This is begging the question. You're beginning with the assumption that Yahweh is only the Father and then concluding the same. It was Yahweh who said "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen. 1:26).

Begotten of the Father alone before all things but not made.

The Son has existed for as long as the Father has existed. If there was a time when the Son came into being, as your statement implies, then please clearly show how "begotten" is different from "made" or "created."

 

[Randy]

There is only true God, not God and true God.

Yes, God our Father
Jesus is not He

This is begging the question. You're beginning with the assumption that Yahweh is only the Father and then concluding the same. It was Yahweh who said "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen. 1:26).

your usual defense that is, someone is begging a question.
And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven

Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

Jesus was in heaven when this was written:
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

yet for us there is but one God, the Father,

The Son has existed for as long as the Father has existed. If there was a time when the Son came into being, as your statement implies, then please clearly show how "begotten" is different from "made" or "created."

No, Jesus's being was defined by another will
Col 1:19

He is all that the Father is but is not coeternal

 

[Randy]

You are not defining a true man when you deny him a human spirit, as opposed to God's Spirit, which transcends Man. And you are indulging in the heresy of modalism when you confuse the Holy Spirit with the Son of God.

What part of Jesus descended from above and was in that body if not His own spirit?
It was His spirit.

Even worse, you are not properly using English terms when you define Jesus' human spirit as "infinite," or deny him a human spirit entirely. All Christians that I know of recognize that all humans are animated by their own personality and spirit--not by an infinite number of persons or by a transcendent Deity.

I don't believe Jesus had the spirit of a man and am not defining it in any manner.
I stated the Son who was, His spirit, the spirit of Gods firstborn, was in that body. He has always been the Son.

If He was not the Fathers Son in the beginning whose Son was HE?
If He always was and always was God how did He become the Son?

How is He "from" any other as a Son if He has no beginning?

True God from true God

I agree in part.
Begotten of the Father alone before all things but not made

Jesus' human spirit, by definition, is limited to his human personality and therefore is not, by definition, "infinite." Jesus, like all men, are animated by their own personality and spirit, and therefore, are finite.

The spirit is life, the flesh counts for nothing as Jesus states.
Jesue was life before the world began.

The eternal life found in the Son is the fullness of the Deity of the only true God our Father. They are one.

 

[RandyK]

What part of Jesus descended from above and was in that body if not His own spirit?
It was His spirit.

The trouble is, you're beginning with the assumption that you're right. But in reality, the Trinity has to be explained properly or we end up in heresy. I'm not saying the Church Fathers were right about everything, but they spent a good amount of time trying to come up with an acceptable formula to describe a transcendent truth--something that we cannot fully understand.

The transcendent Spirit of God coordinated with the Word of God to produce a limited representation of the infinite God in finite terms that we can understand. Otherwise, you confuse transcendent Spiit of God with a finite human spirit, as you are doing.

To answer your question directly, God is transcendent and cannot be divided up into parts and moved into a body becoming that body without rendering that Spirit something finite. It is the *revelation of God* that changes without sacrificing the infinite nature of the Spirit.

Think of it more as a compressed version of an infinite Being. The infinite Being does not change His infinite character--He just assumes a representative form so that this Divine identity is shared between the infinite source of the revelation and the compressed representative of Himself, or the revelation of Himself as a man.

Finite entities cannot do this. But an infinite Being can, using His *word.* It is the word that changes an infinite reality into a finite reality without altering either His infinite nature or His identity
.

I don't believe Jesus had the spirit of a man and am not defining it in any manner.

Then you are in the realm of heresy, whether modalism or Apollinarianism or Docetism.

I stated the Son who was, His spirit, the spirit of Gods firstborn, was in that body. He has always been the Son.

If He was not the Fathers Son in the beginning whose Son was HE?
If He always was and always was God how did He become the Son?

How is He "from" any other as a Son if He has no beginning?

True God from true God

I agree in part.
Begotten of the Father alone before all things but not made


The spirit is life, the flesh counts for nothing as Jesus states.
Jesue was life before the world began.

The eternal life found in the Son is the fullness of the Deity of the only true God our Father. They are one.

You confuse the identity of the Son of God as the preexistent Word of God with his manifestation as a human Son of God. Jesus did not exist prior to his incarnation as a human Son of God. He existed from eternity as the eternal Word of God which in time formed a revelation of the infinite, eternal God as a man.

His identity as a man corresponded to his preexistent revelation as God. But obviously, there was a change when the Word of God produced the human incarnation of the Son of God, and we have to keep these realities distinct when we refer to the Son of God. Otherwise, we are confusing 2 distinct realities, both of which are identified as the eternal God, but only one of which came to be revealed in time.

 

[follower]

I'm not saying the Church Fathers were right about everything, but they spent a good amount of time trying to come up with an acceptable formula to describe a transcendent truth--something that we cannot fully understand.

From all the results and posts and history etc etc etc
it looks clearly like they deceived more than they let on.

 

[RandyK]

From all the results and posts and history etc etc etc
it looks clearly like they deceived more than they let on.

Have you read the Church Fathers? To what degree, if you have? I've read abbreviated portions and some larger sections of their writings, and despite the difficulties and a limited number of problems I stand amazed as what they accomplished.

 

[follower]

Have you read the Church Fathers? To what degree, if you have? I've read abbreviated portions and some larger sections of their writings, and despite the difficulties and a limited number of problems I stand amazed as what they accomplished.

Have read Scripture: what mankind/men call amazing, Yahweh calls an abomination.

 

[Free]

Yes, God our Father
Jesus is not He

Your argument was: "God from true God not true God from true God."

I responded: "There is only true God, not God and true God."

Of course Jesus is not the Father. That completely misses the point. You believe that the Son is "God from true God," but my point is that there is no such thing. There is only true God. If the Son is also God, then it necessarily follows that he is true God. What happens with your position is that the following verses make God out to be a liar:

Deu 4:35 To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD is God; there is no other besides him.
…
Deu 4:39 know therefore today, and lay it to your heart, that the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other. (ESV)

Deu 32:39 "'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand. (ESV)

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

Isa 44:6 Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god. (ESV)

Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me there is no God; I equip you, though you do not know me,
Isa 45:6 that people may know, from the rising of the sun and from the west, that there is none besides me; I am the LORD, and there is no other. (ESV)

You make Jesus a lesser god, which is polytheism, and a created god at that.

your usual defense that is, someone is begging a question.

Not begging a question, begging the question, which is a fallacy, an error in reasoning.

And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven

Okay, what does this have to do with what I stated?

These are very select verses which you are taking out of context:

Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

What do you think this verse is stating that has to do with what I stated? I gave Gen. 1:26, where Yahweh uses plural personal pronouns of himself: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen. 1:26). Why did you avoid addressing that by posting something that has no bearing on it?

 

[Free]

Jesus was in heaven when this was written:
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Okay, and what does it prove? The entire NT was written while Jesus was in heaven, including:

Act 2:25 For David says concerning him, “‘I saw the Lord always before me, for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken;
Act 2:26 therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced; my flesh also will dwell in hope.
Act 2:27 For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption.
Act 2:28 You have made known to me the paths of life; you will make me full of gladness with your presence.’ (ESV)

Who is the "him" that Peter is speaking of here? It is clearly Jesus:

Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.
Act 2:24 God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it. (ESV)

The context is that of Jesus's death and resurrection, hence his quote of Ps. 16:8-11:

Psa 16:8 I have set the LORD always before me; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be shaken.
Psa 16:9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my whole being rejoices; my flesh also dwells secure.
Psa 16:10 For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.
Psa 16:11 You make known to me the path of life; in your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore. (ESV)

But, clearly Ps. 16 is speaking about Yahweh, hence the capital "LORD." It is worth nothing that YHWH was translated into Greek as kurios in the Septuagint, which is also why the NT does the same. More than that, we see this in Hebrews 1:

Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, . . .
Heb 1:10 And, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands;
Heb 1:11 they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment,
Heb 1:12 like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.” (ESV)

Who is speaking "of the Son"? The Father, obviously. And what he says is from another Psalm, which is attributed to Yahweh:

Psa 102:25 Of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.
Psa 102:26 They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away,
Psa 102:27 but you are the same, and your years have no end. (ESV)

So, we have both Peter and the writer of Hebrews strongly implying that the Son is also Yahweh. Then we have Paul:

Rom 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.
...
Rom 10:13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (ESV)

Paul is clearly equating confessing that "Jesus is Lord" with calling "on the name of the Lord," for salvation. And, as you likely know, verse 13 is a quote from Joel 2:32: "And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved." (ESV)

Paul, too, is strongly implying that Jesus, the Son, is also Yahweh. Of course, that is only one of several times he does so.

And John also does so throughout his gospel, not the least of which is:

Joh 12:36 While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them.
Joh 12:37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him,
Joh 12:38 so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: “Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”
Joh 12:39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said,
Joh 12:40 “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.”
Joh 12:41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. (ESV)

John says the above about Jesus and that the quote from Isaiah applies to him.

Isa 6:1 In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple.
Isa 6:2 Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.
Isa 6:3 And one called to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!”
Isa 6:4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke.
Isa 6:5 And I said: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!”
…
Isa 6:9 And he said, “Go, and say to this people: “‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’
Isa 6:10 Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” (ESV)

Yet, we clearly see that the person whose glory Isaiah saw was Yahweh.

There is simply no way to understand John's gospel apart from the fact that the Son is truly God, in every way that the Father is.

yet for us there is but one God, the Father,

I have dealt with this numerous times and no one has yet been able to give me a straight answer to the two logical conclusions from this verse>

1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)
First, if "one God, the Father" precludes the Son from being God, then "one Lord, Jesus Christ" precludes the Father from being Lord. Yet, that would contradict many verses. The only logical conclusion then, is that since "one Lord, Jesus Christ" doesn't preclude the Father from also being Lord, "one God, the Father" does not preclude the Son from also being God.

Second, if "from whom are all things" speaks of the Father's absolute self-existence, then it necessarily follows that "through whom are all things" speaks of the Son's absolute self-existence. It cannot be otherwise.

No, Jesus's being was defined by another will
Col 1:19

What do you mean by "Jesus's being was defined by another will"? I don't know what that means.

He is all that the Father is but is not coeternal

Then he cannot be all that the Father is, not even close. It goes far beyond just not being coeternal. It seems that you haven't really studied the nature of God much.

And, again, please clearly show how "begotten" is different from "made" or "created."