If Jesus is 'God' because he was called "son of God", "lord" and received prostrations then why not David?

[aeg4971]

one word "SHARE"......... (smile), LOL.

now lets see if your "Persons" hold up to the test.
Genesis 1:1 God is the H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym a plurality... correct. now is this plurality is it in your, "PERSONS", or is it kn Numerical difference of only one PERSON, (smile).

let the bible speak.
Isaiah 41:4 " Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he."
so, is this two PERSONS, the first and the Last?....... one more, Isaiah 44:6 " Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God."
so, with your education id this two persons in Isaiah 41:4, and 44:6/

is this two distinct persons?

Share is by Infinite Divine Self communication manifestly expressed in the distinction of Personalis. "WITH " signifies a distinction in the supposita of which it is spoken. Hence distinct in supposita or Hypostasis ,yet same in Substance. I AM the First and the Last. That means two distinct Persons (plurality)in the Divine would be singly ," I AM the First and Last". It follows there is no numerical difference in Essence of Being very true God, but a logical and Substantial distinction in Personalis.

You formed your question of "two distinct persons" in a way that presupposes "two composition subjects", which could not be said of God . So yes it is two distinct Persons in the ancients of the meaning of this word person as applied to God contrasted in the plural. ,But no in the modern English only sense you insist on arguing.

101G why do you like so many others keep arguing against your own understanding and use of this word person, instead of its ancient sense and meaning?

There is no composition and subjection in God as it is in this word person. Other than your humanistic use and argument of this word person, your point is what exactly?


......... Alan

 

[GeneZ]

Finding oneself being able to understand that the Trinity is real is a SIGN to the believer that God is working in you.

Finding oneself brainwashed, and only repeating the Trinitarian perspective by rote, is a SIGN you probably are a religious Catholic.

​

“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”​

​

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”​

​

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed ​

to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven." Matthew 16:15-17​

The Trinity is not explainable to those devoid of the filling of the Spirit.

I believe its a doctrine to tip us off to who is, and who is not, of us.

 

[aeg4971]

Finding oneself being able to understand that the Trinity is real is a SIGN to the believer that God is working in you.

Finding oneself brainwashed, and only repeating the Trinitarian perspective by rote, is a SIGN you probably are a religious Catholic.

​

“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”​

​

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”​

​

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed ​

to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven." Matthew 16:15-17​

The Trinity is not explainable to those devoid of the filling of the Spirit.

I believe its a doctrine to tip us off to who is, and who is not, of us.

Finding oneself being able to understand that the Trinity is real is a SIGN to the believer that God is working in you.

Finding oneself brainwashed, and only repeating the Trinitarian perspective by rote, is a SIGN you probably are a religious Catholic.

​

“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”​

​

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”​

​

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed ​

to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven." Matthew 16:15-17​

The Trinity is not explainable to those devoid of the filling of the Spirit.

I believe its a doctrine to tip us off to who is, and who is not, of us.

As a born and raised Protestant middle age man ,who also grew up to believe the Catholic church is overly ritualistic , and borderline hocus pocus I can say with certainty that clearly we modern Protestants spend all our time (often in vain), trying to explain away the distinction of Personalis in God , whereas the ancient Catholics spent all their time demonstrating by rightly dividing, that a plurality of Personalis in God is nothing less than One very true God, otherwise we are all a bunch of polytheistic pagans giving lip service to monotheism.

My modern 21st century Protestant sola scriptura self admit that I too hold as the ancient Catholic Latin doctors 3 points of consideration when approaching the Holy Scriptures.

1. So as not to have the Impious of Sebelius.
2. Nor the Heresy of Arius.
3. Neither be Repugnant to the SHEMA.

I mean we all have the very same Holy Writ. So the scriptures themselves could never be the problem in Christian discourse. , Ironically by ancient Catholics Latins perspective, Most modern anti Trinitarians directly and indirectly import polytheism in their own theology while erroneously attempting to assert and suppose the Trinity is polytheism. Likewise some modern Trinitarians even on CARM tend to directly and indirectly import polytheism when defending orthodoxy of a plurality of Persons in God. But to be fair most Trinitarians who may import tritheism usually do so in an effort to avoid :

1. The Impious of Sebelius.
2. The Heresy of Arius.

Often at the expense of being Repugnant to the SHEMA. By ancient Catholic standards there is no need to overexpress the distinction of Persons in God to prove that there are distinct Persons in God. As for instance some modern Protestant Trinitarians erroneously assert the " Three Divine Persons" in God are " three separate entities". Not only does the very words of scriptures prevents such signification , but the ancient creed affirms," Neither Dividing the Substance , nor confounding and confusing the Subsistence. Hence " Separated without Division "

Thus One Entity of the Divine Essence/ Substance itself INDIVIDUALIZED ,shared among One Person and another , and another( so as not to be Repugnant to the SHEMA) ,; but not as if other from the Divine Nature.

Personally the only thing I can accuse the ancient Catholic so called Greco Roman Latins of, is scripturally and naturally demonstrating that this name Trinity is nowise Repugnant to the SHEMA.

We as modern Protestant Sola Scriptura Christians, many of us tend to either AFFIRM or DENY this name Trinity, solely on account of ancient Greek creedal language ,often without even considering its Trine Scriptural starting premise in Christological or Theological construct/ science. Which is also demonstrated in fallacious anti Trinitarian denial , alternative and erroneous Christological and theological assertions such as ," God is a plurality of Himself", Diversified Ones" , God is in modes or roles of Himself , "the son pre existed in gestation then uttered into existence, and fully indwelled by the spirit of God the Father". " The Father is the spirit sharing with a flesh creature son because the son is his own Father". Which makes no sense since God by HIs very Nature does not materially birth a creature son from Supreme Being.

Lastly what my modern Protestant brain find most ironic is that all modern anti Trinitarians erroneous Christological and theological half baked suppositions can only have a resemblance of coherency properly expressed in God Trine nature as the ancient doctors express. Simply but, by ancient Catholic Latins perspective , whatever these here modern Sola Scriptura anti Trinitarians suppose against a" Trinity of Persons" in God, is , and will be exactly why the ancient Greeks say," Tres Hypostases un Ousia". And we say in English," One Essence in Three Persons".


I speak in the same Trine Biblical principles as the ancient Catholic Latins , just as the founding Protesters John Calvin, John Wesley and Martin Luther; because their motto in defending this name Trinity is," You can call us what you wanna, but what you can't call us is polytheistic : as when we say God is Trine ," Several Persons having Godhead.

I apologize for being wordy, but I do like to be accused of being elucidating as any ancient apologist must need be, leaving no room for this name Trinity to be erroneously and unholy defiled as any notion of tritheism .


14. For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,

15. Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,

16. That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;

17. That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,

18. May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;

19. And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

20. Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,

21. Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.




......... Alan

 

[GeneZ]

As a born and raised Protestant middle age man ,who also grew up to believe the Catholic church is overly ritualistic , and borderline hocus pocus I can say with certainty that clearly we modern Protestants spend all our time (often in vain), trying to explain away the distinction of Personalis in God , whereas the ancient Catholics spent all their time demonstrating by rightly dividing, that a plurality of Personalis in God is nothing less than One very true God, otherwise we are all a bunch of polytheistic pagans giving lip service to monotheism.

My modern 21st century Protestant sola scriptura self admit that I too hold as the ancient Catholic Latin doctors 3 points of consideration when approaching the Holy Scriptures.

1. So as not to have the Impious of Sebelius.
2. Nor the Heresy of Arius.
3. Neither be Repugnant to the SHEMA.

I mean we all have the very same Holy Writ. So the scriptures themselves could never be the problem in Christian discourse. , Ironically by ancient Catholics Latins perspective, Most modern anti Trinitarians directly and indirectly import polytheism in their own theology while erroneously attempting to assert and suppose the Trinity is polytheism. Likewise some modern Trinitarians even on CARM tend to directly and indirectly import polytheism when defending orthodoxy of a plurality of Persons in God. But to be fair most Trinitarians who may import tritheism usually do so in an effort to avoid :

1. The Impious of Sebelius.
2. The Heresy of Arius.

Often at the expense of being Repugnant to the SHEMA. By ancient Catholic standards there is no need to overexpress the distinction of Persons in God to prove that there are distinct Persons in God. As for instance some modern Protestant Trinitarians erroneously assert the " Three Divine Persons" in God are " three separate entities". Not only does the very words of scriptures prevents such signification , but the ancient creed affirms," Neither Dividing the Substance , nor confounding and confusing the Subsistence. Hence " Separated without Division "

Thus One Entity of the Divine Essence/ Substance itself INDIVIDUALIZED ,shared among One Person and another , and another( so as not to be Repugnant to the SHEMA) ,; but not as if other from the Divine Nature.

Personally the only thing I can accuse the ancient Catholic so called Greco Roman Latins of, is scripturally and naturally demonstrating that this name Trinity is nowise Repugnant to the SHEMA.

We as modern Protestant Sola Scriptura Christians, many of us tend to either AFFIRM or DENY this name Trinity, solely on account of ancient Greek creedal language ,often without even considering its Trine Scriptural starting premise in Christological or Theological construct/ science. Which is also demonstrated in fallacious anti Trinitarian denial , alternative and erroneous Christological and theological assertions such as ," God is a plurality of Himself", Diversified Ones" , God is in modes or roles of Himself , "the son pre existed in gestation then uttered into existence, and fully indwelled by the spirit of God the Father". " The Father is the spirit sharing with a flesh creature son because the son is his own Father". Which makes no sense since God by HIs very Nature does not materially birth a creature son from Supreme Being.

Lastly what my modern Protestant brain find most ironic is that all modern anti Trinitarians erroneous Christological and theological half baked suppositions can only have a resemblance of coherency properly expressed in God Trine nature as the ancient doctors express. Simply but, by ancient Catholic Latins perspective , whatever these here modern Sola Scriptura anti Trinitarians suppose against a" Trinity of Persons" in God, is , and will be exactly why the ancient Greeks say," Tres Hypostases un Ousia". And we say in English," One Essence in Three Persons".


I speak in the same Trine Biblical principles as the ancient Catholic Latins , just as the founding Protesters John Calvin, John Wesley and Martin Luther; because their motto in defending this name Trinity is," You can call us what you wanna, but what you can't call us is polytheistic : as when we say God is Trine ," Several Persons having Godhead.

I apologize for being wordy, but I do like to be accused of being elucidating as any ancient apologist must need be, leaving no room for this name Trinity to be erroneously and unholy defiled as any notion of tritheism .


14. For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,

15. Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,

16. That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;

17. That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,

18. May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;

19. And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

20. Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,

21. Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.




......... Alan

What did that explain and clarify?

 

[aeg4971]

one word "SHARE"......... (smile), LOL.

now lets see if your "Persons" hold up to the test.
Genesis 1:1 God is the H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym a plurality... correct. now is this plurality is it in your, "PERSONS", or is it kn Numerical difference of only one PERSON, (smile).

let the bible speak.
Isaiah 41:4 " Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he."
so, is this two PERSONS, the first and the Last?....... one more, Isaiah 44:6 " Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God."
so, with your education id this two persons in Isaiah 41:4, and 44:6/

is this two distinct persons?

The most rudimentary comprehension when the ancient Creed says of the Three Divine Persons," Neither Dividing the Substance nor confounding and confusing the Subsistence. Separated without Division". Simply Scripturally signifies ,

" The Father is God, The Son is God, The Holy Spirit is God , and yet there are NOT three gods, but One God. The Father is eternal and uncreated ,The Son is eternal and uncreated, The Holy Spirit is eternal and uncreated , and yet there are NOT three eternals and three uncreated, but One Eternal Uncreated.


Now of you don't mind I need you to demonstrate how anything you suppose confute and dispatch these Biblical truths .

Everyone loves to quote scriptures word for word as if quoting is actually interpreting , many often without expressing or signifying whereby it is God is. Now express whereby it is a Diversified ones, or God is a plurality of Himself.

Then refute that," God of His own goodness EVER conceives His Substantial Form and Image Face to Face ,signified by Word, which is rightly called generation eternally begotten and Son.

Refute the Biblical supposition above, without some half baked supposition derived from your humanistic insistence on this word person.


........ Alan

 

[GeneZ]

The Father is one nature. God.

The Son is God and another nature in union.

The Holy Spirit is God and another nature in union.

The Son is soul and Deity in union.

The Holy Spirit is spirit and Deity in union.

As the Son is fully human and fully Deity? Two natures?

The Holy Spirit is fully angelic and Deity in union. Two natures in union.

 

[aeg4971]

What did that explain and clarify?

Oh only what all my post seek to explain and clarify . That the name Trinity is expressly Biblical Monotheism and in no way polytheism ,whether one AFFIRM or Deny the Creedal Language. Scriptures shows God Self Revelation to be Three-fold". Hence Trine in nature. Or as modernism signifies Triune which is shorthand for ancient signification " Trine-Unity".




I hope I cleared things up.



........ Alan

 

[aeg4971]

The Father is one nature. God.

The Son is God and another nature in union.

The Holy Spirit is God and another nature in union.

The Son is soul and Deity in union.

The Holy Spirit is spirit and Deity in union.

As the Son is fully human and fully Deity? Two natures?

The Holy Spirit is fully angelic and Deity in union. Two natures in union.

So in other words Scripturally speaking, as God is numerically one by nature, It would follow ," UNITY is appropriated to the Father , EQUALITY is appropriated Son, and UNION is appropriated to the Holy Spirit".

The Son is God and another nature in union .
The Son is soul and Deity in union.
.

In other elucidating words ," The one Person of Christ at one and at the same time subsist in two natures , Divinity and humanity uncommingled and unalloyed.

The Holy Spirit is God and another nature in union.
The Holy Spirit is spirit and Deity in union.

In other elucidating words, God is Spirit by His very nature , and thus there is no essential difference between Deity and Spiratio. Furthermore The Father and the Son are but ONE originating principle of the Holy Spirit.


Lastly the Scriptural eternal relation between God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Spirit is in no way do to any act of producing change ,existence, motion or movement in God, but rather, purely the subsisting Divine relation of the Originator/ Father to the Originated/Son to the Originating/ Holy Spirit.


Notice how I signified in defense of this name Trinity with no room for charges of polytheism, whereas your signification leaves much to be qualified if only to avoid the occasion of charges of polytheism. I seems you are defending the Trinity based on what humanism an anti Trinitarian might say in opposing this name Trinity., as oppose to defending the monotheism in God Trine nature as I seek to express at all times.


I hope I cleared things up.


........ Alan

 

[aeg4971]

personal opinion? no good at all, just an excuse.

only two words,,,,, "Diversified Oneness".... (smile).

PICJAG, 101G.

A personal opinion that actual knowledge demonstrates daily on CARM. After all you have ridiculously asserted "God is a plurality of Himself", " Diversified oneness", only to of the most simple mind insist that distinct Persons in God is polytheism , God is a plurality of himself, by begotten and son only means flesh. All of which is Biblically retarded, and thus natural more than an opinion.

Case in point:

That would be called," Considering the mode of signification to the Thing signified" . The Most Supreme Intelligible Self Subsisting Thing, we call very true God and thus in and of itself can stand for this word Person in a more excellent way. What is the most excellent way this word Person can be applied to God 101G? It is rhetorical for that would be striping imperfections of genus and composition, subject and accident which could not exist in God.

For the sake of argument lets consider your two erroneous abstract suppositions, but in the Scriptural determination," God is a plurality of Himself" and " Diversified oneness". These two inexact abstract modes of signification to the Thing signified ; Predicated to God , must need be considered in the concrete . If we consider plurality Indeterminately signified, in a determinate manner, and this word diversified in an equivocal sense , The First Principle thing we are Substantially lead to is ," Therefore didst Thou Begat the Co- Eternal, to Whom didst Thou saidith, this day have I Begotten Thee".

I just walked you through exactly how you perpetually refute yourself.


......... Alan

 

[101G]

Share is by Infinite Divine Self communication manifestly expressed in the distinction of Personalis. "WITH " signifies a distinction in the supposita of which it is spoken. Hence distinct in supposita or Hypostasis ,yet same in Substance. I AM the First and the Last. That means two distinct Persons

GINOLJC, to All,

First ERROR of the Day. Equal Share is no Distinction.... (smile).... LOL. scripture, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

at least you're trying to LEARN.

Case in point:

That would be called," Considering the mode of signification to the Thing signified" . The Most Supreme Intelligible Self Subsisting Thing, we call very true God and thus in and of itself can stand for this word Person in a more excellent way. What is the most excellent way this word Person can be applied to God 101G? It is rhetorical for that would be striping imperfections of genus and composition, subject and accident which could not exist in God.

SECOND ERROR of the DAY, in the EQUAL SHARE, there is no striping, not in EQUALLY SHARING od ONE'S SELF. again see above.

For the sake of argument lets consider your two erroneous abstract suppositions, but in the Scriptural determination," God is a plurality of Himself" and " Diversified oneness". These two inexact abstract modes of signification to the Thing signified ; Predicated to God , must need be considered in the concrete . If we consider plurality Indeterminately signified, in a determinate manner, and this word diversified in an equivocal sense , The First Principle thing we are Substantially lead to is ," Therefore didst Thou Begat the Co- Eternal, to Whom didst Thou saidith, this day have I Begotten Thee".

THIRD ERROR oif the DAY. you speak of Flesh Nature, I speak of Spiritual Nature. the concrete is only the MANIDESTATION of the ABSTRACT, which is not SEEN. your LLR for today, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

being is present tense... correct. the Form of God is "Spirit".... his NATURE. so what is abstract is manifested concretly in flesh bone and blood. did his nature changed? no. but is it not Intrinsic Spatial? YES, for Intrinsic: 1. belonging to a thing by its very nature, hence, (diversity). is shows ownership, or possession. as in MY FATHER, or MY GOD. which is himself in the EQUAL SHARE, for no one is EQUAL "TO" God, but in the Equal he is, and this is determined by the term "WITH". oh this is too easy not to understand.

Intrinsic is synonymous with, native, innate, natural, true, real, and essential.
native: belonging to a person by birth or to a thing by nature;
inherent. (hence his, or hers, my, your, our), as in the Lord Jesus in his diversified form as a man. Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God". this scripture support our view of the Intrinsic Spacial which is the diversified spirit, or the ALLOS in form and fashion. listen to the definition of form here in Philippians 2:6
G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fay') n.
1. shape
2. (figuratively) nature
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form Root(s): G3313

knowing the meaning of definition #2, NATURE, and God is, "Spirit", abstract it say figuratively, right, lets see the based of the root of the word. G3313 μέρος meros (mer'-os) n. 1. portion
KJV: behalf, course, coast, craft, particular (+ -ly), part (+ -ly), piece, portion, respect, side, some sort(-what)

so, what's another word for "Portion?", answer ... SHARE... BINGO, there is our answer. God is the EQUAL of himself in Flkesh.... Concretly. supportive scripture, Isaiah 63:5 "And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me."

his "OWN" Arm? native: belonging to a person by birth or to a thing by nature; BIMGO. his OWN ARM is HIM.


I just walked you through exactly how your perpetually IGNORANCE was reproved.

101G..

 

[jamesh]

The word "Lord" is a title for someone with authority. It's used for God. And it's also used for people like Jesus and David. But Christians arbitrarily decide that "Lord" has a divine meaning only when applied to Jesus.



In Acts 1:24-26 they're praying to YHWH.

If Jesus is YHWH then it implies that YHWH is "the son of David". Because Jesus is also referred to as "son of David".

Ok Mr. skorpion! At Matthew 22:42 Jesus ask the following question to the Pharisees, "What do you think about the Christ/Messiah, whose son is He?" They said to Him (like you), "The son of David"

Vs43, "He/Jesus said to them, "Then how does David in the Spirit call Him Lord saying, Vs44, "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, Until I make My enemies beneath My feet?" Vs45, "If David then calls Him Lord, how is He his son?"

So what is the point that Jesus is making because there appears to be a contradiction? How could the Messiah simultaneously be David's son and his Lord? Jesus wanted to show them that Messiah is not simply a nationalistic, political, earthly figure from David's lineage. He is the divine "Lord" of heavenly origin.

The Pharisees did not understand how the Messiah could be both the son of David and the Lord of David, which was the point that Jesus was making. At verse 46, "And no one was able to answer Him a word," So, if the Pharisees did not know how to answer Him, you can't know.

IN GOD THE SON,
james

 

[101G]

To all.
not for an argument, but for edification.
ATTENTION..... there is no more "Son of God", as in title... nor the Title "LORD". I know that sounds mean, or it's a hard pill to swallow but no, it's FACT. scripture, 2 Corinthians 5:16 "Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more."
the flesh of God was called "the Son of God". well that flesh is no more, he is now GORIFIED in NEW FLESH, (resurrected), that is not made with hands.... translation, human hands, meaning no human has anything to do with his flesh that he is in now.. he is in his NEW TABERNJACLE, or TEMPLE/Building.

and as for the title "LORD", no more, by the Amalgamation of the Spirit in Glorified Flesh, God is "Lord". I know that this is a BOLD STATEMENT but it needs to be MADE, and 101G, in the name of the Lord Jesus christ ... is making it.

for it is the "FIRST", the G746 ἀρχή arche (ar-chee') of John 1:1 who is the CREATOR/Builder of the NEW CREATION. supportive scripture, Isaiah 65:17 "For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind." this is the "LORD", lets make sure, Isaiah 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain." so it is the "LORD" who will CREATE the NEW HEAVENS and the NEW EARTH... correct? let's see. Revelation 21:1 "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea." ok, who made this NEW HEAVENS and EARTH? verse 5, Revelation 21:5 "And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful." and it's the "Lord" who sits on the THRONE. but did not the "LORD" said that he was going to make the New Heavens and Earth? ... yes, but it is the "Lord" who is. ... (smile). is the bible in a contridiction? of course not, because the LORD is the Lord in flesh.

Understand, let us move on into GLORY, with the Lord God almighty, JESUS/YESHUA, as ONE. leaving the flesh behind. scripture, 2 Corinthians 10:3 "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:" 2 Corinthians 10:4 "(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds" 2 Corinthians 10:5 "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;" 2 Corinthians 10:6 "And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled." 2 Corinthians 10:7 "Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? If any man trust to himself that he is Christ's, let him of himself think this again, that, as he is Christ's, even so are we Christ's."

as a "Diversified Oneness", my weapons are mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds. and Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.

this is what I'm doing right now. God is a PERSON of ONE in the ECHAD of First and LAST, and now the ... Psalms 118:22 "The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner."........ and the Lord JESUS is that HEAD STONE, the Corner.

Zechariah 4:7 "Who art thou, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it."

Matthew 21:42 "Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?" Matthew 21:43 "Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." Matthew 21:44 "And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. Matthew 21:45 "And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them." Matthew 21:46 "But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet."

the KINGDOM of God is Taken from U, and given unto the TRUE CHILDREN of God.

PICJAG, 101G.

 

[Fred]

ATTENTION..... there is no more "Son of God", as in title

Revelation 2:18 proves your assertion wrong.

 

[101G]

Revelation 2:18 proves your assertion wrong.

excuse me, I ment to say ONLY, in title. I human, I stand correct .... but is this the son of "God" the person who was on EARTH? please answer me.
but before you answer, please note that this is a VISION.

now your answer please, is this the son of God who was on EARTH...... your answer please.

PICJAG, 101G.

 

[GeneZ]

Oh only what all my post seek to explain and clarify . That the name Trinity is expressly Biblical Monotheism and in no way polytheism ,whether one AFFIRM or Deny the Creedal Language. Scriptures shows God Self Revelation to be Three-fold". Hence Trine in nature. Or as modernism signifies Triune which is shorthand for ancient signification " Trine-Unity".




I hope I cleared things up.



........ Alan

The acceptance of the Trinity always begins by faith... i.e. "I see what it says, but I do not understand how it can be."

No one can understand the Trinity at first. Most stare like a deer in the headlights, and acknowledge that the Word tells us that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each God.

Clarity takes time to develop. Using highfalutin language does not help others in advancing in understanding. But, it may comfort alone the one who wants to keep advancing onto having clarity.

 

[101G]

now that it is Clear, there is no Son of God at all anywhere, "ONLY" (smile), in title...concering the Lord JESUS YIKES.

PICJAG, 101G.

 

[GeneZ]

now that it is Clear, there is no Son of God at all anywhere, "ONLY" (smile), in title...concering the Lord JESUS YIKES.

PICJAG, 101G.

What the heck is your problem?

Is that what you believe? Or, was that sarcasm? To whom was it directed?

 

[101G]

What the heck is your problem?

Is that what you believe? Or, was that sarcasm? To whom was it directed?

calm down, hold onto you britches. there is no more son of God, scripture, Luke 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."

what's missing here? answer BLOOD. the son of God had BLOOD, but not anymore... hello..... now do you understand?

PICJAG, 101G.

 

[GeneZ]

calm down, hold onto you britches. there is no more son of God, scripture, Luke 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."

what's missing here? answer BLOOD. the son of God had BLOOD, but not anymore... hello..... now do you understand?

PICJAG, 101G.

Understand what?


You talk to your imagination and it agrees with you. Then, you assume that your imagination thinks like everyone else "should."

Being obscure and confusing does not make one a genius. Einstein said that making the complex into something simple is the gift.

You want a good teacher? Here is one teacher that God raised up for those who need greater clarification. https://rbthieme.org/index.html#tabs-3

Take time and gain knowledge that has been clarified. Then you can clarify for others.

That does not mean others will always understand., But, they will be able to clearly understand what it is that they are not understanding.
The Holy Spirit must do His work to transform the knowledge into having understanding.

grace and peace ..........

 

[101G]

Understand what?


You talk to your imagination and it agrees with you. Then, you assume that your imagination thinks like everyone else "should."

Being obscure and confusing does not make one a genius. Einstein said that making the complex into something simple is the gift.

You want a good teacher? Here is one teacher that God raised up for those who need greater clarification. https://rbthieme.org/index.html#tabs-3

Take time and gain knowledge that has been clarified. Then you can clarify for others.

That does not mean others will always understand., But, they will be able to clearly understand what it is that they are not understanding.
The Holy Spirit must do His work to transform the knowledge into having understanding.

grace and peace ..........

LOL, LOL, LOL, I have the GREATEST TEACHER, the Lord Jesus the HOLY SPIRIT... and just because you cannot understand my speech, just as those of my Lord day, as said, hold your MOUTH, and open your EARS..... and the Lord Jesus teaching is not obscure or confusing, only to the unrepentant.

I have the mind of the Lord JESUS, yes, I'm Human, ... to ERROR is to be Human, but to stay in a LIE is of the Devil.
if I make a Mistake, a mistake can be corrected, but a LIE God deal with that..... (smile).

so you can keep your teaches ... all of them, but my statement still stands. there is no more Son of God, who was in human form, only in title....

now 101G will make another statement.... there is no more any Lamb of God either..... YIKES! but there is a LAMB... ain't that 101G something?

now if you want to discuss these things, or God, I'm Game.

see, there is a difference between being confident, (in the Lord Jesus), and arrogant, (outside the Lord).

as said, if you want to discuss the Lord Jesus .... God , I'm game

PICJAG, 101G.