Some Christians tell me this is the trinity. If so were else in the Old Testament is this evident? I don't think Jews believe in the trinity, if not who is god refering to? And if Christians say this is the trinity he references to (Father, Son, Holy Ghost). Is Jesus already up there in with god and just waited thousands of years to stop in? How would the trinity be relevant in the Old Testament?
2007-06-02 04:23:44 · 14 answers · asked by spkmyer 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Why I can’t believe in the royal we, idea to Genesis 1:26 and 3:22,
If Jehovah talked with the royal we or us, etc, why did He only do it only 4-5 times.
Why didn’t He or doesn’t He continue to do to so through out the bible.
Why didn’t He use the royal we at Gen. 1:29, 30 only 3 verses later, or Gen. 2:18, Gen. 3:11, 15
and through out the rest of the bible? Why at Isa. 6:8, does Jehovah say “Whom shall I send”?
Job 38:4-7 shows that the angels were existing at the creation of man, so Jehovah wasn’t alone and had many spirit creatures to talk to.
Instead, which sounds more real and truthful, that Jehovah was talking to someone who is His Master Worker, His Firstborn Son, His Faithful Witness, who is His image, His exact representation, OR He was talking to Himself. (Prov. 8:30; Heb. 1:3; Col 1:15)
Bible scholar Donald E. Gowan said “There is no support in the O[ld] T[estament] for most of the proposed explanations: the royal ‘we,’ the deliberative ‘we,’ the plural of fullness, or an indication of a plurality of persons in the Godhead.
Why does the word Elohim according to Strong’s Cyclopaedia, when it applies to Jehovah means Supreme God, not Gods? Even when this word is applied to Moses (Ex. 4:16 & 7:1) it doesn’t mean that there are 3 Moses, it doesn’t even mean there are 2 Moses.
(Side point when Jesus said if you see me you see the Father, it is because he is the image of God, the exact representation of his Father. When you see an image in a mirror you are seeing a representation, not the actual person. Col 1:15)
(Side point, According to my college dictionary, begotten means “to be born”, to be born means “brought into life or being” when was Jesus brought into life, when he came to life as a baby? No, as Jehovah’s Firstborn of creation Col. 1:15; Rev 3:14)
2007-06-04 09:58:30 · answer #1 · answered by TeeM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
God the Father God the Son God the Holy Spirit The Trinity. One being, three parts. Just like you: You the Body, You the personality (or soul), You the Life Force. A Human Trinity, made in the image of God. Separate any one of the three from the other two, and YOU cease to exists. But in the case of HUMANS, which are much less powerful, less capable, less flexible than God, the separation is geographical as well as spiritual. God CAN exist if the physical body of Jesus is destroyed, and even dies, and the Holy Spirit can be left behind even when Jesus leaves.
2016-04-01 11:25:52 · answer #2 · answered by Michele 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is true that there are a handful of texts referring to God in the first person plural, generally in the form of "Let's." But generally, in thousands of cases, the Bible refers to God with a singular. This use of the plural hardly supports the doctrine of the trinity. If anything plurality would support polytheism.
Do you think its God's intention to Confuse everyone? The Basic and fundamental belief is this :
"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord"
Whats the meaning of the above verse? If Trinity was what its supposed to be, it should have read :
"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is our Father, Son and the Holy Spirit".
Is there any verse like this in the Bible? Why the Christians cant understand? If the Fundamental or Root belief has to be such, then why isn't it proclaimed numerous times in the Bible? Moreover, why should Jesus say that
Matthew 5:17-19(KJV) – (17) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Why cant the Christians understand ? Is it that difficult to comprehend this? Even Paul, who is accused of misrepresenting Jesus' teachings said :
1 Corinthians 8:6. "But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things."
Galatians 3:20. "God is one."
Ephesians 4:4-6. "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."
1 Timothy 2:5, "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
Is it still NOT CLEAR?
2007-06-02 04:49:03 · answer #3 · answered by The Skeptic 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Genesis 1:26 reports that God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.”
Who was he talking too, that seems to be the question. Well, God was speaking to his first born, His first creation, Jesus Christ.
Col. 1:15-17, RS: “He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation . . . All things were created through him and for him. He is before all things.
John 1:1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in [the] beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.
Many people use this verse to 'prove' the trinity. Pity they don't read a bit further into John. And if you point this out, they fall back on 'a matter of translation'. If a passage can grammatically be translated in more than one way, what is the correct rendering? One that is in AGGREMENT with the rest of the Bible. If a person ignores other portions of the Bible and builds his belief around a favorite rendering of a particular verse, then what he believes really reflects, not the Word of God, but his own ideas and perhaps those of another imperfect human.
John 1:1, 2:
RS reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.” (KJ, Dy, JB, NAB use similar wording.) However, NW reads: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in the beginning with God.”
Which translation of John 1:1, 2 agrees with the context? John 1:18 says: “No one has ever seen God.” Verse 14 clearly says that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us . . . we have beheld his glory.” Also, verses 1, 2 say that in the beginning he was “with God.” Can one be with someone and at the same time be that person? At John 17:3, Jesus addresses the Father as “the only true God”; so, Jesus as “a god” merely reflects his Father’s divine qualities.—Heb. 1:3.
Col. 1:15, 16, RS: “He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth.” In what sense is Jesus Christ “the first-born of all creation”? (1) Trinitarians say that “first-born” here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; thus Christ would be understood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is so, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But the Bible applies this expression only to the Son. According to the customary meaning of “firstborn,” it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah’s family of sons. (2) Before Colossians 1:15, the expression “the firstborn of” occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies—the firstborn is part of the group. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals. What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15? Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof? (3) Does Colossians 1:16, 17 (RS) exclude Jesus from having been created, when it says “in him all things were created . . . all things were created through him and for him”? The Greek word here rendered “all things” is pan´ta, an inflected form of pas. At Luke 13:2, RS renders this “all . . . other”; JB reads “any other”; NE says “anyone else.” (See also Luke 21:29 in NE and Philippians 2:21 in JB.) In harmony with everything else that the Bible says regarding the Son, NW assigns the same meaning to pan´ta at Colossians 1:16, 17 so that it reads, in part, “by means of him all other things were created . . . All other things have been created through him and for him.” Thus he is shown to be a created being, part of the creation produced by God.
So, I hope this clears things up a bit.
2007-06-02 04:57:47 · answer #4 · answered by Suzette R 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yes, we believe this refers to the trinity.
why would it HAVE to be somewhere "else in the OT?" if the bible teaches the trinity even ONCE, then we are to accept it.
having said that, we find God using the word "us" to describe himself in isaiah 6:8. so there it is. there is the "where else in the Old Testament" answer you asked for.
and YES, jesus was ALWAYS up in heaven until he came down and joined us in the manger of bethlehem.
how is it relevant in the OT??? only as a prefigurement of the incarnation
2007-06-02 04:37:03 · answer #5 · answered by dsjpk55 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Now you know what the christians think. Are you ready for the truth? Read The Apocryphon of John where Jesus tells us that the god of Moses was satan. Who ya gonna believe now, Jesus or christians?
2007-06-02 04:59:29 · answer #6 · answered by single eye 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our spirit is eternal.We were with God from the begining.See Jeremiah 1:5.Before we were formed in our mothers womb God knew us.Have you read about the three Hebrews that were thrown into the furnace?A fourth person appeared in there with them.It was Jesus.There are too many other accounts to list here.If you read the old Testament,you can find more.
2007-06-02 04:42:13 · answer #7 · answered by iron maiden77 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This very question was the one with which I struggled for years until a very well informed Bible reader showed me Colossians 1:15, 16 and then, the entire Bible began to fall into place for me. I hope your journey to truth will be as wonderful as mine has been. Please do not hesitate to ask me other things as well. Your question shows a love for God and desire for the real truth of things.
2007-06-02 04:49:43 · answer #8 · answered by Sparkle1 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
God was speaking to Jesus. Jesus was his first creation, & Jesus helped his father Jehovah God create man...Gen. 1:26...Let US make man in our image, according to our likeness...itsnt that awesome!! Man was Jesus' favorite creation...but yes God was speaking to his son Jesus...the trinity teachings is man made, it came about in the 4th century, along w/Catholicism...Satan, is very cunning, anything to veer people off the right track to knowing & serving & learning of the one & only True God Jehovah...goodness, Satan blinds the eyes...oh does he!
2007-06-02 04:36:55 · answer #9 · answered by Redd 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
YOu can see it again when Jesus is praying...a voice from heaven and a dove descending. The US is father son and spirit.
2007-06-02 04:43:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋