I admit I don't know such a verse. If you prefer to base your understanding on what is not said I surrender.
My understanding isn't based solely on what is not said.
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.”
But that is a quote from Psalms 102:25-27, which is clearly speaking of Yahweh. In other words, the writer of Hebrews saw fit to ascribe to the Son a Psalm about Yahweh, from the mouth of the Father no less. The implication is that the Son is also Yahweh. That the Son was involved in creation was already stated in Heb 1:
Heb 1:2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
And that completely agrees with John 1:1-3, 10, 1 Cor 8:6, and Col 1:16-17.
Then we have Paul's statements in Romans 10:
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 10:11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”
Rom 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him.
Rom 10:13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
The implication is that confessing "Jesus is Lord" is the same as calling "on the name of the Lord." And that follows on the heals of 9:5: "To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen." Although there is dispute as to the placement of punctuation, the most natural flow of the grammar is that Jesus is "God over all."
Jesus also claimed to be the I Am in John 8:58 and claimed many times that he existed with the Father prior to coming to earth.
(All ESV.)
My understanding is also based on what is said. Given what isn't said and what is, Jesus can only be the one God, Yahweh, in human flesh, equal to the Father yet distinct.
Your argumentation is poor for me the same as mine for you.
Then what, specifically, is poor argumentation in these statements: Just because you find it strange and it doesn't make any sense to you, doesn't mean it isn't true. It is infinitely complex and cannot be fully comprehended by the human mind, but that doesn't mean it's false.
How does this passage support your view? It doesn't say Jesus is Yahweh but that he was in the form of God and equal to God which I fully agree with. He truly used to act under the name of God in OT and is equal to him.
Because, as I keep pointing out, Christianity always has been and will be monotheistic. Given that there was and ever will be only one being that is God, and only God can have the nature of God, it logically follows that Jesus is also truly the one God. And, since God's name is Yahweh, it then follows that the Son is also Yahweh.
The error in your reasoning is that Jesus can be equal to God but not also be the one God. That contradicts Scripture since that is polytheism.
The false statement won't become true through constant repetition. God used 'US' in OT to address someone equal to him and participating in his activities. Also Psalm 110:1
A declaration of Yahweh to my adonai
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies your footstool.”
where adonai is Jesus doesn't make sense if he is Yahweh. So because Jesus is divine there are definitely more then one divine person which is supported by both OT and NT.
You really don't understand the Trinity nor the monotheism that is taught throughout Scripture nor what is meant by the nature of God. You keep repeating things I've addressed, which the Trinity alone adequately addresses.
I've given numerous passages in which Yahweh himself says he is the only god and there never will be another. There is only one Being that is God; only one Being that has the nature of God. Hence, when God uses "us" and "our" of himself, that speaks to a multiplicity
within the one God, since there absolutely
cannot be another being that is equal to or has the nature of God. The Bible is unequivocal in its message that there is only one Being that is God and all other living beings are creatures.
Gen 1:26 Then God said, “Let
us make man in
our image, after
our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
Gen 1:27 So God created man in
his own image, in the image of God
he created him; male and female
he created them. (ESV)
Notice that God uses plural person pronouns in verse 26 when planning the creation of humans, but then verse 27 uses
singular personal pronouns when stating the act of humans being created in God's image. The doctrine of the Trinity fully affirms the eternal distinctions between the three divine persons within the one God. What they cannot be are three completely separate, independent beings or gods; that would go completely against Scripture.
Let's not continue this argument.
Why not?