Unless You Believe That I Am "HE" (GOD) You Will Die In Your Sins, John 8:24

[genuineoriginal]

I don't think it is a good idea to refer to the godhead as three God's in one. Even though that may be the case.

I like to think of it as three separate entities of God in one person.

Then you are not a Trinitarian, you believe in Sabellianism also known as Modalism

_____
Trinitarians believe that all three members of the Trinity were present as seemingly distinct persons at Jesus' baptism, and believe there is other scriptural evidence for Trinitarianism

Modalism teaches that the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son, and Holy Spirit, identified by the Trinity Doctrine, are different modes, faces, aspects, or roles of the One God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three co-eternal persons within the Godhead, or a "co-equal trinity".
_____​

 

[Robert Pate]

Then you are not a Trinitarian, you believe in Sabellianism also known as Modalism

_____
Trinitarians believe that all three members of the Trinity were present as seemingly distinct persons at Jesus' baptism, and believe there is other scriptural evidence for Trinitarianism

Modalism teaches that the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son, and Holy Spirit, identified by the Trinity Doctrine, are different modes, faces, aspects, or roles of the One God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three co-eternal persons within the Godhead, or a "co-equal trinity".
_____​

They are one, but their works are different. It is heresy to confuse the work of the trinity. The Bible doesn't do it, neither should we.

Jesus always spoke of the Holy Spirit as a person. He refered to him as the Spirit of truth and also as the comforter, John 16:13 and John John 15:26.

 

[freelight]

3 aspects, modes, personalities...........

3 aspects, modes, personalities...........

I don't think it is a good idea to refer to the godhead as three God's in one. Even though that may be the case.

Ah, a bit ambiguous then,...since orthodox creed holds 3 separate distinct personalities who are all 'God', but to maintain a true 'monotheism' also insist there is only one 'God' nevertheless, all sharing the same divine essence.

I like to think of it as three separate entities of God in one person.

But orthodox creed emphasize 3 'persons', whereas a Unitarian theology usually holds 'God' as a singular 'Person', being the God and Father of all....all else are offspring of God. If you are holding God as a singular 'Person', then you are denying 3 'persons' or 'personalities' of God, unless you can stuff 2 other personalities into the original Personality. It would be a matter of defining your term 'entity' versus a 'personality', then explaining the metaphysics of it, if possible...asides from claiming it a 'mystery'.

The Father stays in heaven.

The Son comes into the world as the savior.

The Holy Spirit glorifies the work of the Son and works in the life of the believer.

That's one conceptual view, understanding the omnipresence of God....whether one accepts an orthodox definition of 'The Trinity' or sees the Trinity merely as a conceptual model or way of relating to different aspects of God.

 

[genuineoriginal]

They are one, but their works are different. It is heresy to confuse the work of the trinity. The Bible doesn't do it, neither should we.

The Trinity Doctrine creates such a confusion where the Bible does not.

Jesus always spoke of the Holy Spirit as a person. He refered to him as the Spirit of truth and also as the comforter, John 16:13 and John John 15:26.

That is straying outside of the topic of this thread, which is whether you have to believe that Jesus is the Almighty God instead of the Messiah (Christ).

Maybe another thread would be better to debate whether the Pneumatomachi were correct in their beliefs, especially in light of the verses that show there are at least seven spirits of God.

 

[Robert Pate]

Let's face it, no one can understand the trinity and there is a trinity.

 

[freelight]

Personality-play.................

Personality-play.................

They are one, but their works are different. It is heresy to confuse the work of the trinity. The Bible doesn't do it, neither should we.

Jesus always spoke of the Holy Spirit as a person. He refered to him as the Spirit of truth and also as the comforter, John 16:13 and John John 15:26.

Well, the 'personality' of the Holy Spirit is a more complex subject, since the Spirit can also be referred to as an "it" in some passages in the NT, but we'd have to nail down the greek grammar there in such instances and also consider 'context'. We hear about the 'person' of the Holy Spirit by some teachers, as if to emphasize the personal-ness of God in relation to us, but it seems like so much 'personalizing' God that we confine God to our own personalized theology more or less, so its all self-serving in a way.

If we consider God as truly infinite there are aspects of his nature and being that transcend personality altogether, as far as we can conceive of personality, even if you consider or relate to God as a divine Person. Consider aspects of The INFINITE as being trans-personal, super-personal and non-personal,..since the infinite goes beyond any finite conception or ability to even conceive or even know for that matter. But this goes into another subject of a divine absolute impersonal principle, as known as 'The Absolute', for another discussion.

So we bring God back down to a personal level which is fine, relating to 'Him' as our Heavenly Father. Jesus does this wonderfully for us, revealing God to us as 'Our Father', and relates to God also as his father, including all God's offspring as his own.

Back back to 'holy spirit',....since God is Spirit,....any 'spirit' of God acting as God, representing God...would also have the personality of God inherent in it, to express in whatever way or character that 'spirit' is intended to express itself, or if such spirit has its own unique special personality, it is still a personality originating from God the Father, who is the father of all personalities, the origin of personality itself. God is ONE. - but we are relating to different personalities in the one unified field of consciousness. So, its all God, since all is in God and God is in all. The only differentials, distinctions or separation of any entity or personality is only in 'perception', relatively speaking.

In the NT, the Holy Spirit falls on people; people are filled with the Spirit; baptized in/with the Spirit; walk in the Spirit; perform miracles or operations by the Spirit's, etc. So in this respect the Spirit is the 'active force', 'energy', 'anointing' or 'effective presence of God' moving among men, the breath of God at work whose effects are noticeable. So if a minister is moving by the Spirit of God, directed thereby, he is also anointed/empowered by that same Spirit, and the Spirit has the mind of God, so it obviously is directed by the personality of God. - God may have multiple-personalities all serving him, but its all God....relating to other aspects or personifications of himself.

 

[6days]

It doesn't matter how many versions say that; I imagine they ALL do. Even the New World Translation. There are some things we have to know about "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father." Everyone would agree that Jesus is indeed the "Prince of Peace." However, there is a void in understanding these other two titles.

Ok.... well lets examine that. But, I think you sort of missed the point of the argument. Krsto had said that "Everlasting Father" would be better translated as 'father of futurity'. Every major translation team disagrees with that.*

(1) There are no capital letters OR punctuation in Hebrew, just as in Greek there are no capital letters or punctuation.
(2) The verse would then read, word for word: "a child is born to us a son is given to us and is the government on his shoulder and is called his name wonderful counselor the god mighty everlasting father prince of peace". (The Interlinear Bible/ Hebrew, Greek, English)

Part of the duty of translation teams is to insert punctuation and capitilization based on context. The interlinear Bible actually reads ( I think) " to us is born to us a child For and shall be to is given a son his shoulder on the government Wonderful his name and called mighty the God Counselor of Peace the Prince the everlasting"

(3) Does "god mighty" mean that the Messiah is "god*almighty"? These are two different "gods." "God Mighty" is, in Hebrew, EL GIBBOHR.
(4) "God almighty" is, in Hebrew, EL SHADDAI. Therefore, the "mighty god" is not the same as the "Almighty God."
(5) The Messiah is never referred to as El Shaddai (Almighty God).
(6) Only YHWH (Jehovah) is called El Shaddai.

Jehovah has many names in the OT. Your 'interpretation' method is inconsistent. Do you think that there are many Gods? Or, that God uses different names to describe Himself?Yes, He does. [El Shaddai, El Elyon,*Adonai,Yahweh,*Jehovah Nissi,*Jehovah Raah,Jehovah Rapha, and many others including
El Olam (The Everlasting God)]. Or... do yoy think all those names apply to Jehovah, and exclude "mighty God" because it shows that Jesus is God?

(7) The Messiah is "everlasting father" because he is a life-giver.

Can you see how you try explain away the obvious meaning. Why not just accept that Jesus is the everlasting Father and the mighty God? The evelasting Father is also 'El Olam'...the everlasting God.*

(8) It is vital to understand the term "god." It can be any body or any thing. Referred to by the New Testament writers, it means just that and usually refers to*men*or*idols. In the Old Testament the term included angels and human judges

Yes... we agree. The word is much the same in the English language. We understand the meaning by the context. From the context of "mighty God and everlasting Father", it becomes clear who Jesus is. (Also, of course it is important that we don't take that first in isolation. Scripture should always be interpreted using other Scripture)

Yes, there are MANY "gods,"*but only one ALMIGHTY God, the Father, Jehovah. (I Corinthians 8:5,6)

Absolutely, that there is only one God. Yet you seem to think that 'mighty God and everlasting Father' is a different God?

If anyone reads this, I hope they have a better understanding of what "god" means.

I hope so too. We have many gods in our society (money, fame, education, cars, sports, entertainers or even things like family). But there is only God....there is only one Creator. There is only one Mediator. God humbled Himself...For there is only one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity--the man Christ Jesus. He was fully man... but He is also our "mighty God"...Jesus is the "everlasting Father"

 

[Robert Pate]

Ok.... well lets examine that. But, I think you sort of missed the point of the argument. Krsto had said that "Everlasting Father" would be better translated as 'father of futurity'. Every major translation team disagrees with that.*



Part of the duty of translation teams is to insert punctuation and capitilization based on context. The interlinear Bible actually reads ( I think) " to us is born to us a child For and shall be to is given a son his shoulder on the government Wonderful his name and called mighty the God Counselor of Peace the Prince the everlasting"



Jehovah has many names in the OT. Your 'interpretation' method is inconsistent. Do you think that there are many Gods? Or, that God uses different names to describe Himself?Yes, He does. [El Shaddai, El Elyon,*Adonai,Yahweh,*Jehovah Nissi,*Jehovah Raah,Jehovah Rapha, and many others including
El Olam (The Everlasting God)]. Or... do yoy think all those names apply to Jehovah, and exclude "mighty God" because it shows that Jesus is God?



Can you see how you try explain away the obvious meaning. Why not just accept that Jesus is the everlasting Father and the mighty God? The evelasting Father is also 'El Olam'...the everlasting God.*

Yes... we agree. The word is much the same in the English language. We understand the meaning by the context. From the context of "mighty God and everlasting Father", it becomes clear who Jesus is. (Also, of course it is important that we don't take that first in isolation. Scripture should always be interpreted using other Scripture)

Absolutely, that there is only one God. Yet you seem to think that 'mighty God and everlasting Father' is a different God?

I hope so too. We have many gods in our society (money, fame, education, cars, sports, entertainers or even things like family). But there is only God....there is only one Creator. There is only one Mediator. God humbled Himself...For there is only one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity--the man Christ Jesus. He was fully man... but He is also our "mighty God"...Jesus is the "everlasting Father"

Has KingdomRose left the building?

 

[Ben Masada]

Unless you believ e that I Am "He" (God) you will die in your sins, John 8:24

Unless you believ e that I Am "He" (God) you will die in your sins, John 8:24

This statement was never mentioned by Jesus but by the Hellenist who wrote the gospel of John. The statement is too unJewish to have been mentioned by a Jew. A Jew would never consider himself as a god.

 

[Robert Pate]

This statement was never mentioned by Jesus but by the Hellenist who wrote the gospel of John. The statement is too unJewish to have been mentioned by a Jew. A Jew would never consider himself as a god.

This one did, John 14:6-14.

 

[Ben Masada]

Let's face it, no one can understand the trinity and there is a trinity.

Let's face it, no one can understand the Trinity as indeed there is no Trinity. The idea was fabricated as a result of imagination from the mind of Paul.

The Absolute Oneness of God

Isaiah says that, absolutely, God cannot be compared with anyone or anything, as we read Isaiah 46:5. "To whom will ye liken Me, and make Me equal to, or compare Me with, that we may be alike?"

Therefore, more than one God would have been unable to produce the world; one would have impeded the work of the other, unless this could be avoided by a suitable division of labor.

More than one Divine Being would have one element in common, and would differ in another; each would thus consist of two elements, and would not be God.

More than one God are moved to action by will; the will, without a substratum, could not act simultaneously in more than one being.

Therefore, the existence of one God is proved; the existence of more than one God cannot be proved. One could suggest that it would be possible; but since as possibility is inapplicable to God, there does not exist more than one God. So, the possibility of ascertaining the existence of God is here confounded with potentiality of existence.

Again, if one God suffices, a second or third God would be superfluous; if one God is not sufficient, he is not perfect, and cannot be a deity.

Now, besides being God absolutely One, He is incorporeal. If God were corporeal, He would consist of atoms, and would not be one; or he would be comparable to other beings; but a comparison implies the existence of similar and of dissimilar elements, and God would thus not be One. A corporeal God would be finite, and an external power would be required to define those limits.

 

[Ben Masada]

This one did, John 14:6-14.

No, he did not. Sorry Robert, but you are spiritually slandering Jesus under the pretext to honor him. Jesus was a Jew. The guy in charge of that statement was a Hellenist, former disciple of Paul's. Hence, I have said here more than several times that a Jew could have never written such a gospel.

 

[KingdomRose]

Ok.... well lets examine that. But, I think you sort of missed the point of the argument. Krsto had said that "Everlasting Father" would be better translated as 'father of futurity'. Every major translation team disagrees with that.*



Part of the duty of translation teams is to insert punctuation and capitilization based on context. The interlinear Bible actually reads ( I think) " to us is born to us a child For and shall be to is given a son his shoulder on the government Wonderful his name and called mighty the God Counselor of Peace the Prince the everlasting"



Jehovah has many names in the OT. Your 'interpretation' method is inconsistent. Do you think that there are many Gods? Or, that God uses different names to describe Himself?Yes, He does. [El Shaddai, El Elyon,*Adonai,Yahweh,*Jehovah Nissi,*Jehovah Raah,Jehovah Rapha, and many others including
El Olam (The Everlasting God)]. Or... do yoy think all those names apply to Jehovah, and exclude "mighty God" because it shows that Jesus is God?



Can you see how you try explain away the obvious meaning. Why not just accept that Jesus is the everlasting Father and the mighty God? The evelasting Father is also 'El Olam'...the everlasting God.*

Yes... we agree. The word is much the same in the English language. We understand the meaning by the context. From the context of "mighty God and everlasting Father", it becomes clear who Jesus is. (Also, of course it is important that we don't take that first in isolation. Scripture should always be interpreted using other Scripture)

Absolutely, that there is only one God. Yet you seem to think that 'mighty God and everlasting Father' is a different God?

I hope so too. We have many gods in our society (money, fame, education, cars, sports, entertainers or even things like family). But there is only God....there is only one Creator. There is only one Mediator. God humbled Himself...For there is only one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity--the man Christ Jesus. He was fully man... but He is also our "mighty God"...Jesus is the "everlasting Father"

I guess I missed what Krsto said about "father of futurity." I would agree with that, and it's much less contradictory than "everlasting Father"....capitalized and seeming to indicate that the Son is the Father. I realize that translation teams are trying to insert punctuation and capitalization based on context. But that is a problem when you are doing that with BIAS. Why should Isaiah 9:6 have capital letters where none need be?

Your Interlinear quote is what mine also shows. (You capitalized some words that aren't capitalized in the original.)

You say that Jehovah has "many names." I am awed at the lack of awareness of what Jehovah's name really is, of most people...even regular readers of the Bible. Jehovah has ONE NAME. He gives it at Psalm 83:18, KJV. All the other names you give are either TITLES (El Shaddai, Adonai) or are NAMES OF PLACES that include God's name.

"Jehovah-Jireh" is a place on a mountain in Moriah where Abraham found a ram caught in a thicket, and Abraham viewed this ram as Jehovah's provision and therefore named the place "Jehovah-jireh."

"Jehovah-Nissi" is the name of the memorial ALTAR erected by Moses after battling the Amalekites. The name means Jehovah is my refuge, or Jehovah is my exaltation.

"Jehovah-Shalom" is the name given to the ALTAR that Gideon built at Ophrah. He built it as a memorial to Jehovah.

I think you can get the idea. Jehovah's name isn't any of these things, but his name is INCORPORATED into the names of places or things. I have already said that it is a fact that men worship many gods. But TO US there is one God, the Father. (I Corinthians 8:5,6) "Mighty god" in Isaiah 9:6 is excluded because it refers to the Messiah, even though it would be true that Jehovah is also a mighty god. But the Messiah is never "El Shaddai." Only Jehovah is the Almighty God.

Your "obvious meaning" is not someone else's obvious meaning. Jesus is an everlasting father because he has spiritual children and has the authority to give them life. (Where does the Bible refer to him as "El Olam"?) Jesus is a mighty god because he is an important, powerful person, given that authority BY Jehovah.

Scripture should be interpreted using other Scripture....yes I agree.

Your question about "do you think that 'mighty god and everlasting father' is a different god"....this boggles my mind, because I have explained to you about what "god" means, and that there are no capital letters in Hebrew (and you insert them anywhere you want), and that ONLY Jehovah is El Shaddai.....I don't know why you are asking this. Yes, Jesus is our mighty god (a very important, powerful person) and our everlasting spiritual father who has caused us to have life. Jesus is the mediator BETWEEN God and men. How can he be God Almighty if he is BETWEEN God Almighty and men? Can you imagine it?

:rotfl:

 

[KingdomRose]

This one did, John 14:6-14.

Uh, no he didn't. Ben Masada is right about that. Jesus always said he was THE SON OF GOD. No Jew would think that God Almighty would or could come down to Earth. Not the Source of all life, the maintainer of the entire universe! Jehovah sent His Son here to represent Him. You notice that Jesus said that "no one comes to the Father but THROUGH me." He doesn't identify himself with God...the God that he is mediating for, between God and men. We have "seen" the Father in him because he is the "image" of the Father, doing things the way the Father wanted them done. (Colossians 1:15; John 5:19)

Did you miss verse 10? Jesus said he did nothing of his own initiative, but the Father worked THROUGH him. Did he speak for nothing? Are his words to be shrugged off?

 

[6days]

I realize that translation teams are trying to insert punctuation and capitalization based on context. But that is a problem when you are doing that with BIAS. Why should*Isaiah 9:6*have capital letters where none need be?

The answer is pretty obvious..... EVERY major translation team thought it should be capitalized, based on context. *Even the anonymous JW 'translators' show..."Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,* Eternal Father, Prince of Peace".*

*

Your Interlinear quote is what mine also shows. (You capitalized some words that aren't capitalized in the original.)

No... I didn't capitalize anything. I copied what it shows in the Interlinear.*

You say that Jehovah has "many names." I am awed at the lack of awareness of what Jehovah's name really is, of most people...even regular readers of the Bible. Jehovah has ONE NAME. He gives it at*Psalm 83:18, KJV. All the other names you give are either TITLES (El Shaddai, Adonai) or are NAMES OF PLACES thatinclude*God's name.

Hmmmm..... off hand it seems like you are making a false distinction between 'title' and 'name'. But, even if we go with that distinction, He is referred to with 'titles' such as "the Creator" in Is. 40:28 and Rom. 1:25. In Col. 1:16, we see that Jesus is the Creator.*

Thomas called Jesus "my Lord and my God". Thomas was not calling Jesus a god. Jesus did not rebuke Thomas, but acknowleged that worship that He was indeed Thomas's Lord and God.*

But TO US there is one God, the Father. (I Corinthians 8:5,6) "Mighty god" in*Isaiah 9:6*is excluded because it refers to the Messiah, even though it would be true that Jehovah is also a mighty god. But the Messiah is never "El Shaddai." Only Jehovah is the Almighty God.

1 Cor. 8:5 mentions there are many gods. Jesus is not a god. Jesus is the "Mighty God and Everlasting Father" He is the omnipotent, omniscient Creator..... worshipped by men and angels.*

Jesus is an everlasting father because he has spiritual children and has the authority to give them life.

Jesus is the mighty God and Everladting Father. Period. The statement doesn't need to be re-explained to fit your beliefs.*

(Where does the Bible refer to him as "El Olam"?)

God is refered to as "El Olam"...ETERNAL GOD in Gen. 21:33, Jer. 10:10, and Is. 26:4. Similarily, we see Jesus being called MIGHTY GOD, AND ETERNAL FATHER. There is no need to try explain it away.

*Jesus is a mighty god because he is an important, powerful person, given that authority BY Jehovah.

Jesus is Mighty God and Eternal /Everlasting Father, because He is. No spin required.*

Your question about "do you think that 'mighty god and everlasting father' is a different god"....this boggles my mind, because I have explained to you about what "god" means, and that there are no capital letters in Hebrew (and you insert them anywhere you want)...

There are a couple things wrong with your statement. You mentioned 1 Cor. 8:5. The verse speaks condescendingly of "many gods"..... as distractions from worshipping the one true God. You want to lump "Almighty God and Everlasting Father" into the category of "many gods". You deny the the Gospel message that God Himself humbled Himself....became flesh so that He could be our Mediator. The man Christ Jesus is a mediator between me a sinner....and a Holy God.*

Also... as mentioned before...I am not the one who inserted capital letters into scripture referring to Jesus as God (not god). Even the anonymous 'translators' of the JW Bible (as well every other major translation team) call The Messiah a Mighty God (capitilized) and Eternal Father. (captilized)

 

[beloved57]

Let's face it, no one can understand the Trinity as indeed there is no Trinity. The idea was fabricated as a result of imagination from the mind of Paul.

The Absolute Oneness of God

Isaiah says that, absolutely, God cannot be compared with anyone or anything, as we read Isaiah 46:5. "To whom will ye liken Me, and make Me equal to, or compare Me with, that we may be alike?"

Therefore, more than one God would have been unable to produce the world; one would have impeded the work of the other, unless this could be avoided by a suitable division of labor.

More than one Divine Being would have one element in common, and would differ in another; each would thus consist of two elements, and would not be God.

More than one God are moved to action by will; the will, without a substratum, could not act simultaneously in more than one being.

Therefore, the existence of one God is proved; the existence of more than one God cannot be proved. One could suggest that it would be possible; but since as possibility is inapplicable to God, there does not exist more than one God. So, the possibility of ascertaining the existence of God is here confounded with potentiality of existence.

Again, if one God suffices, a second or third God would be superfluous; if one God is not sufficient, he is not perfect, and cannot be a deity.

Now, besides being God absolutely One, He is incorporeal. If God were corporeal, He would consist of atoms, and would not be one; or he would be comparable to other beings; but a comparison implies the existence of similar and of dissimilar elements, and God would thus not be One. A corporeal God would be finite, and an external power would be required to define those limits.

Why did the jews believe that God was a calf ?

 

[Robert Pate]

Uh, no he didn't. Ben Masada is right about that. Jesus always said he was THE SON OF GOD. No Jew would think that God Almighty would or could come down to Earth. Not the Source of all life, the maintainer of the entire universe! Jehovah sent His Son here to represent Him. You notice that Jesus said that "no one comes to the Father but THROUGH me." He doesn't identify himself with God...the God that he is mediating for, between God and men. We have "seen" the Father in him because he is the "image" of the Father, doing things the way the Father wanted them done. (Colossians 1:15; John 5:19)

Did you miss verse 10? Jesus said he did nothing of his own initiative, but the Father worked THROUGH him. Did he speak for nothing? Are his words to be shrugged off?

Why did Jesus say..."I and my Father are one?" John 10:30.

 

[Brother Ducky]

It is very important to know who Jesus is. If you believe that he was just a good man you will probably not be saved. Jesus claimed to be divine. He said to the Jews, "You are from beneath; I am from above: you are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that you shall die in your sins: for if you do not believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins" John 8:23, 24.

Once again this scripture proves that we are justified by faith. Faith in a man is not going to save you. We must believe that Jesus was God in the flesh if we are going to be saved. Only God can defeat sin, death and the devil and reconcile the world unto himself by Jesus Christ, 2 Corinthians 5:19. I also believe that you must believe that Jesus is the savior of the whole world, 1 John 4:14. To not believe that Jesus is the savior of the whole world is to not believe that Jesus is God.

Many will be lost because they do not believe that Jesus was able to abolish sin, death and the devil and in doing so reconcile the world unto God. They just simply do not have faith in him. When you add anything to the Gospel such as works or whatever, you have dimnished the saving work of Christ and have made Jesus less than what he is.

Doesn't your mentor, Brimsmead, hold that Jesus was just a man?

 

[Robert Pate]

Doesn't your mentor, Brimsmead, hold that Jesus was just a man?

I don't think so. I doesn't matter what anyone believes. The Bible teaches that Jesus was the God-man.

He had to be all God and all man to save us.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The Bible teaches that Jesus was the God-man.

No, the Bible teaches that Jesus is the Son of God and that God sent His Son.

He had to be all God and all man to save us.

Why would you refuse to accept salvation from Jesus because of an extra-Biblical doctrine that claims Jesus is not the Son of God but rather is God Himself?