WHAT DID ISAIAH SEE?

What Did Isaiah See?

Jn 12:37-41 “But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him, that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: “Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.” These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.”

The subject [Him] is Jesus. John states that when Isaiah wrote these words down he saw Jesus. But when did Isaiah see Jesus for Isaiah lived during the 8th century BC? Note it was when Isaiah said the above things.

Is 6:10-11 And He said, “Go, and tell this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ “Make the heart of this people dull, And their ears heavy, And shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And return and be healed.”

So what did Isaiah see when he wrote this.

Is 6:1-4 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one cried to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; The whole earth is full of His glory!” … 5… For my eyes have seen the King, The Lord of hosts.”

Isaiah wrote that he saw God in all His Glory. John states that Isaiah saw Jesus. Now some say that what Isaiah saw was the glory of God that was bestowed on Jesus.

Is 42:8 I am the Lord, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.

Side Note: Is 6:8Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: “Whom shall I send, And who will go for Us?”

Jesus states that no one has seen or heard The Father.

Jn 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

Jn 5:37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.

Luke writes in Acts that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah.

Acts 28:25 The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet: 26 "Go to this people, and say, You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. 27 For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.'



Premise 1 John states that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus.

Premise 2 Isaiah states he saw the glory of God

Premise 3 God states that He does not share His glory with anyone.

Premise 4 Jesus states that no one has seen or heard the Father.

Premise 5 Luke states that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah

Premise 6 We have plurality in Is 6:8

Conclusion Isaiah saw and heard the Triune God.
 
What Did Isaiah See?

Jn 12:37-41 “But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him, that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: “Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.” These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.”

The subject [Him] is Jesus. John states that when Isaiah wrote these words down he saw Jesus. But when did Isaiah see Jesus for Isaiah lived during the 8th century BC? Note it was when Isaiah said the above things.

Is 6:10-11 And He said, “Go, and tell this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ “Make the heart of this people dull, And their ears heavy, And shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And return and be healed.”

So what did Isaiah see when he wrote this.

Is 6:1-4 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one cried to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; The whole earth is full of His glory!” … 5… For my eyes have seen the King, The Lord of hosts.”

Isaiah wrote that he saw God in all His Glory. John states that Isaiah saw Jesus. Now some say that what Isaiah saw was the glory of God that was bestowed on Jesus.

Is 42:8 I am the Lord, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.

Side Note: Is 6:8Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: “Whom shall I send, And who will go for Us?”

Jesus states that no one has seen or heard The Father.

Jn 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

Jn 5:37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.

Luke writes in Acts that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah.

Acts 28:25 The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet: 26 "Go to this people, and say, You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. 27 For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.'



Premise 1 John states that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus.

Premise 2 Isaiah states he saw the glory of God

Premise 3 God states that He does not share His glory with anyone.

Premise 4 Jesus states that no one has seen or heard the Father.

Premise 5 Luke states that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah

Premise 6 We have plurality in Is 6:8

Conclusion Isaiah saw and heard the Triune God.

Just to clarify...

When you say "the Triune God" you are referring to ALL THREE PERSONS. Correct?

But your premise 4 states that no one has seen or heard the Father.

"The Triune God" INCLUDES THE FATHER. Correct?
 
What Did Isaiah See?

Well Isaiah certainly did NOT say he saw one of three divine Persons.

Isaiah was very clear that he saw YHWH (the LORD).

Isaiah 6:5... Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

And since he "saw" Yahweh, that means he saw Yahweh "incarnate" rather than "transcendent" Yahweh.

Are you able to post an overview of what you believe? Here is mine...

For this creation, YHWH God (the only one who transcends all creations) determined to create a universe with a kingdom of redeemed humans (living souls) for his glory where he would reign as a living soul himself. The Scriptures describe how God would accomplish his plan. In an instant, transcendent God (called God the Father) created the supernatural and space-time of this universe and also became immanent as a spirit (called the Spirit of God) and in the form of a living soul (called the Word of God) with a glorious body. God the Father then created all things within the universe by the power of the Spirit of God commanded by the Word of God. But whereas God created a human spirit and soul for each of us, God himself as the Word became the human spirit and soul of Jesus. At his conception, Jesus' glorious body was changed to a mortal body to be made like us so he could make reconciliation for our sins. At his resurrection, Jesus' mortal body was changed back to a glorious body and he will also give each of his elect a glorious body when he returns to reign in his kingdom forever.
 

Stephen

Active member
What Did Isaiah See?

Jn 12:37-41 “But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him, that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: “Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.” These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.”

The subject [Him] is Jesus. John states that when Isaiah wrote these words down he saw Jesus. But when did Isaiah see Jesus for Isaiah lived during the 8th century BC? Note it was when Isaiah said the above things.

It is pretty straightforward. Isaiah saw a vision. Prophets do that. John quotes Isaiah 53:1 as the vision he saw. He sees Christ's glorious death and resurrection and eventual rulership of the earth, as Isaiah says in the preceding verses:

See, my servant will act wisely;
he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.
Just as there were many who were appalled at him—
his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
and his form marred beyond human likeness—
so he will sprinkle many nations,
and kings will shut their mouths because of him.
For what they were not told, they will see,
and what they have not heard, they will understand.


Is 6:10-11 And He said, “Go, and tell this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’ “Make the heart of this people dull, And their ears heavy, And shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And return and be healed.”

And here is another vision.


So what did Isaiah see when he wrote this.

Is 6:1-4 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one cried to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; The whole earth is full of His glory!” … 5… For my eyes have seen the King, The Lord of hosts.”

It looks like he is seeing a vision of the future where the whole earth is full of God's glory.

Isaiah wrote that he saw God in all His Glory. John states that Isaiah saw Jesus. Now some say that what Isaiah saw was the glory of God that was bestowed on Jesus.

Yes. John introduces two visions. In one vision he saw Jesus, and in another vision he saw God.

Is 42:8 I am the Lord, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.

This is how we know Jesus isn't God. Jesus gives his glory to the apostles (John 17:22)


Side Note: Is 6:8Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: “Whom shall I send, And who will go for Us?”

Since there are several people in the room, YHWH and the Seraphim, that makes sense.

Jesus states that no one has seen or heard The Father.

Jn 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

Jn 5:37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.

John confirms that by Father, he means God. (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12). Which is another way we know Jesus isn't God.


Luke writes in Acts that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah.

Acts 28:25 The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet: 26 "Go to this people, and say, You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. 27 For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.'

That is true. It isn't Jesus speaking.



Premise 1 John states that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus. - He sure did in Isaiah 52-53. That is why he quoted the passage.

Premise 2 Isaiah states he saw the glory of God - Again true. He quotes anther passage.

Premise 3 God states that He does not share His glory with anyone. - True. And we know that Jesus does. Proving that Jesus isn't God

Premise 4 Jesus states that no one has seen or heard the Father. - And John confirms that by Father, he means God. And people saw Jesus

Premise 5 Luke states that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah - That is true.

Premise 6 We have plurality in Is 6:8 - We sure do. God and the Seraphim.

Conclusion Isaiah saw and heard the Triune God. - This conclusion seems quite random given the above.
 
Just to clarify...

When you say "the Triune God" you are referring to ALL THREE PERSONS. Correct?

But your premise 4 states that no one has seen or heard the Father.

"The Triune God" INCLUDES THE FATHER. Correct?
Within the one being that is God there exist eternally three co-equal and co-eternal persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
“Person” refers to the center of consciousness and includes the idea of mind, will and desire.
“Being” refers to the essential attributes that make God what he is, holy, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, all-powerful.
“Co-equal” fully shared the being that is God never one third.
“ Coeternal” all three exist within eternity, one did not exist before the other.
God is a spirit thus not limited to the physical, eternally exists outside of time and space. He is not limited to time, space, and matter as we are.
God= what. Three persons= who.
Therefore when Isaiah saw Jesus or heard the HS he experienced the Triune God.
 
Well Isaiah certainly did NOT say he saw one of three divine Persons.

Isaiah was very clear that he saw YHWH (the LORD).

Isaiah 6:5... Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

And since he "saw" Yahweh, that means he saw Yahweh "incarnate" rather than "transcendent" Yahweh.
Read the OP. Isaiah under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that he saw YHWH. John (referring to the same passage) under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that Isaiah saw Jesus, and Paul also (referring to the same passage) under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that Isaiah heard the holy spirit. Now it is simple, if you disagree with the OP reconcile.
Are you able to post an overview of what you believe? Here is mine...

For this creation, YHWH God (the only one who transcends all creations) determined to create a universe with a kingdom of redeemed humans (living souls) for his glory where he would reign as a living soul himself. The Scriptures describe how God would accomplish his plan. In an instant, transcendent God (called God the Father) created the supernatural and space-time of this universe and also became immanent as a spirit (called the Spirit of God) and in the form of a living soul (called the Word of God) with a glorious body. God the Father then created all things within the universe by the power of the Spirit of God commanded by the Word of God. But whereas God created a human spirit and soul for each of us, God himself as the Word became the human spirit and soul of Jesus. At his conception, Jesus' glorious body was changed to a mortal body to be made like us so he could make reconciliation for our sins. At his resurrection, Jesus' mortal body was changed back to a glorious body and he will also give each of his elect a glorious body when he returns to reign in his kingdom forever.
Let's stick to the topic at hand. May I suggest- if you are going to post your interpretation of Scripture, cite the verses that support your thesis. Otherwise the above is your personal opinion and personal opinions are not universal truths.
 
Well Isaiah certainly did NOT say he saw one of three divine Persons.

Isaiah was very clear that he saw YHWH (the LORD).

Isaiah 6:5... Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

And since he "saw" Yahweh, that means he saw Yahweh "incarnate" rather than "transcendent" Yahweh.
Read the OP. Isaiah under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that he saw YHWH. John (referring to the same passage) under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that Isaiah saw Jesus, and Paul also (referring to the same passage) under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that Isaiah heard the holy spirit. Now it is simple, if you disagree with the OP reconcile.
Are you able to post an overview of what you believe? Here is mine...

For this creation, YHWH God (the only one who transcends all creations) determined to create a universe with a kingdom of redeemed humans (living souls) for his glory where he would reign as a living soul himself. The Scriptures describe how God would accomplish his plan. In an instant, transcendent God (called God the Father) created the supernatural and space-time of this universe and also became immanent as a spirit (called the Spirit of God) and in the form of a living soul (called the Word of God) with a glorious body. God the Father then created all things within the universe by the power of the Spirit of God commanded by the Word of God. But whereas God created a human spirit and soul for each of us, God himself as the Word became the human spirit and soul of Jesus. At his conception, Jesus' glorious body was changed to a mortal body to be made like us so he could make reconciliation for our sins. At his resurrection, Jesus' mortal body was changed back to a glorious body and he will also give each of his elect a glorious body when he returns to reign in his kingdom forever.
Let's stick to the topic at hand. May I suggest- if you are going to post your interpretation of Scripture, cit
It is pretty straightforward. Isaiah saw a vision. Prophets do that. John quotes Isaiah 53:1 as the vision he saw. He sees Christ's glorious death and resurrection and eventual rulership of the earth, as Isaiah says in the preceding verses:

See, my servant will act wisely;
he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.
Just as there were many who were appalled at him—
his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
and his form marred beyond human likeness—
so he will sprinkle many nations,
and kings will shut their mouths because of him.
For what they were not told, they will see,
and what they have not heard, they will understand.




And here is another vision.




It looks like he is seeing a vision of the future where the whole earth is full of God's glory.



Yes. John introduces two visions. In one vision he saw Jesus, and in another vision he saw God.



This is how we know Jesus isn't God. Jesus gives his glory to the apost



Premise 1 John states that Isaiah saw the g

Premise 3 God states that He does not share His glory with anyone. - True. And we know that Jesus does. Proving that Jesus isn't God

Premise 4 Jesus states that no one has seen or heard the Father. - And John confirms that by Father, he means God. And people saw Jesus

Premise 5 Luke states that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah - That is true.

Premise 6 We have plurality in Is 6:8 - We sure do. God and the Seraphim.

Conclusion Isaiah saw and heard the Triune God. - This conclusion seems quite random given the above.

the verses that support your thesis. Otherwise the above is your personal opinion and personal opinions are not universal truths.
It is pretty straightforward. Isaiah saw a vision. Prophets do that. John quotes Isaiah 53:1 as the vision he saw. He sees Christ's glorious death and resurrection and eventual rulership of the earth, as Isaiah says in the preceding verses:

See, my servant will act wisely;
he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.
Just as there were many who were appalled at him—










Premise 1 John states that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus. - He sure did in Isaiah 52-53. That is why he quoted the passage.
John is emphatic that it is the GLORY that Isaiah saw. He is explicit that it is the GLORY of Jesus that Isaiah saw. The obvious and clear, the central theme John is writing about is GLORY. The only verse were Isaiah wrote about seeing YHWH's glory is chapter 6. What you are attempting to do is implicitly introduce an inferior explanation that would not hold up in a court of law. Both witnesses John and Isaiah, in combination ,disagree with you.
Premise 3 God states that He does not share His glory with anyone. - True. And we know that Jesus does. Proving that Jesus isn't God
There is a difference here. Your God is one being one personality. My God is one being three personalities.
The being that is God does not share His glory, the personalities do, therefore no contradiction.
Pay attention, citing Jn. 17 not only undermines your argument but supports mine. If your God who is one being one personality does not share His glory how do you explain 17:24.
.
Premise 4 Jesus states that no one has seen or heard the Father. - And John confirms that by Father, he means God. And people saw Jesus
show support.
Premise 5 Luke states that it was the HS that spoke to Isaiah - That is true.
Ok
Premise 6 We have plurality in Is 6:8 - We sure do. God and the Seraphim
God in plural form is asking for a prophet. Cite one verse where a prophet speaks for angels? Nowhere, prophets only speak for God.
Conclusion Isaiah saw and heard the Triune God. - This conclusion seems quite random given the above.
I don't think so.
 

Stephen

Active member
John is emphatic that it is the GLORY that Isaiah saw. He is explicit that it is the GLORY of Jesus that Isaiah saw. The obvious and clear, the central theme John is writing about is GLORY. The only verse were Isaiah wrote about seeing YHWH's glory is chapter 6. What you are attempting to do is implicitly introduce an inferior explanation that would not hold up in a court of law. Both witnesses John and Isaiah, in combination ,disagree with you.

Yes, John saw YHWH's glory in Isaiah 6. However, Christ's glory is in Isaiah 52 and 53.

Only one person is on the throne in Isaiah 6. Not 2 or 3 or 4 or 5.

There is a difference here. Your God is one being one personality. My God is one being three personalities.

The trinitarian God is 3 persons, not 3 personalities. The modalists God is 3 personalities.

The being that is God does not share His glory, the personalities do, therefore no contradiction.

I suppose those are the things you have to say.

Pay attention, citing Jn. 17 not only undermines your argument but supports mine. If your God who is one being one personality does not share His glory how do you explain 17:24..

24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world

Yes, and he also loved us in him before the world was (Ephesians 1:3-4). What's your point?

show support.

To quote myself: "John confirms that by Father, he means God. (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12). Which is another way we know Jesus isn't God."

God in plural form is asking for a prophet. Cite one verse where a prophet speaks for angels? Nowhere, prophets only speak for God.

Moses spoke for the angel in the bush (Exodus 3:1 and Acts 7:30). (good grief. . . . how could you not know that ?)

I don't think so.

I suppose you don't.
 
Read the OP. Isaiah under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that he saw YHWH. John (referring to the same passage) under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that Isaiah saw Jesus, and Paul also (referring to the same passage) under the inspiration of the holy spirit wrote that Isaiah heard the holy spirit. Now it is simple, if you disagree with the OP reconcile.

I DID read your OP and it ends with...

"Conclusion Isaiah saw and heard the Triune God."

"Triune" means "three in one".

So which is it...

A) Isaiah saw Jesus, the second Person of the Triune God.
B) Isaiah saw the Triune God, the three Persons in one.

According to the doctrine of the Trinity, I would think...

You should NOT say "Isaiah saw the Triune God" just as you should NOT say "the Triune God was crucified".

You should say "Isaiah saw Jesus (the second Person of the Triune God)" and "Jesus (the second Person of the Triune God) was crucified".
 
Within the one being that is God there exist eternally three co-equal and co-eternal persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
“Person” refers to the center of consciousness and includes the idea of mind, will and desire.
“Being” refers to the essential attributes that make God what he is, holy, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, all-powerful.
“Co-equal” fully shared the being that is God never one third.
“ Coeternal” all three exist within eternity, one did not exist before the other.
God is a spirit thus not limited to the physical, eternally exists outside of time and space. He is not limited to time, space, and matter as we are.
God= what. Three persons= who.
Therefore when Isaiah saw Jesus or heard the HS he experienced the Triune God.

You say “Being” refers to ATTRIBUTES.

And you say “God” refers to WHAT.

Is the WHAT referring to the ATTRIBUTES?

Or does the WHAT refer to SUBSTANCE?

Or do you think ATTRIBUTES and SUBSTANCE refer to the same thing?

I thought classical Trinitarianism is that the SUBSTANCE refers to SPIRIT rather than ATTRIBUTES.
 
Yes, John saw YHWH's glory in Isaiah 6. However, Christ's glory is in Isaiah 52 and 53.
No, Isaiah saw YHWH's glory in Isaiah 6, and John states in John 12 that Isaiah saw Jesus glory in Isaiah 6. What is central to John in the passage is that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus =Isaiah 6:5 when Isaiah wrote Isaiah 6:9-10. Yes, Isaiah 52-53 refers to Jesus, but that is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Also, such an argument is poor. Why? Because there are multiple passages in Isaiah that refer to Jesus' glory such as Isaiah 9:6.

Only one person is on the throne in Isaiah 6. Not 2 or 3 or 4 or 5.
The trinitarian God is 3 persons, not 3 personalities. The modalists God is 3 personalities.
Poor argument, Isaiah saw one Being on the throne. Trins believe there exist three centers of consciousness in the one Being called God. Modalists believe there is one center on consciousness within the being they call God, and this center of consciousness manifests itself as three different roles.


I suppose those are the things you have to say.

24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world

Yes, and he also loved us in him before the world was (Ephesians 1:3-4). What's your point?
Spare the red herring. Again citing Jn 17 undermines your argument that Jesus is not God, because God does not share His glory according to you and me. Why? Because Jn 17:24 contradicts your argument. But it does not contradict mine. Note, if Jesus is not God why would the Father share His glory with Jesus. You also failed to identify how the Father glorified the Son? Is it the glory that belongs only to a deity?

To quote myself: "John confirms that by Father, he means God. (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12). Which is another way we know Jesus isn't God."
That would be taking verses in isolation. Read Jn 1:18 carefully. It states 1. No one has seen God. 2 Jesus who is in the bosom of the Father declares Him. It does not state that the Father is God or that Jesus is not God. You inferred that in. But does it state that Jesus is not God? No. But let’s look at Jn 20:28 where Thomas explicitly identifies Jesus as his Lord and God. Note John used ho theos which is only used when referring to YHWH. John does not record Jesus correcting Thomas or a comment correcting Thomas himself, therefore in agreement with Thomas.

Moses spoke for the angel in the bush (Exodus 3:1 and Acts 7:30). (good grief. . . . how could you not know that ?)
Who is identified as the Angel of the Lord in the OT? = Jesus. Note the following.


Ge 31: 11 Then the Angel of God spoke to me in a dream, saying, ‘Jacob.’ And I said, ‘Here I am.’ 12 And He said, ‘Lift your eyes now and see, all the rams which leap on the flocks are streaked, speckled, and gray-spotted; for I have seen all that Laban is doing to you. 13 I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed the pillar and where you made a vow to Me. Now arise, get out of this land, and return to the land of your family.’

Vs 11 The Angel of the Lord speaks to Jacob in a dream. Note vs 13 the Angel of the Lord identifies Himself as the God of Bethel. Note, there are numerous examples of the Angel of the Lord being identified as deity.
(good grief. . . . how could you not know that ?)
 
I DID read your OP and it ends with...

"Conclusion Isaiah saw and heard the Triune God."

"Triune" means "three in one".

So which is it...

A) Isaiah saw Jesus, the second Person of the Triune God.
B) Isaiah saw the Triune God, the three Persons in one.

Yes, triune means three in one but it does not mean that they are joined at the hip. According to Trinitarianism, there is one being called God and within this being there exist three centers of consciousness. When one ‘sees’ the being called God one also ‘sees’ the three centers of consciousness which are within the being. The three centers of consciousness fully share the being called God. Therefore there is no contradiction between John who states that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus, Paul who states that Isaiah heard the HS and Isaiah who states that he saw the glory of God. They are all in agreement.

According to the doctrine of the Trinity, I would think...

You should NOT say "Isaiah saw the Triune God" just as you should NOT say "the Triune God was crucified".

You should say "Isaiah saw Jesus (the second Person of the Triune God)" and "Jesus (the second Person of the Triune God) was crucified".
 
You say “Being” refers to ATTRIBUTES.

And you say “God” refers to WHAT.

Is the WHAT referring to the ATTRIBUTES?

Or does the WHAT refer to SUBSTANCE?

Or do you think ATTRIBUTES and SUBSTANCE refer to the same thing?

I thought classical Trinitarianism is that the SUBSTANCE refers to SPIRIT rather than ATTRIBUTES.
If one was to ask "What is it?" I would identify ‘it’ as God, a supernatural spiritual being that possesses such attributes as holy, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, and omnipotent. If one was to ask "Who is it? Who do I identify the centers of consciousness as? I would say the Father, the Son, and the HS.

Maybe this could help.

  • 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.
  • “Co-equal” fully shared the being that is God never one third.
  • “ Coeternal” all three exist within eternity, one did not exist before the other.
    • God= what.
    • Three persons= who
    • Essence -is properly described as that whereby a thing is what it is; the essence of a thing is that which is expressed by its definition.
    • Existence - whereas the essence gives an answer to the question as to what the thing is, the existence is the affirmative to the question as to whether it is.
      • God is eternal, existence is of the essence of God,
      • Essence and existence are identical in God.
    • Nature - is that whereby it acts as it does, the essence considered as the foundation and principle of its operation.
      • Love is a marker of God’s essence.
      • God’s nature is love.
  • Being- signifies the substance of X, which makes X individual.
    • “Being” refers to the essential attributes that make God what He is,
      • holy
      • omnipresent
      • omniscient
      • immutable
      • omnipotent
 

Base12

Member
Your post reminds me of Ezekiel's Vision...

Ezekiel 1:26
"And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it."


Appearance of a Man = Father

Ezekiel 1:28
"As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake."


Appearance of the Bow = Holy Ghost

Ezekiel 2:9
"And when I looked, behold, an hand was sent unto me; and, lo, a roll of a book was therein"


An Hand with Book = Word

And there you have it.

Father, Word and Holy Ghost all in the Old Testament.

:cool:
 

Stephen

Active member
No, Isaiah saw YHWH's glory in Isaiah 6, and John states in John 12 that Isaiah saw Jesus glory in Isaiah 6. What is central to John in the passage is that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus =Isaiah 6:5 when Isaiah wrote Isaiah 6:9-10. Yes, Isaiah 52-53 refers to Jesus, but that is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Also, such an argument is poor. Why? Because there are multiple passages in Isaiah that refer to Jesus' glory such as Isaiah 9:6.

I see. So your plan is to ignore the scripture quotation of Isaiah 53 where Isaiah predicts Christ's crucifixion and subsequent glorification.

Poor argument, Isaiah saw one Being on the throne. Trins believe there exist three centers of consciousness in the one Being called God. Modalists believe there is one center on consciousness within the being they call God, and this center of consciousness manifests itself as three different roles.

I suppose your doctrine requires such non-sensical assertions that Isaiah can't figure out what a person is.

  • Trinitarians believe that God exists in three persons, not three personalities or three centers of consciousness..
  • Modalists believe that there is one person with three modes or personalities.

You claimed that God has three personalities. If you are randomly changing your doctrine between posts, please don't suppose that the bible supports your doctrine.

Spare the red herring. Again citing Jn 17 undermines your argument that Jesus is not God, because God does not share His glory according to you and me. Why? Because Jn 17:24 contradicts your argument. But it does not contradict mine. Note, if Jesus is not God why would the Father share His glory with Jesus. You also failed to identify how the Father glorified the Son? Is it the glory that belongs only to a deity?

The answers to your questions are:
  • God shares his glory because he wants to.
  • It doesn't matter how the God glorified his son. He glorified him. And likewise, Jesus shares that glory with the apostles.
If you think there are different kinds of glory to support your argument, then that would be on you to prove.

That would be taking verses in isolation. Read Jn 1:18 carefully. It states 1. No one has seen God. 2 Jesus who is in the bosom of the Father declares Him. It does not state that the Father is God or that Jesus is not God. You inferred that in. But does it state that Jesus is not God? No.

I'm sorry you were unable to follow the flow of your own argument.

You claimed that nobody has seen the Father (citing two verses in isolation John 6:46 and 5:37). I claimed that why yes, nobody has seen the Father because there are similar verses that say that nobody has seen God (citing two verses John 1:18 and 1 John 4:12)

Here is the argument:
You claimed nobody has seen the Father. With equal weight, I claim that what he means is that nobody has seen God,

  1. Nobody has seen God. (Directly stated in scripture, and affirmed by you above.)
  2. People have seen Jesus (directly stated in scripture)
  3. Therefore Jesus is not God.

(I'm sorry that argument was overly complex).


But let’s look at Jn 20:28 where Thomas explicitly identifies Jesus as his Lord and God. Note John used ho theos which is only used when referring to YHWH. John does not record Jesus correcting Thomas or a comment correcting Thomas himself, therefore in agreement with Thomas.

So you are saying that Thomas is claiming that Jesus is his God. Not any other persons. You've now drifted off into modalism again.

Who is identified as the Angel of the Lord in the OT? = Jesus. Note the following.

This is a non-sequitur.

You requested: "Cite one verse where a prophet speaks for angels? Nowhere, prophets only speak for God."
I responded: "Moses spoke for the angel in the bush (Exodus 3:1 and Acts 7:30)."

The old testament and new testament both confirm that in fact it was an Angel in the bush. If you think the deacon Stephen and his entire audience is incorrect in their assessment that the angel in the bush isn't an angel, then that that is your method of bible study..

(good grief. . . . how could you not know that ?)

This is another non-sequitur. God put his name in angels (Exodus 23:21)
 
I see. So your plan is to ignore the scripture quotation of Isaiah 53 where Isaiah predicts Christ's crucifixion and subsequent glorification.
No one is ignoring it. It is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Now if you think it is relevant to John 12:37-41 state your case. Otherwise it is as relevant as Genesis 1:1.
I suppose your doctrine requires such non-sensical assertions that Isaiah can't figure out what a person is.
No one is stating that Isaiah was wrong, I believe he saw God, I also agree with John that Isaiah saw Jesus, and I agree with Paul that Isaiah heard the HS. Note all three authors wrote under the inspiration of the HS. Now if you disagree with either Isaiah, John, Paul, or the HS please state your case.
  • Trinitarians believe that God exists in three persons, not three personalities or three centers of consciousness..
  • Modalists believe that there is one person with three modes or personalities.
You claimed that God has three personalities. If you are randomly changing your doctrine between posts, please don't suppose that the bible supports your doctrine.
Before we dive into what Trinitarians believe, can you quote any Trinitairan scholar that supports your idea.
The answers to your questions are:
  • God shares his glory because he wants to.
  • It doesn't matter how the God glorified his son. He glorified him. And likewise, Jesus shares that glory with the apostles.
If you think there are different kinds of glory to support your argument, then that would be on you to prove.
How does any of this support your original claim that John 17 proves that Jesus is not God.?
I'm sorry you were unable to follow the flow of your own argument.

You claimed that nobody has seen the Father (citing two verses in isolation John 6:46 and 5:37). I claimed that why yes, nobody has seen the Father because there are similar verses that say that nobody has seen God (citing two verses John 1:18 and 1 John 4:12)

Here is the argument:
You claimed nobody has seen the Father. With equal weight, I claim that what he means is that nobody has seen God,

  1. Nobody has seen God. (Directly stated in scripture, and affirmed by you above.)
  2. People have seen Jesus (directly stated in scripture)
  3. Therefore Jesus is not God.

(I'm sorry that argument was overly complex).
Your argument was not overly complex but overly insufficient. It is the same old game of taking verses in isolation and then running with them. How do you reconcile your interpretation of John 1:18 with John 20:28 where Thomas [who is in the presence of Jesus ] explicitly addresses Jesus as Lord and God, John 12 which we are discussing, compound that with Isa 6. Exodus 24:10, where it is recorded that a whole company of Israelites "saw the God of Israel"; Job 42:5, where Job said of God, "Now mine eye seeth thee." One has to ask 'What does John mean by 'no one has seen God'"
God is a Spirit, He is invisible, immortal, and eternal. No man has seen God in the sense of seeing the invisible Spirit. But Jesus as God has manifested himself, so anyone who has seen Jesus has seen God.
I hope that was not overly complex.

So you are saying that Thomas is claiming that Jesus is his God. Not any other persons. You've now drifted off into modalism again.
Not only has Thomas stated that Jesus is God but under the inspiration of the HS John recorded the event and statement as true. Also Paul in Titus 2:13 and Peter in 2 Pe 1:1 explicitly state that Jesus is God. Note, it only takes one person claiming so in Scripture for it to be true.
This is a non-sequitur.

You requested: "Cite one verse where a prophet speaks for angels? Nowhere, prophets only speak for God."
I responded: "Moses spoke for the angel in the bush (Exodus 3:1 and Acts 7:30)."

The old testament and new testament both confirm that in fact it was an Angel in the bush. If you think the deacon Stephen and his entire audience is incorrect in their assessment that the angel in the bush isn't an angel, then that that is your method of bible study..
This is another non-sequitur. God put his name in angels (Exodus 23:21)
Non sequitur. Really?

Why did you ignore the following where the Angel of the Lord identifies himself as God.

Ge 31: 11 Then the Angel of God spoke to me in a dream, saying, ‘Jacob.’ And I said, ‘Here I am.’ 12 And He said, ‘Lift your eyes now and see, all the rams which leap on the flocks are streaked, speckled, and gray-spotted; for I have seen all that Laban is doing to you. 13 I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed the pillar and where you made a vow to Me. Now arise, get out of this land, and return to the land of your family.’

Vs 11 The Angel of the Lord speaks to Jacob in a dream. Note vs 13 the Angel of the Lord identifies Himself as the God of Bethel. Note, there are numerous examples of the Angel of the Lord being identified as deity.

But lets analyze what you wrote. "God put his name in angels (Exodus 23:21)." Really? Is that what the verse reads? Does it read "God puts His name in angels [plural] or this specific angel [singular]? Yours is a common mistake. Angel = messenger, not a specific creation of God such as Michael or Gabriel.
But it gets deeper. "My name is in him." God does not give his honor to anyone especially a created being. Note the name Jesus in the original language means 'YHWH is salvation."

But it gets even deeper. Note Exodus the verse in its entirety "Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions;for My name is in Him."
Note the following verse where Israel provoked and pay close attention to the consequence.
Nu 21: And the people spoke against God and against Moses: “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and our soul [c]loathes this worthless bread.” 6 So the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and many of the people of Israel died.

Now for the kicker = note Paul's commentary. 1 Cor 10:9 nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents;
 

Stephen

Active member
No one is ignoring it. It is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Now if you think it is relevant to John 12:37-41 state your case. Otherwise it is as relevant as Genesis 1:1.

I see. You need me to demonstrate that Isaiah 53:1 is relevant to John 12:37-41 when John directly quotes Isaiah 53:1 in John 12:38

38 so that the word of the prophet Isaiah would be fulfilled. He said, “Lord, who has believed our message, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

I suppose that denying the obvious is part and parcel for those that wish to defend doctrine of the trinity.

No one is stating that Isaiah was wrong, I believe he saw God, I also agree with John that Isaiah saw Jesus, and I agree with Paul that Isaiah heard the HS. Note all three authors wrote under the inspiration of the HS. Now if you disagree with either Isaiah, John, Paul, or the HS please state your case.

I'm sure you believe he "saw God", but that wasn't the discussion. The discussion was how many persons did Isaiah see on the throne? Did he see 2, 3, 4, or 5? In utter and complete contradiction to the doctrine of the trinitarian, Isaiah of course saw one person on the throne as he says: "the train of his robe filled the temple. "

In regards to the glory John saw, he certainly did say Isaiah saw Jesus is Isaiah 53, which is of course why John quoted 53:1 directly. I agree with John fully. I also believe Paul was right, Isaiah heard the holy spirit because he quotes the vision in Isiah 6 where he heard a voice in his vision,

But again, your fantasy of me disagreeing with scriptures is based on you not being able to find a quotation of Isiah 53:1 in John 12:38 even though it is highlighted for you in every bible with a cross reference.

Before we dive into what Trinitarians believe, can you quote any Trinitairan scholar that supports your idea.

You need me to provide for you a trinitarian scholar that supports the idea that the trinitarian god is three persons.

"There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture – the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another – that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons." -A Brief Definition of the Trinity James White, April 29, 1998, Theology Matters

I suppose that is par for the trinitarian course that I have to explain to them that their doctrine is that God is three persons and then cite their scholars to them to prove it to them.

How does any of this support your original claim that John 17 proves that Jesus is not God.?

To quote myself: "Jesus gives his glory to the apostles (John 17:22)".

Your argument was not overly complex but overly insufficient. It is the same old game of taking verses in isolation and then running with them. How do you reconcile your interpretation of John 1:18 with John 20:28 where Thomas [who is in the presence of Jesus ] explicitly addresses Jesus as Lord and God, John 12 which we are discussing, compound that with Isa 6. Exodus 24:10, where it is recorded that a whole company of Israelites "saw the God of Israel"; Job 42:5, where Job said of God, "Now mine eye seeth thee." One has to ask 'What does John mean by 'no one has seen God'"

How much hypocrisy does it take to accuse others of "taking verses in isolation and then running with them", when the OP is a hodge podge of verses taken in isolation? I believe the answer is "trinitarian levels of hypocrisy".

Setting aside such accusations, why is it up to me to reconcile things? You claimed nobody has seen the father. Scripture says nobody has seen God. If "Jesus is God" then nobody saw Jesus. If the holy spirit was seen, then it isn't God either.

God is a Spirit, He is invisible, immortal, and eternal. No man has seen God in the sense of seeing the invisible Spirit. But Jesus as God has manifested himself, so anyone who has seen Jesus has seen God.
I hope that was not overly complex.

Let's read that first part slowly, and with reading comprehension, because it makes no sense in light of the doctrine you are attempt to promote. You claim:
  • "God is a spirit" (which means Jesus isn't God)
  • "He is" (meaning God is a singular person directly denying the idea that God is a trinity)
  • "invisible, immortal and eternal" (which means Jesus isn't God because Jesus is visible, and because Jesus died, and because Jesus was born respectively).

That wasn't a matter of complexity. What you posted doesn't make any sense whatsoever in light of the doctrine you are trying to promote. It actually destroys your own doctrine.


In contrast, this does make sense: Anyone who has seen Jesus has seen God because Jesus is the image of the invisible God (which by definition means he's not God).

Not only has Thomas stated that Jesus is God but under the inspiration of the HS John recorded the event and statement as true. Also Paul in Titus 2:13 and Peter in 2 Pe 1:1 explicitly state that Jesus is God. Note, it only takes one person claiming so in Scripture for it to be true.

I suppose that your imagination reigns supreme here.

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
2 Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

God and Jesus are described as two separate persons.

For a doctrine as important as to whether God is one person or three persons, it would be a consistent theme through scripture and your scriptural support would not come from "taking verses in isolation and then running with them" like you just did here (actually you were worse, as the verses don't even say what you want them to say)

Non sequitur. Really?

Yes really.

You demanded : "Cite one verse where a prophet speaks for angels? Nowhere, prophets only speak for God."
I responded: "Moses spoke for the angel in the bush (Exodus 3:1 and Acts 7:30)."

If you think that Moses isn't dealing with an angel, in the bush, please show how both the NT and the OT explanation of what was in the bush to be incorrect.
 
I see. You need me to demonstrate that Isaiah 53:1 is relevant to John 12:37-41 when John directly quotes Isaiah 53:1 in John 12:38

38 so that the word of the prophet Isaiah would be fulfilled. He said, “Lord, who has believed our message, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Yes John quotes from Isa 53. Now this is where simple reading comprehension comes in. Let's analyze John 12. Vs 37 introduces vs 38, vs 39 introduces vs 40. Vs 41 is referring to the passage in which Isaiah states he saw the glory of Jesus. Following your idea that would be either vs 38 or 40. Following your scenario we would have to ignore vs 40 and believe that vs 41 refers to vs 38 ignoring the fact that nothing in vs 41 hints that it is referring to vs 38. "These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.” = if it is referring to vs 38 John would have to indicate so. Why? Because without any indication it is referring to the last thing mentioned by Isaiah = vs 40.
Also Isaiah 53 is not about glory but the "sin bearing Messiah'. There is no glory in bearing sin. Only chapter 6 explicitly speaks of God's glory. To follow your idea we would have to ignore simple grammatical rules.

I'm sure you believe he "saw God", but that wasn't the discussion. The discussion was how many persons did Isaiah see on the throne? Did he see 2, 3, 4, or 5? In utter and complete contradiction to the doctrine of the trinitarian, Isaiah of course saw one person on the throne as he says: "the train of his robe filled the temple.
Again if you are going to criticize the Trinity at least understand what you are criticizing. Let me try to make this simple. In total there are four nouns involved. Father, Son, HS, and God. = One being /three independent centers of consciousness. There is one center of consciousness [includes the idea of mind, will and desire] in your body = when someone sees your body they see the whole picture - mind and body. Sames applies to Isaiah's vision. When Isaiah saw the glory of God, Isaiah saw the glory of the whole, = one supernatural being who is fully shared by three separate centers of consciousness.
Question is someone sees your train, does that train belong to the you the physical being along with your spirit and soul, or just the physical being? Same applies to the being we call God.
You possess an incorrect understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity.
You need me to provide for you a trinitarian scholar that supports the idea that the trinitarian god is three persons.

"There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture – the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another – that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons." -A Brief Definition of the Trinity James White, April 29, 1998, Theology Matters

I suppose that is par for the trinitarian course that I have to explain to them that their doctrine is that God is three persons and then cite their scholars to them to prove it to them.
And here is proof that you have no idea of what you criticize. Read carefully what you posted and you will note it is polytheism not Trinitarianism. Why? Because it is incomplete. So I guess it is part of your course that I have to explain to you the doctrine that you claim to fully understand. Read the following several times, and if you cannot get it I will break it down for you on the next post.
Homework.
What is the difference between "There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture – the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another – that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons."
And

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.
To quote myself: "Jesus gives his glory to the apostles (John 17:22)".
You have a shallow understanding of scripture. The glory spoken of in Isaiah 42:8 is the glory that God possesses because He is is God.
The glory spoken of in Jn 17:22 is a different glory. In John the glory that that the Father gave the Son which the son gives to His disciples is one that appears as humble, weak and suffering. This glory is ultimately displayed on the cross.

Jn 7:39 But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those [g]believing in Him would receive; for the [h]Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
12:16 His disciples did not understand these things at first; but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things were written about Him and that they had done these things to Him.
12:23 23 But Jesus answered them, saying, “The hour has come that the Son of Man should be glorified.

How much hypocrisy does it take to accuse others of "taking verses in isolation and then running with them", when the OP is a hodge podge of verses taken in isolation? I believe the answer is "trinitarian levels of hypocrisy".
Don't just write about it, prove it. Otherwise it is a sound argument.
 
To quote myself: "Jesus gives his glory to the apostles (John 17:22)".

How much hypocrisy does it take to accuse others of "taking verses in isolation and then running with them", when the OP is a hodge podge of verses taken in isolation? I believe the answer is "trinitarian levels of hypocrisy".

Setting aside such accusations, why is it up to me to reconcile things? You claimed nobody has seen the father. Scripture says nobody has seen God. If "Jesus is God" then nobody saw Jesus. If the holy spirit was seen, then it isn't God either.
In the amount of time it took you to write the about, you could have reconciled. Or is it you cannot reconcile it.

but let me help you again.

How do you reconcile your interpretation of John 1:18 with John 20:28 where Thomas [who is in the presence of Jesus ] explicitly addresses Jesus as Lord and God, John 12 which we are discussing, compound that with Isa 6. Exodus 24:10, where it is recorded that a whole company of Israelites "saw the God of Israel"; Job 42:5, where Job said of God, "Now mine eye seeth thee." One has to ask 'What does John mean by 'no one has seen God'"

Care to take a wack at it?
Let's read that first part slowly, and with reading comprehension, because it makes no sense in light of the doctrine you are attempt to promote. You claim:
  • "God is a spirit" (which means Jesus isn't God)
  • "He is" (meaning God is a singular person directly denying the idea that God is a trinity)
  • "invisible, immortal and eternal" (which means Jesus isn't God because Jesus is visible, and because Jesus died, and because Jesus was born respectively).

That wasn't a matter of complexity. What you posted doesn't make any sense whatsoever in light of the doctrine you are trying to promote. It actually destroys your own doctrine.


In contrast, this does make sense: Anyone who has seen Jesus has seen God because Jesus is the image of the invisible God (which by definition means he's not God).


But allow me to do your homework again.


"God is a spirit" (which means Jesus isn't God) =
That is a poor conclusion. You are spirit and body just as Jesus is spirit and body.

"He is" (meaning God is a singular person directly denying the idea that God is a trinity)
Wrong, 'He'= meaning that the being called God is a singular being who happens to be fully shared by three centers of consciousness.

"invisible, immortal and eternal" (which means Jesus isn't God because Jesus is visible, and because Jesus died, and because Jesus was born respectively).
Yes Jesus' body was born, it was visible, and died on the cross, but His spirit has always been and will continue to be invisible, immortal and eternal.


Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
2 Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

God and Jesus are described as two separate persons.
Really, what translation did you pull up.
But let's look at the NKJV.

Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
2 Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a bond servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have [a]obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

Who's translation is correct.

Note 2 Pe1:11 for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jeus Christ.

In Titus 2:13 God and Savior Jesus Christs, 2 Pe 1:1,God and Savior Jesus Christs, 2 Pe 1:11 Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,== the sentence structure in the original language is the same. Following your logic in 2 Pe 1:11 there exist two persons, 1=Lord 2= Savior Jesus Christ. Would you agree to that?

Your nonsense fails the sniff test.

For a doctrine as important as to whether God is one person or three persons, it would be a consistent theme through scripture and your scriptural support would not come from "taking verses in isolation and then running with them" like you just did here (actually you were worse, as the verses don't even say what you want them to say)
Such an inflated ego
You demanded : "Cite one verse where a prophet speaks for angels? Nowhere, prophets only speak for God."
I responded: "Moses spoke for the angel in the bush (Exodus 3:1 and Acts 7:30)."

If you think that Moses isn't dealing with an angel, in the bush, please show how both the NT and the OT explanation of what was in the bush to be incorrect.
Again poor understanding of scripture. Angel derives from the Greek angelos, a translation of a Hebrew word meaning "messenger."

One has to cognitively define between the function of messenger and an angelic being. The "Angel of the Lord" in the OT is Jesus. Note again what you ignored and failed to address from the last post.

Why did you ignore the following where the Angel of the Lord identifies himself as God.

Ge 31: 11 Then the Angel of God spoke to me in a dream, saying, ‘Jacob.’ And I said, ‘Here I am.’ 12 And He said, ‘Lift your eyes now and see, all the rams which leap on the flocks are streaked, speckled, and gray-spotted; for I have seen all that Laban is doing to you. 13 I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed the pillar and where you made a vow to Me. Now arise, get out of this land, and return to the land of your family.’

Vs 11 The Angel of the Lord speaks to Jacob in a dream. Note vs 13 the Angel of the Lord identifies Himself as the God of Bethel. Note, there are numerous examples of the Angel of the Lord being identified as deity.

But lets analyze what you wrote. "God put his name in angels (Exodus 23:21)." Really? Is that what the verse reads? Does it read "God puts His name in angels [plural] or this specific angel [singular]? Yours is a common mistake. Angel = messenger, not a specific creation of God such as Michael or Gabriel.

But it gets deeper. "My name is in him." God does not give his honor to anyone especially a created being. Note the name Jesus in the original language means 'YHWH is salvation."

But it gets even deeper. Note Exodus the verse in its entirety "Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions;for My name is in Him."

Note the following verse where Israel provoked and pay close attention to the consequence.

Nu 21: And the people spoke against God and against Moses: “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and our soul [c]loathes this worthless bread.” 6 So the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and many of the people of Israel died.

Now for the kicker note Paul's commentary on the passage. 1 Cor 10:9 nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents;

Care to take a wack at it?
 

Stephen

Active member
Yes John quotes from Isa 53. Now this is where simple reading comprehension comes in. Let's analyze John 12. Vs 37 introduces vs 38, vs 39 introduces vs 40. Vs 41 is referring to the passage in which Isaiah states he saw the glory of Jesus. Following your idea that would be either vs 38 or 40. Following your scenario we would have to ignore vs 40 and believe that vs 41 refers to vs 38 ignoring the fact that nothing in vs 41 hints that it is referring to vs 38. "These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.” = if it is referring to vs 38 John would have to indicate so. Why? Because without any indication it is referring to the last thing mentioned by Isaiah = vs 40.

Also Isaiah 53 is not about glory but the "sin bearing Messiah'. There is no glory in bearing sin. Only chapter 6 explicitly speaks of God's glory. To follow your idea we would have to ignore simple grammatical rules.

Well now that we have established that indeed John obviously quoted Isiah 53 which is explicitely about Jesus. Let's now establish ne next obvious truth: that Isaiah 52-53 is about the glory of Jesus.

Let's read the servant song:

Isaiah 52-53 NIV
The Suffering and Glory of the Servant <--- The actual passage heading by the NIV translators
13 See, my servant will act wisely;
he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted. <- - - Glory
14 Just as there were many who were appalled at him—
his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
and his form marred beyond human likeness—
15 so he will sprinkle many nations,
and kings will shut their mouths because of him.
For what they were not told, they will see,
and what they have not heard, they will understand
1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? <- - - - verse quoted by John
. . .
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, < - Glory
and he will divide the spoils with the strong, < - Glory
because he poured out his life unto death, <- why he is glorified
and was numbered with the transgressors. <- why he is glorified
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors. < - - - end of servant song

It is rather obvious that this is the glory being spoken of by John.

Again if you are going to criticize the Trinity at least understand what you are criticizing. Let me try to make this simple. In total there are four nouns involved. Father, Son, HS, and God. = One being /three independent centers of consciousness. There is one center of consciousness [includes the idea of mind, will and desire] in your body = when someone sees your body they see the whole picture - mind and body. Sames applies to Isaiah's vision. When Isaiah saw the glory of God, Isaiah saw the glory of the whole, = one supernatural being who is fully shared by three separate centers of consciousness.

Question is someone sees your train, does that train belong to the you the physical being along with your spirit and soul, or just the physical being? Same applies to the being we call God.

The mind, body, and all other parts that make up a person, all make up one single person, not two, three, four, five, or six persons or whatever your count is. If somebody sees the train that belongs to me, they see the train of one person, me. And likewise, Isaiah saw the train of one single person in Isaiah 6.

These facts of course directly deny the doctrine of the trinity which teaches that God is three persons.

And here is proof that you have no idea of what you criticize. Read carefully what you posted and you will note it is polytheism not Trinitarianism. Why? Because it is incomplete. So I guess it is part of your course that I have to explain to you the doctrine that you claim to fully understand. Read the following several times, and if you cannot get it I will break it down for you on the next post.

Homework.

What is the difference between "There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture – the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another – that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons."

And

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.

The request was that I show evidence to prove my idea that the God of the trinitarians is three persons, not a complete dissertaion of the doctrine of the trinity. Please don't move the goalposts and then say I didn't answer the request. The quotation was sufficient to demonstrate my claim that the god of the trinitarian is three persons.

To respond to our request, the difference between the two quotes is that one is made by a learned scholar who knows that using the word "God" the way you have done is not appropriate in this context and why, and the other quote is by you.

The glory spoken of in Isaiah 42:8 is the glory that God possesses because He is is God.

The glory spoken of in Jn 17:22 is a different glory. In John the glory that that the Father gave the Son which the son gives to His disciples is one that appears as humble, weak and suffering. This glory is ultimately displayed on the cross.

Jn 7:39 But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those [g]believing in Him would receive; for the [h]Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

12:16 His disciples did not understand these things at first; but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things were written about Him and that they had done these things to Him.

12:23 23 But Jesus answered them, saying, “The hour has come that the Son of Man should be glorified.

So now the doctrinal defense says that there are multiple kinds of glory, one that God has, and one that Jesus has. So now that we have established that your doctrine requires that glory Jesus posessed and spoken of in John 17 is completely different from God's glory, but rather it is the glory that God has given him (John 17:24) and that is the glory that the apostles recieve.

The big lesson here is that Jesus is not God as their glories are different. If Jesus had glory because he was God, and then his Father gave him more glory because of the cross, then Jesus would have more glory than the father who is supposedly greater than him.
 
Top