1 Corinthians 8:6 and the Trinity
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 авг 2024
- In this clip from episode #403 ( • Messiah Matters 403 - ... ), we discuss a comment where someone attempts to use 1Cor. 8:6 to push against the Trinity, not realizing this text actually supports the doctrine of the Trinity.
Executive Producer: Lee & Vivian Eagan, Erna Draper, Bob & Larue Miller, Bobby Keicher, John Coulthard, Eric Warren, Kyle Ripley, Levi Mitchel.
Rob Vanhoff Rob teaches courses on 2nd Temple Period, Rabbinic Literature, Judaism, Koine Greek, and Aramaic. He has delivered papers at conferences for both Evangelical Theological Society and the Society of Biblical Literature. He serves at Heart of Messiah Ministries in Spokane Valley. Rob holds two degrees from the University of Washington: MA, Comparative Religion (2005) and BA, Near Eastern Languages & Civilization, with a minor in Music (2003).
Caleb Hegg is the founder of Pronomian.com, a site dedicated to the study of God's covenants and law. Caleb has lectured at various conferences around the world, and written multiple published articles, most notably, several articles in "Celebrate the Feast" (TorahResource, 2019). Caleb Hegg received a two-year certificate from TR-Institute. Caleb is currently enrolled at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in an M.Div program.
1 Corinthians 8:6 only proves the Shema, not the Trinity. It doesn't even mention the Holy Spirit for crying out loud. It simply states that there is ONE God, Yahweh our Father. And there is one King Messiah, Yeshua. Appeal to Scripture, not some Trinitarians book. Come on guys..
This verse completely contradicts the Trinity lol, how do people not see it clearly. And the fact that he tried to use Deuteronomy 6:4 is so funny cause his translation says LORD which means Yahweh or Jehovah, so the text reads “Yahweh/Jehovah our God is one Yahweh/Jehovah.
@@Understandmed8 Exactly😩How can people take verses and literally twist them to say WHAT IT DOESN’T SAY?!? That verse clearly says The Father is GOD and Jesus is the Lord. Plenty of verses in the New Testament say the exact same thing. And people completely ignore it🤯
@@Understandmed8no Deuteronomy proves nothing for the anti-Trinity case
@@leahjames6870and One LORD is The Father your LORD?
The Shema confirms the Trinity in the hebrew actually.
Genesis 2:24
Deuteronomy 6:4
The word 'Echad' is a compound One
Secondly God uses Three Names which is really ibteresting.
I could also point Isaiah 9:6-7 out
{ THE MIGHTY GOD } IN THE ORIGINAL - Isaiah uses same Name later refering clearly to The Lord
This attempt at avoiding the obvious made my brain hurt
Yours too huh😩😂
One LORD? is God not your LORD?
@@au8363 Jesus was made Lord by his God and Father. God was never made Lord by anyone. Why don’t you worship the same God that Jesus does? Is that not what makes us Christian? Following Christ’s example in all things?
@@au8363
that would be the case IF the verse did not establish father to be God directly. The doctrine of the trinity is that there are 3 persons that make up the one true God, but if one of the persons from these three persons is established to be God already then that person is God and the other two are not.
Also, using your logic, david is also God because david like the God of the old testament is called "King of israel".
I hope you reply to my comment, I have been studying the New Testament looking for verses that challenge the Trinity teaching and have over 400 verses. Do I need to reject them because I did not read Chris Delling's book?@@unletteredandordinary
1 Cor 8:6 is a trinitarian text?!? Boy there is quite a disconnect😂😂😂
It is
It still is evident elsewhere
When you start with the conclusion that the trinity is true, every verse is a "trinitarian text" and if you disagree you are a dumbo who does not know the Greek. Snobs, that honor Papal teaching of 325 AD.
1 Timothy 2 v5
@@benjamindavis4130Good scripture. Proving absolutely no such thing as a trinity. 👍
I do not find any Scriptural proof for the Trinity but I do find Scriptural proof that the Father and the Son are One, that the Son proceeded from the Father, rather than being co eternal persons (John 8:42).
The sender is greater John 13:16 KJV
Proceeding can be Eternal
Are you saved?
@@unmeritedfavour48
John 13:16 KJV - Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.
Said neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him , basically jesus being sent isn’t greater nor less
@@dianabriseno1940 Do you hath the right Jesus?
Those who do not accept the Trinity, are really quite ignorant of scripture. They have only a handful of proof texts, out of context, against mountains of scripture in both testaments.
The Father is the one God 1 Timothy 2:5 KJV Ephesians 4:6 KJV Jesus is between the one God
Would you mind sharing these mountains of scriptures? Preferably from the Old Testament
@@lukegear3290 We been waiting for months!! 🤣
@@unmeritedfavour48no Jesus Is God
@@lukegear3290The whole Bible
This is a Trinitarian text? Where is the 'third' person of the Trinity in 1 Corinthians 8:6?
The one true God is obviously Lord of everything but, obviously, not all lords are the one true God. The Father is the one true God and his son is distinct from the Father and is lord but not the one true God. You cannot say that the God and the Lord are the same thing. In Deuteronomy the word "LORD" is word 3068 in the Strong's Concordance and this word is the YWHW. YWHW is the name of God but has been replace by the "LORD"(those who have obscured God's name will have a difficult judgement I believe). There is also a difference between all things "from" and all things "through" as "from" denotes origin and "through" denotes path, mechanism or conduit. We also live "for" the Father and "through" the son which is also distinctly different.
Is God your LORD?
@@au8363Jesus is not God Almighty. Jehovah is.
This is a bad answer to a good question.
If Paul wanted to teach the trinity he would have except he he teaches biblical monotheism.
If you’re a binitarian and want to make such an argument um maybe because the spirit is not mentioned in this verse, but with due respect this is a valid question to ask and it definitely disproves the trinity.
No one taught the trinity and most importantly, no one refuted the trinity and in all the epistles written to guide a young church through false beliefs, the fact that no one has a problem with the trinity doctrine proves it was never taught.
Or best case scenario everyone understood it without any questions. But whether or not eating shellfish and keeping sabbath and circumcision were right or wrong were disputed. Nah
Paul's letters can stand alone. The Greek recipients in Corinth did not have to memorize the Hebrew of Deuteronomy 6 to understand a very clear verse.
@@horaceball5418And I’ll add, Paul isn’t quoting the Shema. He quotes the Hebrew Bible often and if he wanted to say “hear o Israel the lord is one lord” he could have instead he says words not written in the Shema: “one God the Father from whom are all things and for whom we exist”
Should we believe scholarship 1 Corinthians 8:6?
Should we trust Chris Delling or the Apostle Paul?
Do we need to know the Greek to understand 1 Corinthians?
Why are 3 "he" instead of "they".
Pope Sylvester I who through Constantine forced the Trinity on the church sends his thanks.
@Messiah Matters I completely agree with you. However, the comment you address in the video is a great example why I argue the Trinity primarily from the TaNAK, and only bring in NT passages at the end of my argument. People by and large do not understand the Greek language or texts, especially the underlying LXX of NT quotes from the TaNAK. Anyway, great job!
If there is only One Lord, see Rev 11:15 and tell me who this One Lord is please. If there is only One God, see Heb 1:8-10, etc. Bird's Eye View is the only resolve.
Why did Jesus have a God? When the Son of God, the Arm of YaH, the Word, took on flesh/man, He took on the obedience to God the Father in that realm. Phil 2 is Him setting aside His use of divinity to do the job that Adam couldn't do, in Adam's stead, as a man, obeying His Father.
Check out the doctrine of inseparable operations.
Y'SHUA is YHUH ♡
Amen
Jesus was made Lord Acts 2:36 KJV
@@unmeritedfavour48 Right, Master/Lord in His Incarnate being, but not 'made God'.
@@auntieanna God is not three persons God is three parts body soul spirit
@@unmeritedfavour48God is not parts
Where is the Holy Spirit ?
The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father and the Son. You cannot separate them?
@@MessiahMatters The Holy Spirit According to the Bible is the Spirit of God Joel 2:28 / Acts 2:17..
I Am NOT promoting or defending Religion Denomination Teachings.
I follow the Apostles Doctrines..
Every Apostle Epistle Salutation is Clear of Who God and Jesus Christ is .
We all free to join to any camp.
I am with the Apostles and Jesus Christ.
@@MessiahMatters 1 JOHN 2:22 is in Fullfilmennt, Denying the Father and the son..
Calling God a liar ..
@choicegospelnetwork so then Paul is wrong in Romans 8? I am not sure what you're actually arguing here. The Bible is quite clear that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of the Son. You said I'm calling God a lier? Not sure where you're getting that, I am affirming what the Bible says.
@@MessiahMatters Acts 20:30...
Paul Warned us..
It's here ..
I guarantee you that this concept was taught to you by The church...
You didn't just read the Bible and came up with this kind of Confusing Doctrine 🤔.
1 is Still 1 .. 1 GOD THE FATHER OF OUR LORD Jesus Christ ))) Is that difficult?
Jesus Christ was made lord and Christ in Acts 2:36 ..
Psalms 110:1 explains that.
God is the Lord God Almighty and Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior.
That is why 1 Corinthians 8:6 explains..
God is ALWAYS The Lord God Almighty 🙏..
No confusion or Contradictions in God's word.
I know you learnt these Doctrines from church so I understand.
It's Difficult to avoid indoctrination.
Jesus Christ Warned us about it. There are many broad ways.
The Apostles of Jesus Christ made it their duty in Every Epistle Salutation to Declare what they believed 👏
No. You're wrong 😂
Feels very much like putting together a strawman and then knocking it down. Most people that have a problem with the trinity agree with every point of the treaty except different persons.
The Trinity is a false Doctrine and a confusion of God's word..
Jesus Christ clearly explained who God was .
This is fullfilmennt of God's word.. 1 John 2:22...
@@choicegospelnetworkno The Trinity is What The Bible teaches
what?
@Messiah Matters - following your logic on your view given Paul articulates the Father is God and Jesus is the Lord, and according to Trinitarianism the Father is not Jesus' divine self, would you then be willing to say the Lord is not God since Paul calls the Father God but not the Lord and Jesus the Lord but not God?
On the Trinitarian premise this verse falls at Trinitarian logic if you're going to bifurcate Jesus and the Father then you must also by logical deduction also bifurcate God and the Lord, which is NOT what the Shema says.
Whoever the Lord is God is and whoever God is the Lord is.
Paul's point here is to show idols dont mean anything and for the Christians there is only one God, the Lord, who is BOTH *AND* the Father and Jesus.
The *and* joins the two phrases.
You guys talk about Greek here but you fail at the original text of Hebrew in Deuteronomy 6:4 on your logic
I would ask you to comment regarding your bifurcation of the Father and Jesus and how far you are willing to take that logic.
They probably don't have time to respond to your nonsense, so I will. You clearly know neither Greek nor Hebrew. They explained very clearly why the Greek of this text proves the Trinity and does refer to Jesus as YHWH. You also have a very narrow (arguable) translation of the Shema. Many Jewish scholars don't understand it as referring to singularity, but rather preeminence and superiority. (Over against the other gods of the nation). It is not a commentary on God's nature or essence.
@@brucekriskovich4975 wow nonsense. You didn't even address my contention with their point. I agree Jesus is the LORD God of the Shema. I am not Unitarian; I wholeheartedly confess that Jesus is God. I just don't agree with the Trinitarian premise. You did not deal with my contention however that on the Trinitarian premise if you bifurcate Jesus and the Father in this verse the way this video contends, then you have God not being the LORD and the LORD not being God. If the God of the Shema is the LORD and the LORD of the Shema is God, then you cannot separate them the way this video purports to do. Regarding the charge that I don't know Hebrew, you have no clue what I know and don't know. The Shema consists of a singular verb "hear" and consequently all the nouns in the clause are singular and form in part a Hebrew Chain Construct of the clause whereby the end of the clause must add an "is" at the end forming what is a definite and indefinite clause and thus the "is" is added by translators, "Hear O Israel the LORD our God the LORD 'is' one" - So your assertion that I don't know Hebrew in the case of the Shema is superfluous and misplaced at best and erroneous and frivolous at worse. Consequently, when Paul is applying "God" and "Lord" to Father and Jesus he is synonymizing them. For Paul, an ardent 1st century Jew, he knew no other God than the LORD and for him to include Jesus in the very same sentence whereby he is quoting from the Shema would be blasphemy for him to interpret Jesus as "other than" God's very self-revealed in immanence. Paul here is not distinguishing between two divine persons; rather he is distinguishing between God transcendent and God immanent as James Dunn and Richard Bauckam and others would agree; who by the way are Trinitarians who are honest theologians dealing with the text. Dunn would state, "Christ is divine in no other way than God immanent, God himself acting to redeem as he did to create" - This text cannot be used to affirm the Trinity but it does do a great job at showing that God is both transcendent as the creator, the Father, and God is also immanent as the man Christ Jesus - He is both God and man acting to create all things and redeem mankind, as one self-existent God and not multiple persons of God. The honest Trinitarian theologian Dunn agrees with my position. I could quote Barth, Bauckam, and others but Jeffrey Tigay will suffice, who wrote the Jewish Publication Society’s Torah commentary on Deuteronomy, provides several helpful illustrations regarding the Shema which Paul is quoting here in the NT in the text in question. He writes, “In the face of polytheism it meant that the Divine is one, not many; in the face of Zoroastrian and Gnostic dualism it meant one, not two; in the face of Christian Trinitarianism it meant one, not three; and in the face of atheism, one and not none.” You just cannot get the Trinity from Deuteronomy 6:4 or Paul's use of it here in 1 Corinthians 8:6 - He is simply showing that the selfsame existent one that the Jews had always believed in, the LORD GOD of the OT was transcendent in his creation but immanent in the person and work of Jesus Christ. This is and cannot be used to butcher and proof text Trinitarian dogma into Paul who would have not known or thought about triadic dogma such as the Trinity in his work. For Paul Jesus was merely the "image of God" the transcendent God of Israel immanent as the man Christ Jesus. This is why Jesus would quote, "Why do you call me LORD, LORD and do not do the things that I ask?" Why? Because Jesus understood that, and we ought to as scriptural readers, recognize that by using the double intimation of LORD, LORD, he is following the same pattern as was used of YHWH in the Old Testament, where Ezekiel for example over 200 times calls God the LORD GOD! Why? Because when the translators translated Jesus' words as "LORD LORD" they were following the pattern of Ezekiel and others by calling Jesus Kurios, Kurios, knowing that they would substitute the divine name for Kurios in the first portion of "LORD" and of course the second portion of "God" is already translated as Kurios in Greek, and if we are going to accept the Septuagint translation here we have to acknowledge that Jesus was calling Himself the very divine name of the Old Testament, a call of blasphemy if he was merely a man OR if he was claiming to be the selfsame God of Israel - either way it would have been blasphemy if it were not true. Therefore it is my contention that Jesus is calling Himself the very LORD God of Israel as the self-same person and not another divine person other than that self-same God that created, formed, kept, and delivered Israel. I suggest you read the book, The Glory of God in the Face of Jesus Christ and The History and Development of the Doctrine of the Trinity. The authors of this video did not go into near enough detail and actually were quite rude about the comments being made by the commentor about the Deuteronomic passage, they weren't scholarly, they didn't cite any scholarly material, they didn't refer to any scholarly work, they effectively blasted the commentor for the comment but then do a 3 minute video on the verse in question, with poor exegesis at that, trying to put words into the mouth and understanding of Paul that Paul would have never had himself. No OT or NT writer intimated the Trinitarian dogma, and it is not didactically taught throughout any place in the Scripture and no OT or NT writer would have understood the Trinity. At BEST one could argue for dualism or binitarianism AT BEST and in fact, after the modalistic monarchians of the 1st century that is exactly what the men like Justin and Tertullian and others tried to argue that Jesus was somehow a "lesser God" than "God" but was still "God" and that is what the entire council of Nicea was about. But that was a council arguing between two INCORRECT views, as the original church the modalist monarchians (notice I did not say sequential or dynamic modalists) weren't even at the table even though Tertullian admits that they represented the "majority of believers" in his day for example. So even Nicea missed the truth wholesale because they weren't even debating a valid belief against an invalid belief, they were debating on two invalid beliefs and chose what was considered the lesser of the two invalid beliefs. Both Arius and Athanasius got it wrong and to prove that point, neither thought the Holy Spirit was God - that didn't get codified for hundreds of years and you are trying to tell me Trinitarianism is true? Yikes! It is not didactically taught at all. What we do have is one God, the transcendent LORD of all the universe, who became immanent as and in the man Christ Jesus. Jesus was fully God and fully man and was that self-same God who was transcendent who said in Zechariah 12:10 they will look upon ME! whom they have pierced. Now if we are going to believe that when God uses singular pronouns like I or Me for example, He means a singular person; and to be consistent, just like Trinitarians like to use the same logic to say when there is an "us" or an "our" or "are" as a plural verb it must mean more than one person of God, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. So either the "me" in Zechariah 12:10 is talking about one person of God, YHWH, the Father OR the plural intimations of the OT and NT do not mean what you think they mean - you cannot use plural pronouns in one place to try to prove the Trinity and then look at this plainly singular pronoun and say it represents something else than a single person of God. So, the LORD GOD immanent said they will look on ME whom they have pierced; and yet John applied that to Jesus. No respectable first century Jewish Christian would EVER come away with the Trinity. In fact, they would act like Thomas did when John wrote this, when Thomas saw Jesus, he looked at the nail prints in his hands and side, and Zechariah says, "They shall look upon ME! whom they have pierced," Thomas staring at Jesus said, "MY LORD!!! and MY GOD!!!" Why? Because Thomas was in part fulfilling Zechariah 12:10; God transcendent (Me - the LORD GOD) was God immanent (Jesus) as the very man Christ Jesus! End of story end of debate - God bless!
@@kylendenney Jesus is God but your not a trinitarian? You don't believe in the holy Spirit? Try to explain without writing a book. Brevity is the soul of whit!
Well put, Gents!
Yeth, the trinity ith true becauth we know the trinity ith true!
@@horaceball5418There is no trinity in the Bible. Jehovah alone is God Almighty.
This is very interesting. Still isn't proof of the Trinity, though. It's more a proof of a Binity, or the Two Powers conception of the Biblical Godhead.
Right! 😅
Which is what I believe in and what the bible says.
1 Cor 8:6 isn’t the only Verse In The Bible
It still is obvious elsewhere
@au8363 I'm obviously aware. There isn't evidence for the Trinity anywhere. It's so bad they had to make up 1 Jn 5.7.
The verse does not say you have one lord, because that would contradict the scripture as there’s more then one, but if we remove the comma and make it read:
but to us our One is Aloha the dad, of whom are all, and we in him; and one Lord Jeshu Meshiha, by whom are all, and we by him.
This reads better, as there’s only one lord messiah who is Jesus who’s Isu
where does it say there more than one LORD
Would this verse be about the one Elohim the Father and Yeshua who brings all believers who repent and gives us life.
Yeshua our High Priest whom raise us to life.
Also if this is a trinity verse where the other third in the trinity.
Just asking questions and not being anti. 😊
No trinity in the verse
Clear by “one God, the Father”
Rather compare to 1 Tim 2:5
There is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Messiah Jesus
The one Lord has a God
Eph 1
17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him,
@@mitchellc4 Christ is our intermediary between God and man. In 1 Tim. 2:5, Jesus is said to be the mesitēs (“mediator, intermediary”), between God and man: “There is one God and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” An intermediary represents two parties. Jesus is the two natured person, fully God and fully man functioning as both eternal Priest and Mediator (and propitiation). Christ the Son is not merely a representation of God and man, rather His state as eternal Priest and Mediator (or Intermediary) between God and man consists of the Son as God-Man ontologically.
The Apostle Paul informs us in his glorious Carmen Christi (Phil. 2:6-11) that God the Son emptied Himself by taking the nature of a servant having been made in the likeness of men and having been found in the appearance as a man (Phil. 2:6-8).
The eternal Word became flesh in order to propitiate the Father, thus redeeming (through His perfect life and sacrificial death) all those that the Father gave Him (John 6:37). The incarnation of God the Son is an essential doctrine, since it is a vital part of the gospel (2 Tim. 2:8), it should be included in our evangelism. The propitiation, priesthood, and mediatorial role is accomplished by Christ, as the two natured person-the God-Man.
@@johnnybaptist6933
Hello
Being a mediator has nothing to do with two natures
There’s no “God and man” two nature talk in scripture
The verses is clear
1 Tim 2
5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
The MAN Christ Jesus
Not the “god man”
Not the “two natured god and man”
The MAN
The mediator between God and man is a MAN
1 Tim 2:5
5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
The MAN Messiah Jesus
Scripture doesn’t talk about a god-man
That sounds so Greek and not biblical
-
Philippians 2 is most likely a comparison with Adam
Modern scholars acknowledge this
Adam was in the image of God
Instead of humbling himself
He grasped at equality with God by eating the fruit (you will be like God!)
Because of this he was kicked out of the garden and died
Jesus was in the image of God
Instead of grasping at equality with God he humbled himself as a servant
And obeyed all the way to the point of death
Because of this God has highly exalted him
This is from the University of St. Thomas:
“A second group of biblical scholars argues that in Phil 2:6-11 Paul (or whoever authored the hymn) was not describing a pre-existent, divine being but rather the earthly Jesus of Nazareth. These scholars generally interpret the periscope as exhibiting a "Second Adam" Christology. According to this Christology, the earthly Jesus described in the hymn did not have equality with God. Christ made a choice - unlike the Adam of Genesis - not to grasp at equality with God, but to be obedient to God by accepting death.”
So even some scholars don’t view this the same
More
James Dunn (Methodist NT Scholar) p115. Christology in the Making
“Moreover it can readily be seen that the outline of thought in the Philippian hymn fully matches the two-stage Christology evident elsewhere in first generation Christianity. - free acceptance of man’s lot followed out to death, and exaltation to the status of Lord over all.”
J A T Robinson (Anglican NT Scholar), p166 “The Human Face of God”
The picture is not of a celestial figure lowering himself to become a man, to be exalted still higher than he was before. Rather, it is that the entire fullness of God was enabled…to find embodiment in one who was completely one of us as any other descendant of Abraham.”
Jerome Murphy-O’Connor (Catholic NT Scholar)
“Inevitably, those who begin their exegesis of this hymn with the assumption that it concerns a pre-existent divine being tend towards a docetic (gnostic) interpretation of these lines.”
James P. Mackey (Catholic Theologian). p52 ” The Christian Experience of God as Trinity”
“The fact that in the context of the hymn in the actual epistle there is no mention at all of this anonymous divine figure who becomes man…”
Karl-Josef Kuschel (German Theologian) p250 “Born Before All Time”
“From this fact that the Jewish rather than Hellenistic syncretism may be the key to understanding the Philippians hymn, present day exegetes have drawn the radically opposite conclusion that the Philippians hymn does not speak of the pre-existence of Christ at all.”
Anton Vogtle (German Catholic NT Scholar) Freiburg exegete
“No pre-existence of Christ before the world with an independent significance can be recognized even in Phil. 2.”
Klaus Berger (German Catholic NT Scholar) Heidelberg exegete
“Philippians 2:6 is primarily concerned with making statements about high status and by no means necessarily concerned with pre-existence.”
Bas van Iersel (Dutch NT Scholar) p45. ‘Son of God in the New Testament’
“But of pre-existence and equality of being with God we cannot discover any trace in Paul’s letters”
@@mitchellc4 Your snippets of quotes from "scholars" don't mean that much without surrounding context or their credentials. But a little on Philippians 2:6, Paul says that Christ was ‘existing’ (huparchon) in the ‘form of God’. . . The participle is ‘timeless’ in that it does not point to any moment when Jesus ‘started’ to exist . . . Therefore Christ has always been in the form of God. You'll need to know Koine Greek to rebut this but I highly doubt you do.
@@johnnybaptist6933
Hello
See previous post
Also simply look up other uses of huparchon
See if all the people it’s used of are you going to imply your rule
Going to end up with a lot of “timeless” people
Doesn’t work
For example
David being (huparchon) a prophet…
(Same structure V-PPA-NMS)
So David is an eternal prophet with no beginning??
Doesn’t work
Father is a title, Son is a title, God is a Spirit and He is holy. Holy Spirit is also a title. The name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is Jesus!
That’s why the disciples always baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in the book of acts. They were obeying what Jesus told them in Matthew 28:19
Please post the verses that says that the name of God is Jesus. Thank you
@@yeni_daughterOfGod John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Hebrews 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by INHERITANCE obtained a more excellent name than they.
I’d also like to point out that I’m not claiming that Jesus is the Father. Jesus is God’s only begotten Son.
@@yeni_daughterOfGod also check out this one! Deuteronomy 18:18-19 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken UNTO MY WORDS WHICH HE SHALL SPEAK IN MY NAME I will require it of him.
@@lukegear3290 in John 5:43; does not says that God’s name is Jesus. I can work for ATT and I would be a sale representative for ATT, that doesn’t mean I am ATT.
Isaiah 9:6: same explanation
Hebrew 1:4: doesn’t says that God’s name is Jesus.
Jesus came to represent The Father on earth. Again, coming in the name of someone doesn’t mean thats their name.
Hello
James Dunn on 1 Cor 8:6
Dunn points out that the only reference to the Shema may be in the “one God, the Father”
He points out there’s a distinction between the One God, the Father, who is the source and origin of all things, the one Lord referred to in terms of agency of mediation
The fact that Paul constantly refers to the God of our Lord
The God of our Lor
The one Lord has a God….
The one Lord is not God
Rather a reference to Psalm 110:1 or 1 Tim 2:5
There is one God and one mediator between God and man, the MAN Messiah Jesus
The one Lord has a God
Eph 1
17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him,
That’s just one example
How many Creator's are there? How many Redeemers, etc?
@@auntieanna
Hello
There is one creator, God
That is, the Father
Col 1:16ff
@@auntieanna
Hello
Yes?
In him (the RISEN Jesus) the new creation
Colossians seems to be another comparison of Adam vs Jesus
Old creation can New creation
Old creation
Adam was the image of God
Adam was the firstborn
Adam was given authority to rule over the old creation
Adam disobeyed
-
New creation
The risen Jesus is the image of God
He is the firstborn from the dead
He is given all authority
Jesus obeyed
It’s talking about an authority structure
Thrones principalities powers
Not “trees birds and mountains”
The context is also the RISEN Jesus
Not Jesus before his exaltation
Jesus can’t be the firstborn from the dead before he died?
Also God can’t be the firstborn from the dead, God can’t die
--
You won’t find Jesus claiming he created the world
You will find him saying GOD made them male and female
Not “I made them…”
Let US create man in OUR.... elohEEM, also signaling plurality.
.... all things, whether in heaven or on earth, whether visible or invisible.....
😊