Why Did God Tell Israel That He is One?

[TMSO]

Thanks sorry,

Yes, one invisible God represented outwardly (what the eyes see) by another created god, Jesus the Son of man. Who born again became Jesus the Son of God .

There is only one God. God is clear in the Old Testament. Jesus cannot be another created god. That would mean more than one God. I recall in another thread you said that the number three indicates completeness in various places in scripture. So, wouldn't a trinity mean the completeness of God, hence a reflection on three found throughout scripture?

Two is the one witness our invisible Eternal God has spoken as a labor of his love . . "Let there be" and the witness was good "the birth of the Son of man Jesus. . redeemed by the father as the first born of many sons of God .(believers)

If Jesus is the Son of God, which means of the likeness of God, just as a human son isn't a father but is human, that makes Jesus a god. Or, the trinitarians are right, and Jesus is One of the three coexisting/coeternal person of the Being we know as God. However, the Bible is clear that we have no basis for comprehending God. As humanity, our ability to comprehend is based on a shared experience. There is no shared experience with God. Nothing we have experienced can relate. It's like explaining the taste of your food to a life long vegan by saying it tastes like chicken. They have no idea what chicken tastes like. We have no idea what it is like for God to be a trinity of three co-existing/co-eternal persons.

The father calling us gods of little faith. . . Power of the father . Peter knowing he felt short of the power asked Christ working in him to increase his new born again faith as it is written

No such thing as angels a fake word. Coined hundreds of years after the closing of the book of law.

Then explain Old Testament prophecies and "The Angel of the Lord". What happens in Daniel 7? The angel Michael, the defender of Israel stands up to get involved. What about Daniel 9? God sends out Gabriel, His lead messenger angel out to Daniel to deliver God's decree in person. It says man, but it is the same angel that spoke to Mary about Jesus. Angel means... messenger.

oral traditons of dying mankind to give the illusion of more than one god not seen can be sought after .the foundation of what are called patron saints 3,000 and rising .Also needed to extend time after death .Loved ones or renown dead ones communing with the living .

Its Christ (one) working with us not of us to both reveal his will and empower mankind to do it to His good pleasure not a legion of gods .

One for the travel Christopher. another sickness Mother Queen Mary another .3500 listed on line with idol images available to put a face on the legion of angels. . they call patron saints

No such angel creation .

No evidence nada, nothing

It's all over the Bible.

 

[Mr GLee]

There is only one God. God is clear in the Old Testament. Jesus cannot be another created god. That would mean more than one God. I recall in another thread you said that the number three indicates completeness in various places in scripture. So, wouldn't a trinity mean the completeness of God, hence a reflection on three found throughout scripture?

Thanks, Yes one God as Christ our husband (the anointing teaching the Holy Spirit) Our father who mightyfuly worked in Jesus the Son of man to both will and to empower dying mankind . . as it power of faith works in all born again sons of God..

The dynamic dual . Satan would have mankind believe Godis a Jewish man as King of kings.

Three is a crowd it makes room for earthly inspired family what some called Queen mother and they must call men on earth Holy Father .in rebeliob to the commandment not call men on earth Holy Father .the fake trinity

Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your (adopting )Father, (Abba) which is in heaven.

If Jesus is the Son of God, which means of the likeness of God, just as a human son isn't a father but is human, that makes Jesus a god. Or, the trinitarians are right, and Jesus is One of the three coexisting/coeternal person of the Being we know as God. However, the Bible is clear that we have no basis for comprehending God. As humanity, our ability to comprehend is based on a shared experience. There is no shared experience with God. Nothing we have experienced can relate. It's like explaining the taste of your food to a life long vegan by saying it tastes like chicken. They have no idea what chicken tastes like. We have no idea what it is like for God to be a trinity of three co-existing/co-eternal persons.

All born again believers are called sons of God

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, (the adopting Father) they are the sons of God.

Then explain Old Testament prophecies and "The Angel of the Lord". What happens in Daniel 7? The angel Michael, the defender of Israel stands up to get involved. What about Daniel 9? God sends out Gabriel, His lead messenger angel out to Daniel to deliver God's decree in person. It says man, but it is the same angel that spoke to Mary about Jesus. Angel means... messenger.

His lead messenger (not angel) was the cheif apostle /prophet Jesus, the Son of man

2 Corinthians 11:5 For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.

It was sent messenger (Apostle) in all cases not angel . Jesus the Christ our husband is Lord of lords( sent His apostle Jesus the Son of man )

It is Christ who works in us to both reveal the understanding of his will and empower dying mankind to do it to his good pleasure (Philippian 2:13 )Not some unseen creation called angel (fake word) .

It's all over the Bible.

Yes the word messenger is used in error just as Apostle .

Both work together to create what is called patron saints. False doctrine passed from the Pharisees with Sadducees . Disembodied workers with a familiar or family spirit his and hers gods . 3500 and rising patron saints as "angel" the fake word

One is our invisible (faith) authority Eternal God not a man dying mankind

 

[TMSO]

Thanks, Yes one God as Christ our husband (the anointing teaching the Holy Spirit) Our father who mightyfuly worked in Jesus the Son of man to both will and to empower dying mankind . . as it power of faith works in all born again sons of God..

The dynamic dual . Satan would have mankind believe Godis a Jewish man as King of kings.

Three is a crowd it makes room for earthly inspired family what some called Queen mother and they must call men on earth Holy Father .in rebeliob to the commandment not call men on earth Holy Father .the fake trinity

No. It is the Holy Spirit. Stop blaspheming.

Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your (adopting )Father, (Abba) which is in heaven.

All born again believers are called sons of God

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, (the adopting Father) they are the sons of God.

Jesus isn't adopted. Jesus is God or a god, which is kind of anti-scripture. It also says that everything that was created was created by and through Jesus in John 1.

"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 [a]He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not [b]comprehend it."

His lead messenger (not angel) was the cheif apostle /prophet Jesus, the Son of man

The reason He was called Son of man instead of Son of God is that in those days, sons of god (a god) were a dime a dozen. Left and right people claiming to be sons of god. So Jesus came as Son of man.

2 Corinthians 11:5 For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.

"4 For if [b]one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully. 5 For I consider myself not in the least inferior to the [c]most eminent apostles. 6 But even if I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not so in knowledge; in fact, in every way we have made this evident to you in all things."
Any of the 12 Paul considered to be eminent to himself. He did not walk with Jesus while Jesus was on Earth. The apostles did. They had the true oracles of Jesus Christ. Paul was saved later, and was an apostle because it was Jesus Himself who saved Paul on the road to Damascus. He was taught by the Father, and saved by the Son.

It was sent messenger (Apostle) in all cases not angel . Jesus the Christ our husband is Lord of lords( sent His apostle Jesus the Son of man )

An apostle is a witness, not a messenger. An ambassador. Angels are God's messengers, not witnesses. And even Jesus spoke of them in inspired scripture.
Matthew 22
"23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him, 24 saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother: 26 likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. 27 And last of all the woman died also. 28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. 31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, 32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. 33 And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine." (AKJV)

Angels of God in heaven, the words of Jesus recorded by God in our New Testament. Unless you don't believe the Bible to be inspired.

It is Christ who works in us to both reveal the understanding of his will and empower dying mankind to do it to his good pleasure (Philippian 2:13 )Not some unseen creation called angel (fake word) .

Scripture also tells us to be careful how we act because we could be entertaining angels unaware.

Hebrews 13:2 "2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares."

Yes the word messenger is used in error just as Apostle .

Both work together to create what is called patron saints. False doctrine passed from the Pharisees with Sadducees . Disembodied workers with a familiar or family spirit his and hers gods . 3500 and rising patron saints as "angel" the fake word

One is our invisible (faith) authority Eternal God not a man dying mankind

Jesus is our authority. It is through Him we have our hope and our salvation. (Ephesians 1).

 

[Mr GLee]

Perhaps we see the problem explained here...

Romans 11:25 NKJV
For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

God is not a racist.

All Israel are not born again Israel just as a Jew outwardly is not a Jew. One is a Jew inwardly.

Christ in Isaiah 62 propmised to re- name his bride a new name. . more befitting name in respect to "all the nations" of the world.

Named her Christian in Acts . Christian with no other meaning added . "Residents of the invisible city of Christ" prepared for his bride the church .Named after the founder of the city ,.Christ the husband

In that way the fullness has happened .The bride .

Revelation 21King James Version 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. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

 

[Fred]

Page 59: The Platonists began to furnish brilliant recruits to the churches of Asia and Greece, and introduced among them their love of system and their idealism. To state the facts in a few words, Hellenism insensibly supplanted Judaism as the form of Christian thought, and to this is mainly owing the orthodox dogma of the deity of Jesus Christ.

Proof?

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Deut 6:4 . . Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one.

I've heard it suggested that "one" speaks of a composite unity. For example the
first chapter of Ezekiel presents the Lord as a deity who wears four hats.
_

 

[LeviR]

.
● Deut 6:4 . . Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one.

I've heard it suggested that "one" speaks of a composite unity. For example the
first chapter of Ezekiel presents the Lord as a deity who wears four hats.
_

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Fred and Greetings Ode:hgod,

Proof?

I decided to examine this subject soon after you stated this, but decided that it would take too much time and effort to gain a reasonable balanced perspective of this era. At first I read the surrounding chapter of the book where I had taken this extract. Rather I decided that I had better studies and more important interests. All i can say though is that A Reville would have a reasonable understanding of what he stated, both this item and the other items that I quoted.

I've heard it suggested that "one" speaks of a composite unity. For example the
first chapter of Ezekiel presents the Lord as a deity who wears four hats.

It seems strange that anyone would equate the One God, Yahweh with the four faces of the Cherubim.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Mr GLee]

Jesus isn't adopted. Jesus is God or a god, which is kind of anti-scripture. It also says that everything that was created was created by and through Jesus in John 1.

"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 [a]He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not [b]comprehend it."

It seems you are mistaken.

God is not a Jewish man as dying mankind .It is the goal of the devil to teach God is a dying Jewish man as King of kings .Why support that lie?

It Christ our husband working in us not Jesus the son of man in us .His corrupted flesh and blood has turned to dust long ago .

As born again sons of God we are considered as gods..


John 10:34-36King James VersionJesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? (Christian)

Christ's spirit of adoption by which we can cry out Abba Father

Mark 14:36And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt .For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

Galatians 4:6And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

Jesus is not ashamed to call us brother and sisters .

Are you ashamed to call him brother?

Matthew 12:50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Mark 3:35For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

 

[Fred]

Greetings again Fred and Greetings Ode:hgod,

I decided to examine this subject soon after you stated this, but decided that it would take too much time and effort to gain a reasonable balanced perspective of this era. At first I read the surrounding chapter of the book where I had taken this extract. Rather I decided that I had better studies and more important interests. All i can say though is that A Reville would have a reasonable understanding of what he stated, both this item and the other items that I quoted.

Thus, an assertion without proof.

 

[Binyawmene]

I decided to examine this subject soon after you stated this, but decided that it would take too much time and effort to gain a reasonable balanced perspective of this era. At first I read the surrounding chapter of the book where I had taken this extract. Rather I decided that I had better studies and more important interests. All i can say though is that A Reville would have a reasonable understanding of what he stated, both this item and the other items that I quoted.

Fact-checking some unknown author's opinions of books to see if they are true or false claims are never easy. For instance, take Pliny the Younger, Emperor of Bithynia in northwestern Turkey, writing to Emperor Trajan in 112 A.D. writes:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang an anthem to Christ as God, and bound themselves by a solemn oath not to commit any wicked deed, but to abstain from all fraud, theft and adultery, never to break their word, or deny a trust when called upon to honor it; after which it was their custom to separate, and then meet again to partake of food, but ordinary and innocent kind.​

Here is what we do know from Pliny's report that Christians was singing to Christ as God. That was the early Christians customs, practice, and religious beliefs. And this was more than likely going on for many of years before it was reported to Trajan. But that doesn't tell us the idea where "Christ as God" concept came from or the origins itself. We know that Paul was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to travel to the province of Bithynia (Acts 16:6 -7). But Paul did met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus and his wife Priscilla (Acts 18:1-2). The province of Pontus is right beside the province of Bithynia during the Roman empire rule. In other words, Bithynia and the western portion of Pontus were combined in 64 B.C. to form a double province by Roman General Pompey. And Peter mention exiles Christians living in both the province of Pontus and the province of Bithynia (1 Peter 1:1-2). From that, we do know that there were Christians living there already. By that standpoint we can say there is a time-gap about 40 or 50 years between Acts 18:1-2 and 1 Peter 1:1-2 with Pliny's report in 112 A.D. to Trajan.

That would be a place to start pin-pointing the origins Christ as God concept. But I can save you from the trouble, Christ as God, comes from Christ himself and the Apostles, which is written in the New Testament. It's not a Christian history argument but a spiritual blindness argument. Because Unitarians deny that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

 

[LeviR]

Fact-checking some unknown author's opinions of books to see if they are true or false claims are never easy. For instance, take Pliny the Younger, Emperor of Bithynia in northwestern Turkey, writing to Emperor Trajan in 112 A.D. writes:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang an anthem to Christ as God, and bound themselves by a solemn oath not to commit any wicked deed, but to abstain from all fraud, theft and adultery, never to break their word, or deny a trust when called upon to honor it; after which it was their custom to separate, and then meet again to partake of food, but ordinary and innocent kind.​

Here is what we do know from Pliny's report that Christians was singing to Christ as God. That was the early Christians customs, practice, and religious beliefs. And this was more than likely going on for many of years before it was reported to Trajan. But that doesn't tell us the idea where "Christ as God" concept came from or the origins itself. We know that Paul was forbidden by the Holy Spirit to travel to the province of Bithynia (Acts 16:6 -7). But Paul did met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus and his wife Priscilla (Acts 18:1-2). The province of Pontus is right beside the province of Bithynia during the Roman empire rule. In other words, Bithynia and the western portion of Pontus were combined in 64 B.C. to form a double province by Roman General Pompey. And Peter mention exiles Christians living in both the province of Pontus and the province of Bithynia (1 Peter 1:1-2). From that, we do know that there were Christians living there already. By that standpoint we can say there is a time-gap about 40 or 50 years between Acts 18:1-2 and 1 Peter 1:1-2 with Pliny's report in 112 A.D. to Trajan.

That would be a place to start pin-pointing the origins Christ as God concept. But I can save you from the trouble, Christ as God, comes from Christ himself and the Apostles, which is written in the New Testament. It's not a Christian history argument but a spiritual blindness argument. Because Unitarians deny that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

Unitarians don’t deny Jesus is the son of the living God.
We deny he was the same age as his Father when born of Mary.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

It seems strange that anyone would equate the One God, Yahweh with the four faces of the Cherubim.

Well, to begin with, that entire scenario was a symbolic vision of the glory of God.
(Ezek 1:1 & Ezek 1:28) so we probably shouldn't be thinking that those particular
cherubim were real.

Anyway:

"As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the face of a man, and the face of
a lion, on the right side: and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; they
four also had the face of an eagle." (Ezek 1:10)

Those four faces aren't too difficult to figure out. The face of a man would represent
humanness, the face of a lion would represent monarchy, the face of an ox would
represent service, and the face of an eagle would represent divinity.

That vision might be an impression of Jesus as he's portrayed in the four Gospels. The
face of a man would be Jesus in Luke, the face of a lion would be Jesus in Matthew, the
face of an ox would be Jesus in Mark, and the face of an eagle would be Jesus in John.

The four living creatures show up again in the 10th chapter with one difference. The
face of an ox has been replaced by the face of a cherub, yet Ezekiel says all four
faces were the same faces he saw in the 1st chapter; so the ox/cherub face is a bit
of a mystery.
_

 

[Binyawmene]

Unitarians don’t deny Jesus is the son of the living God.
We deny he was the same age as his Father when born of Mary.

Unitarians deny the Deity of Christ or that divine quality of him.
That means they deny Jesus is the Christ.

You might like this thread.

 

[LeviR]

Unitarians deny the Deity of Christ or that divine quality of him.
That means they deny Jesus is the Christ.

You might like this thread.

I don’t know of any Unitarian teaching that denies a divine quality in Christ, or that Jesus is the Christ.

To say Jesus is the Christ means Jesus is the anointed one of God. God doesn’t anoint Himself.
God anointed His son to be prophet, priest and king.

 

[makesends]

I don’t know of any Unitarian teaching that denies a divine quality in Christ, or that Jesus is the Christ.

To say Jesus is the Christ means Jesus is the anointed one of God. God doesn’t anoint Himself.
God anointed His son to be prophet, priest and king.

That's ludicrous. Just the logic is self-contradictory, the notion that self-existent God can make something else also self-existent God. As @LeviR said elsewhere, that's a [human notion] demi-god (as if there was, or even logically could be, such a thing). Jesus was not half and half.

 

[LeviR]

That's ludicrous. Just the logic is self-contradictory, the notion that self-existent God can make something else also self-existent God. As @LeviR said elsewhere, that's a [human notion] demi-god (as if there was, or even logically could be, such a thing). Jesus was not half and half.

You must have me confused with someone else, as I have never said those things you claim me of saying.

 

[makesends]

No, you wouldn't say them as such, but you believe them. You said, for example, in effect, that he has not always been God. No, I'm too lazy to look it up to quote it. If you earnestly want to know Christ, I will look it up, but I don't see that in you, and I am lazy.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Fred and Greetings Binyawmene,

Thus, an assertion without proof.

I consider it an assertion with reasonable substance. The author gives a great amount of detail and this is evidence that he had access to a wide range of material. Also one of my brethren studied this period and listed the gradual ideas propounded by many of the ECF's that led to the ultimate acceptance of the Nicene Creed and the claim that Jesus is God.

Fact-checking some unknown author's opinions of books to see if they are true or false claims are never easy.

Yes, I was disappointed with the book as it did not quote the sources of his many statements and deductions. I was not interested in following up all aspects, but I was interested in what is available concerning the early Unitarians which he briefly mentions.

Christ as God, comes from Christ himself and the Apostles, which is written in the New Testament. It's not a Christian history argument but a spiritual blindness argument. Because Unitarians deny that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.

I was brought up believing that there is One God, the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I was further instructed in the Yahweh Name when I was 19 y.o. and that was over 60 years ago. I have confirmed my understanding over this period. I have answered many of the "favourite" verses misused by Trinitarians such as John 8:58 and John 10:30. Your last statement seems to deny the Trinity and their claim that Jesus is God.

Unitarians deny the Deity of Christ or that divine quality of him.
That means they deny Jesus is the Christ.

I do not answer for all Unitarians, but as a "Biblical Unitarian" I believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God by birth, character and resurrection and that he is a human now exalted to sit at the right hand of God in God the Father's Throne.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Fred]

Greetings again Fred and Greetings Binyawmene,

I consider it an assertion with reasonable substance. The author gives a great amount of detail and this is evidence that he had access to a wide range of material.

But you can't even supply one of these so-called proofs.

Yes, I was disappointed with the book as it did not quote the sources of his many statements and deductions.

What a waste of paper.