Is Jesus of New T LORD/Jehovah of the Old T?

Originally posted by divegeester
To those interested I suggest taking a big step back and consider the nature of God's character as revealed over the whole Bible. I see without any contradiction a single deity reconciling all things to himself, revealing himself over the ages through Laws and Prophets and finally though an image of himself - in physicality a begotten son, but in essenc ...[text shortened]... it which is the only name given amongst men by which we may be saved is - JESUS (God saves).

The idea you state here is called "modalism", it is not the Trinity doctrine.

"The offices of Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just offices held by the same single deity and personage." - Modalism

I once considered this idea during my studies in an attempt to make sense
of the idea the there was only one God. Yet the Holy Bible said that the
Son was God, the Holy Spirit was God, and the Father was God. But then
I realized it was not true because the Holy Bible also revealed that the
the Father was a distinct person from the Son, the Son was a distinct person
from the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit was a distinct person from Father.
So the Trinity doctrine was the only theory that fit the description of God
revealed in the Holy Bible.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The idea you state here is called "modalism", it is not the Trinity doctrine.

"The offices of Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just offices held by the same single deity and personage." - Modalism

I once considered this idea during my studies in an attempt to make sense
of the idea the there was only one God. Yet the Holy Bible said that the
Son was ...[text shortened]... ty doctrine was the only theory that fit the description of God
revealed in the Holy Bible.

The idea you state here is called "modalism", it is not the Trinity doctrine.

"The offices of Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just offices held by the same single deity and personage." - Modalism

I'm not saying that it is the trinity doctrine. I'm saying that the trinity doctrine is error; there is one God. Men may decide that having a trinity suits their need for an explanation of the mystery of God in Christ, but it does not fit the description of this God throughout the Bible who says "I am one".

I don't look for doctrine, I look for what God is saying about himself through the Bible, whatever that is, is the truth; everything else even if it appears contradictory (like Jesus crying out to the Father) is open to conjecture

Originally posted by divegeester
[b]The idea you state here is called "modalism", it is not the Trinity doctrine.

"The offices of Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just offices held by the same single deity and personage." - Modalism

I'm not saying that it is the trinity doctrine. I'm saying that the trinity doctrine is error; there is one God. Men may decide that having a tr ...[text shortened]... if if appears contradictory (like Jesus crying out to the Father) is open to conjecture[/b]

If you knew anything about the Hebrew, you would know that is a
composite one not an absolute one described in the verse.

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you knew anything about the Hebrew, you would know that is a
composite one not an absolute one described in the verse.

You will have to excuse my ignorance of Hebrew. I believe there are hundreds of scriptures where God describes his nature, all stating "I am one".

The trinity doctrine is never mentioned in the Bible and is error. You may have been brought up to believe in three Gods and that is your prerogative of course; but will remain with my one deity thanks.

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you knew anything about the Hebrew, you would know that is a
composite one not an absolute one described in the verse.

Sorry, I meant "compound" not "composit".

Originally posted by RJHinds
Sorry, I meant "compound" not "composit".

It is like saying there is only one group. The group can consist of three
persons. Just like God can consist of three person and be one God.
Each person is a part of the one group. That is why it says in Genesis
that God said let "us" make man in "our" image.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is like saying there is only one group. The group can consist of three
persons. Just like God can consist of three person and be one God.
Each person is a part of the one group. That is why it says in Genesis
that God said let "us" make man in "our" image.

You may believe what you wish of course. But you will never take that gospel to the Jewish people.

God is one person, he will not give his glory to another. Look for God's character revealed and try not to get caught up in how he has physically revealed himself. There is mystery in the revelation yes, but God's character is easy to track through the Bible.

Originally posted by divegeester
I did robbie twice, but I'll do it again as you answered my "how many saviours" question.

Jesus does not have or need a saviour. The scripture you quoted is not needed to make your very valid point that Jesus to the human eye was completely physically separated from God, he prayed to his Father, could have called for him to take him down from the cro ...[text shortened]... er that God being eternal is outside of time and sees the being to the end of all things.

is it just me or is this a pile of pure nonsensical gibberish? here is the scripture,

(Hebrews 5:7) . . .In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also
petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and
tears, and he was favourably heard for his godly fear. . .

and we have the absurd assertion that Christ did not need a saviour? who was he
supplicating? himself? who is the one who was able to save him out of death?
himself? was he crying to himself? heard by himself? what an absurdity! and to
try to fob us off with irrelevant details that God is outside the realms of time and
that Jesus in this instance was separated from God, is a rip off! I am sorry to state
and claim that its a mystery is not good enough, otherwise why would God ask us
to take in knowledge of him and Christ if we could never ascertain to any kind of
accuracy?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
is it just me or is this a pile of pure nonsensical gibberish?

It's just you.

Originally posted by divegeester
It's just you.

its a rip off, if i bought that excuse on ebay id definitely send it back, product description inaccurate.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its a rip off, if i bought that excuse on ebay id definitely send it back, product description inaccurate.

It's what I believe and I've given you the reasons why; I don't expect you to agree.

Originally posted by divegeester
It's what I believe and I've given you the reasons why; I don't expect you to agree.

whether i agree or not is hardly the point, how anyone can look at this text objectively,

'offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of
death'

and then state, that Christ himself is not appealing to God in the capacity of a saviour is
quite beyond me, in fact, I will appeal to the atheists who have no pre conceptions and
no vested interests to look at this statement and render an objective opinion!

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is like saying there is only one group. The group can consist of three
persons. Just like God can consist of three person and be one God.
Each person is a part of the one group. That is why it says in Genesis
that God said let "us" make man in "our" image.

Well, I belong to a group of 3 Ford Mustang guys, but how can we be one? The Bible says we are made in God's image but no humans that I know of are a 3 in 1 being. The Bible again clearly says at
1 Corinthians 8:4-6 (New Living Translation)

4 So, what about eating meat that has been offered to idols? Well, we all know that an idol is not really a god and that there is ((((((only one God.)))))))))
5 There may be so-called gods both in heaven and on earth, and some people actually worship many gods and many lords. 6 But we know that there is ((((((((only one God, the Father)))))))), who created everything, and we live for him. And there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom God made everything and through whom we have been given life.

I've posted this scripture over and over and I really don't think all the trinitarians here are reading this. Why? Is the word ((((((( one )))))))) not understandable?
If he was 3 in 1 or however the trinity explains it, it would say that here in this very scripture. Right? But the Holy spirit is not even mentioned and even though Jesus is mentioned he is called only "Lord", not God at all. Don't you think this would have been a perfect time to express Jesus as God also?

And in the account of Genesis who was God talking to? Were you there to see or do you have any special knowledge of that time that we don't have?
God could have been talking to his son Jesus or any multutude of other angels watching this happen.

Anyway sorry for seeming to be short with words. I mean no harm just tired so I'm going to bed.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
whether i agree or not is hardly the point, how anyone can look at this text objectively,

'offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to [b]save him out of
death'

and then state, that Christ himself is not appealing to God in the capacity of a saviour is
quite beyond me, in fact, I will appeal to the atheists w ...[text shortened]... ns and
no vested interests to look at this statement and render an objective opinion![/b]

I think your confusing your own point.

There is only one God and 'Saviour' (capital S) God said it was himself in Hosea (and many other places in Bible). Period.

The fact that Jesus could have been saved (small S) from the cross is a red-herring. If the centurion had pull Jesus off of the cross and 'saved' him would that make him his saviour too?

You're appeal for atheists to help you in this matter is amusing though.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
is it just me or is this a pile of pure nonsensical gibberish? here is the scripture,

(Hebrews 5:7) . . .In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also
petitions to [b]the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and
tears, and he was favourably heard for his godly fear. . .

and we have the a ...[text shortened]...
to take in knowledge of him and Christ if we could never ascertain to any kind of
accuracy?[/b]

Only those that have sinned need a savior. Jesus was without sin.
When he received the beatings and was crucified on the cross, He
was taking the punishment that each and everyone of us deserve
for sinning against God. In the flesh He was able to feel the emotions
and pain of that punishment. He demonstrated that it was so bad
that any man would cry out to be saved from the torture and death.
He did not have to take our punishment; but He willing gave up His life
for us. There is no greater love. Since Jesus was without sin, He
could take our punishment and die for us. He not only died a
physical death, but also a spiritual death by being separated from
the Father for 3 days and 3 nights. He therefore became the savior
of the whole world. Without Him there would be no savior, He is the
only savior.