False doctrine to the point of shameful manipulation of Hebrew. This is nonsense on the same level as JW watchtower.
The best you can do, is to insult?
What you have posted is simple an ad hominem attack.
It simply attacking the person making the argument rather than the argument itself when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making.
This is usually the last position of ignorance knowing that it cannot compete with the intelligence and character of X, it is usually a sign of desperation on the part of the one insulting. [Logically Fallacious]
The bottom line is that the verse doesn't mention the Trinity or plurality. Again, it is shameful to force your doctrine where the text isn't plainly teaching it.
Now a red herring. I did not mention the Trinity in this. We are discussing plurality. And yes when YHWH says 'us' or 'we' He is using plurality as it pertains to Him.
First comes mention of a child born
in the actual text, then Son. Please read context, not your narrative.
Changing the subject again. You claimed that the Son is not an eternal tittle. Notice Jesus is identified as the Son before He took on flesh.
3 Individuals? Wow. Many Trinitarians don't say "individuals" because that strongly implies three gods.
No it does no imply three gods. If you bothered to read what you argued against originally the explanation is there
But let me help you out.
- There are three divine persons called “God” in the Bible.
- Within the one being that is God there exist eternally three coequal and coeternal persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
- “Person” refers to the center of consciousness and includes the idea of mind, will and desire.
- Just as I am a being with one center of self-consciousness, who I call “I”, God is a being with three centers of self-consciousness each of which can say “I”.
- I am the Father.
- I am the Son.
- I am the Holy Spirit.
- Each has a first-person perspective.
- They are three distinct persons.
- The Father is not identical to the Son or the Holy Spirit.
- The Son is not identical to the Father or the Holy Spirit
- The Holy Spirit is not identical to the Son or to the Father.
- They are not independent of each other they still belong to the same being.
- Since each is divine they share the attributes of deity.
- God is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
- The Father is God and not the Son or the Holy Spirit.
- The Son is God but not the Father or Holy Spirit.
- The Holy Spirit is God but not the Father or Son.
The Apostles always baptized IN THE NAME OF JESUS? Do you need all those scripture examples, or do you have them?
Hint, when you write something such as the above, you are claiming omniscience. We have several passages where the Apostles baptized in the name of Jesus and other where it just states baptized. To state that they always did X when that is not recorded is claiming supernatural ability to know such facts. So you can use 'We have several passages where it is recorded that the Apostle's did X. "
Back to nonsense
Irrelevant. What trumps here? What Jesus said, or what the Apostles did?
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father [that Me] and of the Son [Also Me and of the Holy Spirit [The spiritual me], (Mt 28:19).
Your post; Jesus is the one God manifested in the flesh then it is clear
he is the Holy Spirit in regards to his essence or divine nature.
This is modalism.
Let's apply your theory of modalism to the text..
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father [that Me] and of the Son [Also Me and of the Holy Spirit [The spiritual me], (Mt 28:19).
And I will pray the Father [pray to myself], and He [ that's me]will give you another Helper [which is me]...(Jn 14:16).
1When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God [saw Himself] descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. 17 And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son [Jesus speaking], in whom I am well pleased.” (Mt 3:16–17).
All the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (Colossians 2:9)
I agree.
Jesus was with them in the flesh was he not? The coming of the Holy Spirit is Jesus coming in Spirit. See JOHN 14:18.... I WILL NOT LEAVE YOU AS ORPHANS, I WILL COME TO YOU.
Please pay attention to the text.
And I will pray the Father , and He will give you
another Helper...(Jn 14:16).
If the Father will give another Helper, it would mean that the 'other Helper' is not the present Helper.
You've got the Trinitarian talking points down, I'll give you that. Think man. What difference does it make where you insert "everlasting". He is still the Father, and you categorically said that the Bible doesn't call him Father. Well, Isaiah 9:6 does regardless of how you translate the adjective "everlasting" or "eternal".
These are not talking points, but the truth, and note in answer to you. If I was using talking points I would try to steer the conversation to those points.
Now to the above.
There is a difference between God the Father, and Father of everlasting. They are not the same, and following Hebrew Isa is not identifying Jesus as God the Father but X.
So, what's your point? To be Jesus' son means He is their Father. Do you have two Fathers in heaven?
What is my point? My point is to illuminate your nonsense. Did you bother to read what I was responding to?
Your Modalist post. Revelation 21:7 teaches that Jesus is our Father.
Is that what it teaches?
He who overcomes shall inherit all things, and
I will be his God and he shall be My son. (Re 21:7).
Overcoming is a necessary condition to the Jesus' son.
Here you shot yourself in the foot.
Notice, if we are to take this verse literal which we should, pay close attention to 'I will be his God'.
God translates from 'theos' = YHWH