Jesus is God !

[Ps82]

By your pronoun "him" to which (if any) of these three Persons are you referring?

• The Father
• The Son
• The Holy Ghost

At least to the Father and the Son. Holy Ghost ? Haven't formed an opinion on that yet ... Scripture tells us we are the house of this Holy Spirit in us. So, does that mean if he is in me ... his visible form is that of a Woman? If the Holy Spirit is in a man then his outward form would be of a male? I'm prone to call the Holy Spirit a HIM ... simply because The Spiritual God chose to be known among men as a MAN.

Which one (if any) of the following are you saying?

1. "are you trying to make [the Father] into two or three other persons?"
2. "are you trying to make [the Son] into two or three other persons?"
3. "are you trying to make [the Holy Ghost] into two or three other persons?"

No, those three are what make up the God Head ... they are the ONE God in three persons.
Take a look at James 2:19 and Isaiah 48:16

I'm not making any Person into multiple Persons. I'm recognizing the three Persons Who are the Triune God. You seem to like saying the names of those three Persons, but seem to not like recognizing the fact that those three Persons are three Persons.

Actually, I do see them as three individual persons of the God Head.
My understanding of three concepts helps me understand the miracle better.

1. The ONE God did create one image for himself and used it twice to present himself unto the eyes of men as the Father and the Son. He was them. They were Him. If you want to grammatically correct one would write: He is they. They are He.
2. The Spiritual ONE God is able to share measures of his spiritual essence with things and beings he created.
3. God did use his image to manifest the begotten Son, the Father, and even the first Adam.

The Father and the Son were both equal to the Spirit in divine nature ... but not Adam.

Jesus explains how that worked:
John 3:34 For he [the Messiah] whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him [the Messiah].

IOW, God could give things by measure to created beings ... but Jesus had access to all of God's Spirit as needed. Thus making him equal to God the Spirit and equal to the Father in access and in image.
I'm definitely a trinity believer.

Do you mean you believe only one person is God?


By your word "God" are you referring to the Father? Yes or No?

Typically, when I use the world God I am distinguishing the invisible God from the visible Father and the visible Son. I think this description of a Spiritual God moving in darkness and upon the waters is found in Genesis 1:1-3.

When I use the words Father/LORD/YHWH, I am thinking God, who appeared, unto A,I,J. Moses and 74 children of Israel with a body of heaven. Exodus 24:9-12.

When I mention Christ/Messiah/Savior I am thinking of the begotten Son of God. Of course, we here believe that he arose from the dead to become our Risen Lord.


7djengo7, how do you name/describe them?

 

[7djengo7]

What part of there being ONE God that you, Judge Rightly, Keiw1 and Clete don't get?

I already told you what I don't get about your saying "there is ONE God":

I believe there is ONE God...

Do you mean you believe only one person is God? [Yes or No?]

You: <NO ANSWER>

So, you already knew that I don't get whether or not, by saying "there is ONE God", you mean you believe only one person is God. And, you know that I still do not get whether or not, by saying "there is ONE God", you mean you believe only one person is God, since you know that you have not yet answered the question I asked you about your saying "there is ONE God".

Also, @JudgeRightly, @Clete, and I are all Christians -- and thus, Trinitarians. @Keiw1 is not a Trinitarian, and thus he is not a Christian. He is an unitarian, an anti-Trinitarian heretic. If you answer Yes to the question I've asked you -- "Do you mean you believe only one person is God?" -- then you will thereby be openly admitting that you are one of @Keiw1's fellow unitarian, anti-Trinitarian heretics. And, in that case, no wonder you seem to want to stonewall against such questions as that!

 

[7djengo7]

You wrote:

I believe there is ONE God are you trying to make him into two or three other persons?

So, I asked you:

By your pronoun "him" to which (if any) of these three Persons are you referring?

• The Father
• The Son
• The Holy Ghost

You responded:

At least to the Father and the Son.

So, by your pronoun "him", when you say "are you trying to make him into two or three other persons?" you are referring to both the Father and the Son? If that's what you're doing, then this is what you've just handed us:

I believe there is ONE God are you trying to make [the Father and the Son] into two or three other persons?

The Father and the Son are already two Persons, and have been so for all eternity; obviously I don't need to make the Father and the Son into two Persons. And, I'm certainly not making, nor trying to make those two Persons into three other persons.

 

[Ps82]

I already told you what I don't get about your saying "there is ONE God":

I believe there is ONE God. He is a Spirit... with POWERS to do miracles!!! He can manifest himself as three identifiable persons of the God Head.

HE is they! They are He!
[Sorry. To be grammatically correct and to express that the Three are the ONE God I have to use linking verbs and pronouns in the nominative case.]

My on opinion at this time: I have found that each one in the God Head have their own freewill ... but it is guided by God permissiveness. The Father and the Son are willing to do what ever the Spirit wishes and God will allow them to do anything as long as it is part of his will.

The fact, that Jesus could be tempted to sin and refuse or that he can question whether to drink the cup and go to the cross or not certainly made him an individual. Yet, you know Jesus said: Not my will but thine.

Oh and remember Abraham gave the LORD God some choices of when or when not to destroy all of Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet the LORD could not find even 10 people; so he saved only Lot and his family. That shows that The Father was his own person.

I'm not denying their person-hood when I say there is only ONE invisible Spiritual God.

Also, JudgeRightly, Clete and I are all Christians -- and thus, Trinitarians. Keiw1is not a Trinitarian, and thus he is not a Christian. He is an unitarian, an anti-Trinitarian heretic. If you answer Yes to the question I've asked you -- "Do you mean you believe only one person is God?" -- then you will thereby be openly admitting that you are one of Keiw1's fellow unitarian, anti-Trinitarian heretics. And, in that case, no wonder you seem to want to stonewall against such questions as that!

Thank you. This info should be helpful to me. I'm just meeting all of you and often getting your ideas confused with each other's.
I am a Trinitarian most definitely! Just adding my ideas to help show how ONE God can become three personages of the God Head.

I'd love to explain to all of you how I came to understand this concept, ONE God three in the God Head, but it would take a book to explain just how one chapter in the OT revealed this insight for me.

Of course, the chapter has to do with the NAME God chose, and the fact that he had an image and he used it, and that he could used it multiple times even simultaneously at one event. WOW!

 

[7djengo7]

I believe there is ONE God...

Do you mean you believe only one person is God? [Yes or No?]

You: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

It's a Yes-or-No question. If you mean you believe only one person is God, then answer Yes. If you do not mean you believe only one person is God, then answer No.

I believe Jesus was God appearing in flesh who died for the sins of all who would honor and follow him as their Lord.

By your word "God" are you referring to the Father? Yes or No?

You: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

It's a Yes-or-No question. If by your word "God", when you say "I believe Jesus was God appearing in flesh...", you are referring to the Father, then answer Yes. If by your word "God", when you say "I believe Jesus was God appearing in flesh...", you are not referring to the Father, then answer No.

 

[7djengo7]

I am a Trinitarian most definitely!

No Trinitarian would stonewall against the questions I've been asking you, and which you still have not answered. Besides, I've wrangled with unitarians -- anti-Trinitarian heretics -- who asininely call themselves "Trinitarian", yet who glaringly advertise that they are not Trinitarian, by their asininely saying things like "Jesus is the Father".

 

[Ps82]

No Trinitarian would stonewall against the questions I've been asking you, and which you still have not answered. Besides, I've wrangled with unitarians -- anti-Trinitarian heretics -- who asininely call themselves "Trinitarian", yet who glaringly advertise that they are not Trinitarian, by their asininely saying things like "Jesus is the Father".

Well, I'm writing to three people on a couple of threads. Perhaps I answered your questions for someone else.

Will you list each one your next post please? I'll give them a try but somehow I figure you won't like the answers, but I'm attempting to have a discussion here for a while longer anyway. I have a busy life.

 

[Clete]

Same for you.

Precisely!

Which is why I DO NOT read my doctrine into the text of scripture and pretend that if I add parenthetical statement while quoting a verse of scripture that I've made an actual argument!

I think you can also call Eisegesis a discussion among Bible students of what we find in scripture.

That would be a stupid thing to call it, unless by "discussing" you mean, yank whatever the Hell it is we want to believe out of practically any passage we can find.

Sure I have opinions ... so do you. I don't necessarily have an agenda except that I would like to show people what I see in scripture which means something to me.

The whole point here is that you do not see this stuff in scripture, you place it there and then pretend to have found something profound and ask us to see it.

Actually, yes!

I knew it.

Completely bizarre nonsense that you absolutely did not get out of any passage of scripture. You're just making this stuff up!

Except only in appearance for Jesus was God, who came bearing the original image God chose for himself, and which God agreed to share with the first Adam.

Saying it doesn't make it so!

Who was Adam? He was a spiritual being created male/female. He was given a measure of life from God and was ultimately blessed to receive an image which was after the likeness of God's own image. He was not God

There is no mention in scripture that Adam was ever anything but male.
There is no such thing as a "measure of life".
There is no evidence whatsoever that Adam looked like God - period.

You're just making all of this stuff up!

Who was Jesus? He was the WORD, who was God and was with God. Since he was God he was an invisible Spirit. John gave him the name when he came as the Messiah - the WORD of God.

John wrote what the Holy Spirit inspired him to write. John, unlike you, wasn't just making stuff up out of whole cloth and assigning names to God by his own fiat decision.

He was blessed as the promised Messiah to share the one and only image God created for his personal use. It was the same image God shared with Adam

Utter nonsense!!! Jesus was the Son of Mary too, Ps82! That is, He was a biological child of Mary. If He physically looked like anyone, it would have been her and perhaps her father.

I guess you don't accept the trinity explanation ... The Spirit, the Father, and the Son

My response of "What?" was not a rejection of anything, per se. It was me saying that what you had just said made no sense.

I had asked you:

• What to you is understood by these two truths?

God comes [OT times] into the world and appears unto mankind in dreams, visions, and face to face while working.
God comes into the world [NT times] and appears unto mankind face to face doing his works.

You didn't explain what these meant to you ... only that you thought I spoke jibberish. Sigh

One thing you should remember is that the entire thread is still right here for the entire world to read and so when you tell lies, it's very easy for people to know and to prove it. What I actually said was this....

"I can't even tell what it is you're talking about! It's literal gibberish!​

​

Did John and Paul not have dreams and visions during the New Testament era?​

Did Peter not speak of dreams and visions during his sermon after Pentecost?"​

So first of all, I still cannot determine just what it is that you're trying to say that you want me to respond to and, far more importantly, the question is based on a demonstrably false premise, which is the false dichotomy that you present between the way God presented Himself in the Old Testament vs. the New Testament.

BTW, of course, John, Peter and Paul had dreams and visions ...

Oh! I thought you just said that I hadn't responded to your question!

but they came after the Lord had risen from the dead and gone to heaven.

Yeah, they came in the New Testament, just as you stated no longer happened.

Before that they saw God face to face as his own begotten Son. How many times does Christ need to repeat these truths??? "When you have seen me, you have seen the Father. The Father and I are one."

The New Testament dreams and visions did not happen to convey the truth that Christ and the Father are One. What are you even talking about?

Well, people saw God clearly in the OT face to face, in dreams and visions. Exodus 24 tells you that 74 people saw his body of heaven clearly and had food and drink in his presence and was not harmed. Read it for your self

It isn't in dispute!

Again, what are you even talking about?

Ah ha ... now I understand you. You do not believe that the Messiah was God incarnate ... the Emanuel. Well, that could lead to a lot of confusion.

You have seriously lost your mind. There isn't a syllable of what I said that any rational mind could use to come to such and idiotic conclusion.

Yep, There is no God - Other than ME. There is ONE God. He is the Father, Son and Spirit.

You would not get that from those passages though, Ps82!

You only get that from hindsight.

Your conclusions of what I write and insert is just confusion. When I put things inside brackets or parenthesis I am only adding truth found elsewhere in scripture which adds insight to the matter.

No you aren't! You are inserting YOUR DOCTRINE! Your doctrine is NOT scripture and you've done nothing at all to scripturally support, never mind establish, that doctrine. If you were to try, you'd do that same thing again, adding some other aspect of your doctrine into the scripture to make an argument for that. Eventually, you'd come all the way back around and thereby claim that the whole system is internally consistent but its really all one gigantic mess of question begging nonsense.

It should be so clear. The ONE and only God is an invisible Spirit. HE alone has manifested himself with a presence within his creation. In our case, he manifested himself unto the eyes of mankind. Even though he made a way for him to appear ... it was still God... an Emmanuel - God among us. Thus we have the

Guess you missed the truth: A just God and Savior. IOW, He was the Savior... appearing in flesh.

It was the first time anyone had ever seen God as his own begotten Son ... They had seen God as the Father with his body of heaven. Now they were seeing God the Son in mortal flesh for the first time. John 1:18
The noun is God ... the appositive [word or phrase renaming or describing the noun] is the Son. IOW, God was the Son!View attachment 11408

That simply is not what John 1:18 says! That's your doctrine being read into the passage. It is text book eisegesis!

You simply do not have the needed expertise to argue with the translation of practically every English bible ever printed.

 

[7djengo7]

Perhaps I answered your questions for someone else.

That sounds nonsensical. What do you even mean by that? Explain to us exactly what it would be for you to "answer [my] questions for someone else".

Will you list each one your next post please?

You've posted "replies" to my very posts in which I asked you loud and clear the questions you have failed to answer. So, if you really did not see the questions I asked you, then you've just told me that you've been posting "replies" to my posts without even having read my posts -- which would be an advertisement to all that it is pointless for anyone to try to interact with you, since you just sit there making noise without even reading what we post. Either that, or you're simply lying -- hoping in futility to sell the bogus idea that why you have failed to answer the questions I've asked you is because you never saw them in the first place.

Here's a list of two questions I've asked you (repeatedly), both of which you have thus far failed to answer (and are choosing to play dumb in regards to):

Do you agree with the truth @JudgeRightly stated, that the Son, Jesus, is not the Father? Is Jesus the Father? Yes or No?

You: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

I believe there is ONE God...

Do you mean you believe only one person is God? [Yes or No?]

You: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

I'll give them a try

No you won't. Instead, you'll continue lying about them.

but somehow I figure you won't like the answers,

You will not be answering them. And, I'm quite content with your failure (and inability) to answer them. You don't like the questions I've asked you, which is why you are lying about why you have failed to answer them.

but I'm attempting to have a discussion here for a while longer anyway.

It really does not seem like you have been attempting to have a discussion here at all.

I have a busy life.

Since the time when I asked you the questions you have thus far failed to answer (and are now lying about), you subsequently have taken the time to post "replies" to my posts in which I had asked you them. So, your now saying "I have a busy life" is merely a joke, and is no explanation for your failure to have answered the questions I have asked you. Don't post another "reply" to me unless in it you shall have answered the two, Yes-or-No questions I've once again listed for you in this post, or else you'll just be advertising that you're a lying troll, and I'll simply set you on "ignore", so as not to be further tempted to give you the attention for which you're begging.

 

[Ps82]

Well, I'm writing to three people on a couple of threads. Perhaps I answered your questions for someone else.

Will you list each one your next post please? I'll give them a try but somehow I figure you won't like the answers, but I'm attempting to have a discussion here for a while longer anyway. I have a busy life.

7djengo7 said: [No Trinitarian would stonewall against the questions I've been asking you, and which you still have not answered. Besides, I've wrangled with unitarians -- anti-Trinitarian heretics -- who asininely call themselves "Trinitarian", yet who glaringly advertise that they are not Trinitarian, by their asininely saying things like "Jesus is the Father".]

I'm waiting on the list of questions I have not answered ... but it's the Fourth you know. I have a busy life.

 

[7djengo7]

7djengo7 said: [No Trinitarian would stonewall against the questions I've been asking you, and which you still have not answered. Besides, I've wrangled with unitarians -- anti-Trinitarian heretics -- who asininely call themselves "Trinitarian", yet who glaringly advertise that they are not Trinitarian, by their asininely saying things like "Jesus is the Father".]

I'm waiting on the list of questions I have not answered

Here it is, once again, you lying, anti-Trinitarian, Christ-hating, Satan-serving antichrist -- just as I already provided in post #4489 : a list of two of the questions (printed in red) I've asked you repeatedly, that you've never answered:

QUESTION #1

Do you agree with the truth @JudgeRightly stated, that the Son, Jesus, is not the Father? Is Jesus the Father? Yes or No?

@Ps82: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

QUESTION #2

Do you mean you believe only one person is God? [Yes or No?]

@Ps82: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

I have a busy life.

Ah, yes: you have the "busy life" of a deranged, lying, noisemaking troll, begging for attention. You're clearly not right in the head, seeing as you consider repeatedly chanting "I have a busy life," to be the makings of a busy life. Now, I leave it to you to enjoy the fact of my never seeing another one of your ravings from this point on, since you're now set on "Ignore", as befits the troll that you are.

 

[theMadThinker]

Even tho he said OTHERWISE?

 

[Ps82]

You: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

It's a Yes-or-No question. If you mean you believe only one person is God, then answer Yes. If you do not mean you believe only one person is God, then answer No.


You: <NO ANSWER, STILL>

It's a Yes-or-No question. If by your word "God", when you say "I believe Jesus was God appearing in flesh...", you are referring to the Father, then answer Yes. If by your word "God", when you say "I believe Jesus was God appearing in flesh...", you are not referring to the Father, then answer No.

I believe God is an invisible Spirit. There is only one God. A God of miracles.

He was able to come into the world appearing as a supernatural presence, which worked among men in the OT. Became known as The Angel of The LORD ... and also as The Father of Israel.

This ONE invisible spiritual God was able to come into the world as a man of flesh to be an individual with freewill to make choices. Saying this does not mean that somehow the Spirit of God has been diminished.

My beliefs: The creator God designed humanity to be compatible to receiving an additional measure of Life from him. I believe that Life is identified as the Holy Spirit of God in us. This does not make us equal with God ... not even equal to Jesus, but the Spirit is empowered with his own works to do in us on our behalf.

This is how I see the God Head as three distinct individuals working among mankind. Yet, They are the One God and He is them. The correct way to write this is: He is they. They are he.

Now, I can show you scripture where Jesus prayed to the Father in front of witnesses. He asked the Father to bless him by giving him the glorious presence he had shared with the Father before the world was. [John 17:5] Revealing a time when he was not the manifested Son but was the WORD of God who was with God while being God.

I can show you passages where one day our Risen Lord will be able to introduce the risen saints to the eternal King of Kings, LORD of lords, and eternal potentate [IOW, introduce them to the Father] who dwells in unapproachable light. The saints will see him safely because they will finally be eternal beings themselves. [I Tim. 6:15] Our Risen Lord Jesus having been glorified introduces us to the Father.]

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in us ... are all the one God ... who works on our behalf in individual ways. Glory belongs to Jesus because of how he freely suffered, bled and died to provide us the miracle we didn't deserve. The eternal super-natural presence of the Father God did not die for us. The Holy Spirit in us did not die for us. Only Jesus. No honor for Jesus... no entering the door to eternal life.

 

[Clete]

I believe God is an invisible Spirit. There is only one God. A God of miracles.

He was able to come into the world appearing as a supernatural presence, which worked among men in the OT. Became known as The Angel of The LORD ... and also as The Father of Israel.

This ONE invisible spiritual God was able to come into the world as a man of flesh to be an individual with freewill to make choices. Saying this does not mean that somehow the Spirit of God has been diminished.

My beliefs: The creator God designed humanity to be compatible to receiving an additional measure of Life from him. I believe that Life is identified as the Holy Spirit of God in us. This does not make us equal with God ... not even equal to Jesus, but the Spirit is empowered with his own works to do in us on our behalf.

This is how I see the God Head as three distinct individuals working among mankind. Yet, They are the One God and He is them. The correct way to write this is: He is they. They are he.

Now, I can show you scripture where Jesus prayed to the Father in front of witnesses. He asked the Father to bless him by giving him the glorious presence he had shared with the Father before the world was. [John 17:5] Revealing a time when he was not the manifested Son but was the WORD of God who was with God while being God.

I can show you passages where one day our Risen Lord will be able to introduce the risen saints to the eternal King of Kings, LORD of lords, and eternal potentate [IOW, introduce them to the Father] who dwells in unapproachable light. The saints will see him safely because they will finally be eternal beings themselves. [I Tim. 6:15] Our Risen Lord Jesus having been glorified introduces us to the Father.]

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in us ... are all the one God ... who works on our behalf in individual ways. Glory belongs to Jesus because of how he freely suffered, bled and died to provide us the miracle we didn't deserve. The eternal super-natural presence of the Father God did not die for us. The Holy Spirit in us did not die for us. Only Jesus. No honor for Jesus... no entering the door to eternal life.

Too much double talk.

Did the Creator die for your sins?

Yes or no!

 

[Bright Raven]

Too much double talk.

Did the Creator die for your sins?

Yes or no!

That would be a yes

 

[Clete]

That would be a yes

Ps82 will not answer the question directly.

 

[Ps82]

No Trinitarian would stonewall against the questions I've been asking you, and which you still have not answered. Besides, I've wrangled with unitarians -- anti-Trinitarian heretics -- who asininely call themselves "Trinitarian", yet who glaringly advertise that they are not Trinitarian, by their asininely saying things like "Jesus is the Father".

I looked above and I have not stone-walled in answering your question. Recheck my replies above to you. I believe the ONE God is spiritual and invisible to men and angels ... Here is how I believe he manifests himself within creation as two sentient visible presences. God created an image for himself. He tells us that plainly in Genesis two when he says, "Let us make man after our image ... and likeness." The ONE God already had created ONE visible presence to represent himself. AND he also insinuates that he planed from the start to use it more than once. By the use of the plural pronouns [us and our] we can conclude that he will use that one image to manifest his presence multiple times and ways. Obviously, he appeared in the OT and became known as the super-natural presence of YHWH ... and finally known as the Father of Israel who promised a Son. In the NT he became known as Emanuel [God with us], the Christ, the mortal Lord Jesus.

The above truth explains why Jesus could say: The Father and I are ONE. When you have seen me as a mortal presence of God, you have seen the Father who was a super-natural presence belonging to the ONE God. We represent the ONE invisible Spiritual God among men. Jesus also said many times many ways that the Father works and how he also now works. The ONE Spiritual God became two in the sight of men. There is an OT example of how the ONE God came to Abraham, but Abraham saw three Lords. He fed them and one of the Lord's stayed behind to talk to Abraham about the destruction of Sodom and G. Two of the Lord went on into S and G ... and later the third special LORD finally went into S and G that evening. He stayed in the streets that night while the other two had chosen earlier in the day to go into Lot's house for supper. A mob accosted the LORD in the streets and took him to Lot's door where they had seen the other two Lords go. However, they pressed the LORD against Lot's door and threatened Lot and the others to come out. Yet, The LORD in the street with them caused the men to be spiritually blinded. They no longer could see The LORD nor Lot's door but were able to wander off toward their homes without trouble. Now, I believe these three Lords represented the ONE God and Judge of mankind that night. Yet, all three had freewill to stay and talk to Abraham, or go forward, or to eat supper with Lot instead of staying on mission in the streets looking at the sins of the people.

Yet, God's will was carried out that night anyway for the three were working in unison on the same mission. What the other two stepped back from the third accomplished. God's permissive will does not interrupt his ultimate plans...

Now, why did the mob carry the third Lord to Lot's house where the other two Lords had gone? My conclusion is: The three represented the ONE God and they bore the one and only image God had created for his personal use. IOW, triplets. Because they looked alike the mob knew they were together that evening and on mission to condemn them for sins. They wanted them gone.

Why three Lords that night you ask? I don't know for sure... but I have an interesting suspicion ... They represented how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit work together on behalf of the ONE God regarding the affairs of mankind. I am definitely a Trinitarian, but that doesn't negate that there is one God.

 

[Right Divider]

They represented how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit work together on behalf of the ONE God regarding the affairs of mankind.

They ARE the ONE God.

I am definitely a Trinitarian, but that doesn't negate that there is one God.

No, you are not.

 

[Bright Raven]

They ARE the ONE God.

No, you are not.

I looked above and I have not stone-walled in answering your question. Recheck my replies above to you. I believe the ONE God is spiritual and invisible to men and angels ... Here is how I believe he manifests himself within creation as two sentient visible presences. God created an image for himself. He tells us that plainly in Genesis two when he says, "Let us make man after our image ... and likeness." The ONE God already had created ONE visible presence to represent himself. AND he also insinuates that he planed from the start to use it more than once. By the use of the plural pronouns [us and our] we can conclude that he will use that one image to manifest his presence multiple times and ways. Obviously, he appeared in the OT and became known as the super-natural presence of YHWH ... and finally known as the Father of Israel who promised a Son. In the NT he became known as Emanuel [God with us], the Christ, the mortal Lord Jesus.

The above truth explains why Jesus could say: The Father and I are ONE. When you have seen me as a mortal presence of God, you have seen the Father who was a super-natural presence belonging to the ONE God. We represent the ONE invisible Spiritual God among men. Jesus also said many times many ways that the Father works and how he also now works. The ONE Spiritual God became two in the sight of men. There is an OT example of how the ONE God came to Abraham, but Abraham saw three Lords. He fed them and one of the Lord's stayed behind to talk to Abraham about the destruction of Sodom and G. Two of the Lord went on into S and G ... and later the third special LORD finally went into S and G that evening. He stayed in the streets that night while the other two had chosen earlier in the day to go into Lot's house for supper. A mob accosted the LORD in the streets and took him to Lot's door where they had seen the other two Lords go. However, they pressed the LORD against Lot's door and threatened Lot and the others to come out. Yet, The LORD in the street with them caused the men to be spiritually blinded. They no longer could see The LORD nor Lot's door but were able to wander off toward their homes without trouble. Now, I believe these three Lords represented the ONE God and Judge of mankind that night. Yet, all three had freewill to stay and talk to Abraham, or go forward, or to eat supper with Lot instead of staying on mission in the streets looking at the sins of the people.

Yet, God's will was carried out that night anyway for the three were working in unison on the same mission. What the other two stepped back from the third accomplished. God's permissive will does not interrupt his ultimate plans...

Now, why did the mob carry the third Lord to Lot's house where the other two Lords had gone? My conclusion is: The three represented the ONE God and they bore the one and only image God had created for his personal use. IOW, triplets. Because they looked alike the mob knew they were together that evening and on mission to condemn them for sins. They wanted them gone.

Why three Lords that night you ask? I don't know for sure... but I have an interesting suspicion ... They represented how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit work together on behalf of the ONE God regarding the affairs of mankind. I am definitely a Trinitarian, but that doesn't negate that there is one God.

You are not a trinitarian in the Biblical sense. The one true God is Father, Son and Holy Spiriy

 

[Clete]

I looked above and I have not stone-walled in answering your question. Recheck my replies above to you. I believe the ONE God is spiritual and invisible to men and angels ... Here is how I believe he manifests himself within creation as two sentient visible presences. God created an image for himself. He tells us that plainly in Genesis two when he says, "Let us make man after our image ... and likeness." The ONE God already had created ONE visible presence to represent himself. AND he also insinuates that he planed from the start to use it more than once. By the use of the plural pronouns [us and our] we can conclude that he will use that one image to manifest his presence multiple times and ways. Obviously, he appeared in the OT and became known as the super-natural presence of YHWH ... and finally known as the Father of Israel who promised a Son. In the NT he became known as Emanuel [God with us], the Christ, the mortal Lord Jesus.

The above truth explains why Jesus could say: The Father and I are ONE. When you have seen me as a mortal presence of God, you have seen the Father who was a super-natural presence belonging to the ONE God. We represent the ONE invisible Spiritual God among men. Jesus also said many times many ways that the Father works and how he also now works. The ONE Spiritual God became two in the sight of men. There is an OT example of how the ONE God came to Abraham, but Abraham saw three Lords. He fed them and one of the Lord's stayed behind to talk to Abraham about the destruction of Sodom and G. Two of the Lord went on into S and G ... and later the third special LORD finally went into S and G that evening. He stayed in the streets that night while the other two had chosen earlier in the day to go into Lot's house for supper. A mob accosted the LORD in the streets and took him to Lot's door where they had seen the other two Lords go. However, they pressed the LORD against Lot's door and threatened Lot and the others to come out. Yet, The LORD in the street with them caused the men to be spiritually blinded. They no longer could see The LORD nor Lot's door but were able to wander off toward their homes without trouble. Now, I believe these three Lords represented the ONE God and Judge of mankind that night. Yet, all three had freewill to stay and talk to Abraham, or go forward, or to eat supper with Lot instead of staying on mission in the streets looking at the sins of the people.

Yet, God's will was carried out that night anyway for the three were working in unison on the same mission. What the other two stepped back from the third accomplished. God's permissive will does not interrupt his ultimate plans...

Now, why did the mob carry the third Lord to Lot's house where the other two Lords had gone? My conclusion is: The three represented the ONE God and they bore the one and only image God had created for his personal use. IOW, triplets. Because they looked alike the mob knew they were together that evening and on mission to condemn them for sins. They wanted them gone.

Why three Lords that night you ask? I don't know for sure... but I have an interesting suspicion ... They represented how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit work together on behalf of the ONE God regarding the affairs of mankind. I am definitely a Trinitarian, but that doesn't negate that there is one God.

What is it about the label "trinitarian" that makes it something you even want to have applied to you? You ARE NOT a trinitarian by anyone's definition other than your own and so I don't get it, why bother with the pretense? What's the benefit of identifying with a group with which you disagree almost entirely?

You aren't the only one to do this sort of thing, of course. I find tons of Christians who talk and live their lives like Open Theists but insist on being called Calvinists and are quick to give a hearty "Amen!" at any mention of God's immutability that is preached from the pulpit. The Branch Davidians to this day insist that they are Christians, as do the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses. Democrats desire to control every aspect of everyone's life (except for their sex lives) but insist that they are defenders of freedom. Etc.

Perhaps that last example gives light to the motive. To the democrats, "freedom" is just a jingle. It's marketing. It's camouflage. It is the proverbial sheep's clothing on the wolf and I strongly suspect the label "trinitarian" is your woolen coat as well.